The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet Tribute to Investors in the CGIAR The Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) would not be where it is today if not for 4 decades of dedicated support from its investors. As a community that believes in the power of research, we who work in the CGIAR salute the visionaries who gave their support to creating this unique organization. Forty years later, we remember and express our gratitude. Gratitude to the 18 countries and organizations that in May 1971 announced their decision to participate in the CGIAR as Members. And gratitude to the expanded fellowship of Members and other governments and institutions that demonstrated their confi dence in the CGIAR by providing, with mounting generosity, the resources needed to carry out its mission. Our gratitude extends to host countries around the world that have given the CGIAR Centers homes in their nations. And to the farmers, scientists, technicians, partners and staff, who together have tirelessly advanced the CGIAR’s mandate through the years. At this juncture, this time of reform and renewal, we celebrate all who have ever invested in the work of the CGIAR. Thank you for helping to achieve this momentous milestone. Table of contents Message from the CGIAR Leadership: Renewing International Research on Agriculture and Natural Resources 2 Grounds for Confi dence: Forty Findings on the Impacts of CGIAR Research, 1971-2011 7 From Rio to Svalbard: CGIAR Genebanks Safeguard Humanity’s Agricultural Heritage 16 A Better Way of Working to Create a Better Future for the World’s Poor 19 CGIAR Financial Highlights, 1971-2011 33 The CGIAR in 2010 43 Abbreviations 48 Message from the CGIAR Leadership RENEWING INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH ON AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES A remarkable performance over the past 40 years provides a fi rm basis for a forceful response to the daunting challenges to come over the next 40 years In 2011, as the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) embarks on its fi fth decade, global circumstances bear a striking resemblance to those that gave birth to the organization 40 years ago. The years just before the CGIAR’s founding in 1971 posed grounds for serious concern about global hunger, as India, Pakistan and other Asian countries teetered on the brink of famine. But this period also provided convincing evidence that agricultural science was a powerful instrument for combating hunger. The proof came in dramatic increases in agricultural productivity resulting from the widespread adoption of new, high-yielding rice and wheat varieties, together with the increased use of fertilizers, irrigation and other inputs, in what came to be celebrated as the Green Revolution. Humanitarian concerns, coupled with science-based conviction, brought together agricultural researchers and development donors who created the CGIAR. Their shared objective was to extend the early gains made possible by modern agricultural science by mobilizing resources to support research on a “long-term continuing basis,” in the words of Robert McNamara, then president of the World Bank. Forty years later, the world food system is again showing signs of severe strain. Despite decades of steady improvement in agriculture, a major food price crisis erupted in 2008, imposing great hardship on poor consumers. The crisis marked the beginning of a new era of food price infl ation and volatility that, fueled by economic shocks and natural disasters, continues to the present. Since June 2010, rising food prices have driven into poverty an estimated 44 million people in the developing world. These developments have prompted a worldwide renewal of concern about agriculture after nearly 2 decades of relative complacency and neglect (see Box 1 on page 5). The CGIAR has responded to this opportunity by seeking more effective ways to bring agricultural and environ- mental science to bear on entrenched hunger and poverty, and to maintain this work with stable, adequate fi nancial support. The outcome is a broad portfolio of major new initiatives for strategic research, the CGIAR Research Programs, which are quickly being set in motion. 2 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond 1970s 1971 Greater capacity to meet bigger challenges encompass all of the world’s major food crops as 4 Centers well as livestock and fi sh, together with a focus 18 Members Notwithstanding the clear parallels between the on health and nutrition, climate change, and the CGIAR at birth and today, much about its work and improved management of the natural resources circumstances has changed. that sustain rural livelihoods, including soil, water, 1979 forests and biodiversity. 12 Centers For one, the challenges of today are more complex than those of several decades ago. Agriculture and Moreover, new tools from molecular biology, informa- 32 Members (of which 2 rural environments must supply goods and services tion science and other fi elds have enhanced the are developing countries) for a much larger human population: 6.8 billion in problem-solving power of this research. Broader 2011, almost double the 1971 population of 3.8 partnerships embracing diverse actors at all levels billion. The fi gure is expected to surpass 9 billion have extended its reach, generating better research within the next 40 years, requiring targeted research products and making them more widely available. efforts to achieve a 70% increase in agricultural production, according to the World Bank. As a consequence, the early productivity gains that galvanized the donor community in 1971 have Meanwhile, improving agricultural productivity quickly been augmented by deeper and wider impacts, enough to keep pace with rapidly rising demand has which encompass key agricultural systems in all become more diffi cult. Many of the fairly easy gains parts of the developing world. They derive from have already been achieved. Further advances are advances on multiple fronts including environmental complicated by institutional and policy weaknesses, as stewardship, government policy, and understanding well as by the extensive degradation of soil, water and of gender and nutritional dynamics, as well as from other natural resources caused in large part by more agricultural productivity. intensive food production using unsustainable practices. This remarkable performance over the past 40 years Global climate change is expected to profoundly is a fi rm basis for a forceful response to the chal- affect agriculture in the developing world over the lenges that agriculture and rural environments must next several decades. The combination of higher confront over the next 40 years. temperatures, shifting disease and pest pressures, and more frequent and severe droughts and fl ooding Transforming the CGIAR research approach will depress and destabilize the output of crops and farm animals while further increasing pressure on In formulating that response, the CGIAR concluded water and other natural resources. during 2009, after extensive consultations, that a new approach was needed to reinvigorate agricul- As the complexity of the challenges has grown, so tural and environmental research in the 21st century. has the responsive capacity of the CGIAR and of Key to this new approach was the creation of the agricultural science generally. The research agenda Global Conference on Agricultural Research for of the CGIAR and its partners has expanded to Development (GCARD), a biennial process organized Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 3 by the Global Forum on Agricultural Research Fund are united by the Strategy and Results (GFAR). GCARD brings together farmers, community Framework, which provides a robust yet fl exible development organizations, leading scientists and structure through which all 15 of the Consortium’s innovators to help the CGIAR identify demand-driven member Centers can act in a more collective and research and partnership opportunities. It also concerted manner with hundreds of partners to allows the CGIAR to take actions that improve deliver results through new research programs. the orientation of agricultural research systems, structures and processes for maximum progress In doing so, this remarkable association of toward key development objectives. international actors will continue to build on CGIAR successes in improving crop varieties, developing In December 2009, the CGIAR approved a plan to better farming methods, promoting incisive policy establish the CGIAR Consortium of International analyses, and widely disseminating knowledge and Agricultural Research Centers, uniting the 15 information to improve the lives of millions of people Centers of the CGIAR and their partners around in the world’s rural areas. Readers of this publication a portfolio of major strategic research programs. are invited to glance back at this widely recognized The plan included creating the CGIAR Fund to record of achievement while also looking into the mobilize funding from more than 60 donors that future toward a new era of results and impact that fi rmly support this research. The Consortium and serve the urgent needs of the poor and hungry. Inger Andersen Carlos Pérez del Castillo Chair Chair CGIAR Fund Council CGIAR Consortium Board 4 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond The research agenda has expanded to encompass all of the world’s major food crops as well as livestock and fi sh, together with the improved management of natural resources. BOX 1 Witness to a National Research Awakening While the food price crisis of 2008 may have caught nation’s wheat millers made it cheap and expedient world leaders off guard, it came as no surprise to to import ever larger quantities of the grain. Only a Segundo Ceballos, who labored as a fi eld worker at handful of staff at the Santa Catalina Experiment the Santa Catalina Experiment Station of Ecuador’s Station, including Ceballos, continued sowing a few National Institute for Agricultural Research (INIAP improved wheat lines each year. by its Spanish abbreviation) from 1966 until 2009. “When wheat prices spiked in 2008, Ecuador’s govern- He vividly recalls the golden age of this country’s wheat ment cushioned the blow by subsidizing imported wheat research in the 1970s. Scientists, technicians and fi eld at great cost,” says Julio César Delgado, INIAP director workers tended 15 or 20 hectares of international wheat general. But, he explains, well aware of the shortcomings nurseries sent by CGIAR researchers, using superior of such a policy, government policymakers sought, at experimental lines to develop improved varieties. the prompting of President Rafael Correa, INIAP’s help Norman Borlaug, the father of the Green Revolution, in formulating a plan to revitalize wheat production and visited periodically to observe the team’s progress and reduce the country’s excessive dependence on purchases to cheer them on. As a result of harvests made bountiful from the international wheat market. by wheat improvement worldwide, the price of this staple grain declined steadily for several decades, Two improved wheat varieties from INIAP — Vivar offering large benefi ts for poor consumers. and San Jacinto, both released in mid-2010 and derived from the CGIAR’s collaborative research By the turn of the century, however, wheat research — are among the fi rst products of the campaign. At in Ecuador had lost momentum. Successive govern- a ceremony held for the release of Vivar, Ceballos ments, relying heavily on income from petroleum, said he was very happy about the new varieties and had ignored food agriculture and the research the wheat research revival. These developments needed to keep it strong and competitive. Domestic vindicated years of struggle to keep wheat improve- wheat production was particularly neglected, because ment, a central pillar of his country’s food security, low international prices and the political clout of the from falling. Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 5 A 2008 study estimated the overall annual economic benefi ts of CGIAR research on rice at US$10.8 billion just in Asia, far exceeding the investment in this work. 6 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond GROUNDS FOR CONFIDENCE: Forty Findings on the Impacts of CGIAR Research, 1971-2011 Impact assessment fi nds that CGIAR research has generated — and continues to generate — profound benefi ts to poor people both within and outside agriculture The CGIAR’s collaborative research has brought about development impacts on a scale that is without parallel in the international community. They derive from “international public goods” — including improved crop seeds, better farming methods, incisive policy analysis and associated new knowledge — that are made freely available to national partners in developing countries, who transform them into locally adapted products that respond to the needs of rural households. Following are 40 largely quantitative fi ndings on CGIAR impacts since its inception in 1971. Most (the exceptions being numbers 7, 12, 13, 14, 20 and 27) were gleaned from a 2010 article in the journal Food Policy, which provides a comprehensive overview of hard evidence published in the last decade on CGIAR research impacts. The article was written by agricultural economics professor Mitch Renkow of North Carolina State University in the USA in collaboration with Derek Byerlee, a former economics adviser in the World Bank’s Agriculture and Rural Development Department. Co-author of the World Development Report 2008: Agriculture for Development, Byerlee serves as chair of the Standing Panel on Impact Assessment of the CGIAR’s Independent Science and Partnership Council. Addressing concerns that an expanded mission and slower funding growth in the 1990s may have eroded the CGIAR’s effectiveness, the Food Policy article concludes that the impacts of its crop improvement research “continue to be very large, generating profound benefi ts to poor people both within and outside the agricultural sector.” The study also cites “substantial evidence . . . that other research areas within the CGIAR have had large benefi cial impacts.” The evidence summarized here was gleaned from a large literature on research impacts. It bears eloquent testimony to the CGIAR’s growing commitment over the last decade to rigorous impact assessment. Certainly, it shows that the CGIAR founders’ early confi dence in agricultural science was well placed. But more importantly, the evidence provides grounds for continued confi dence, as CGIAR researchers and partners build on past successes to confront the acute development challenges of the 21st century. Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 7 Genetic improvement of staple foods In addition to improving all of the world’s major food crops, CGIAR researchers have achieved, for the fi rst Most of the CGIAR’s documented impact has resulted time ever, dramatic productivity gains in a tropical from research to improve crops. Its products — high- food fi sh. yielding seeds with wide adaptation and durable stress resistance — were central to the Green Revolution of 7 The selective breeding of Nile tilapia the 1970s. They have also fi gured prominently in resulted in a highly productive strain subsequent efforts to extend the initial gains in that grows more quickly and survives agricultural productivity (see Box 2 opposite). better than local ones, offering yields that are from 25% to nearly 80% 1 As a result of crop improvement higher in the fi ve Southeast Asian research within and beyond the CGIAR, countries where the “super tilapia” was introduced 65% of the total area planted to the and evaluated during the mid-1990s. In all of these world’s 10 most important food crops is countries, the new strain has generated additional sown to improved varieties. income and employment on fi sh farms large and small, while easing market prices by about 10% and 2 About 60% of the food crop area thus benefi ting consumers signifi cantly. In the planted to improved varieties is Philippines alone, increased employment in the tilapia occupied by many of the approximately industry has benefi ted 300,000 people. 7,250 varieties bred using genetic materials from the CGIAR. Stress resistance for more stable production 3 A 2008 study estimated the overall For smallholder farmers, the appeal of improved crop annual economic benefi ts of CGIAR varieties lies not just in their higher yields but also in research on the three main cereals their resistance to diseases and pests and their alone, and just in Asia, at US$10.8 adaptation to physical stresses like drought — traits billion for rice, $2.5 billion for wheat that translate into more stable yields over time. and $0.8 billion for maize, far exceed- ing the investment in this work. To a large extent, the Modern crop varieties have replaced a large number benefi ts have come from lower food prices, which of traditional landraces, creating initial concern that favor poor consumers in particular, since they spend a narrower genetic base would make yields less about half of their income on staple foods. stable. To mitigate this danger, CGIAR plant breeders have broadened the genetic diversity of 4 Research on the genetic improvement modern varieties through strategies such as of maize, rice and wheat has made interspecifi c hybridization, or wide crossing, which possible rates of yield growth that have introduces into domesticated species genes for varied in recent years from 0.7 to 1.0% pest resistance and other traits found in the wild annually. relatives of these crops. 5 According to a 2008 study on potato Recent research documents a steady improvement, varieties originating in 8 decline in the variability of maize and the CGIAR were planted to more than wheat yields over the last 40 years, 1 million hectares, double the area an improvement that is statistically documented just 5 years before. associated with the spread of varieties with more stress resistance. 6 The estimated rates of return on the CGIAR’s investment in all crop More stable yields generate benefi ts improvement research range from 39% 9 with an estimated annual value of in Latin America to more than 100% in US$149 million for maize and $143 Asia, the Middle East and North Africa. million for wheat, more than the total 8 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond amounts spent annually on maize and wheat breeding for the developing world. BOX 2 Seeds of Revolution 10 Research to maintain resistance to a single major disease of wheat — leaf Starting in the late 1960s, rapidly spreading semi-dwarf varieties of rice and rust — generated benefi ts from 1973 wheat with short, stiff stems made possible a quantum leap in the yields of to 2007 that are currently worth these staple cereals across Asia and in other regions. Fed with fertilizer and $5.4 billion. irrigation, the new lines produced more grain without lodging, or falling over, under the weight of larger panicles as did the taller and more willowy tradi- 11 A 2009 study to quantify benefi ts tional varieties they replaced. from CGIAR research on yield stability estimated that the global economic value of genetic resistance In the world of rice, IR8 was the fi rst major protagonist in this remarkable story to various wheat diseases amounts of technological change. While offering high yields, it lacked resistance to to as much as $2 billion annually. various diseases and insect pests. CGIAR rice scientists worked quickly to correct this and other shortcomings, developing hundreds more new rice lines Diseases pose a major threat to livestock production from the 1970s on that combined high yield potential with better grain quality as well. Solutions such as vaccines are now being as well as disease and pest resistance. rolled out and should generate large impacts. IR36 was the fi rst improved rice variety to feature the most desirable attributes of 12 The production and delivery of a all its predecessors. Early maturing and high-yielding, it showed multiple vaccine for East Coast fever — a resistance to all the major diseases and pests of the Philippines as well as to the tick-borne disease that threatens major rice pest in India and Sri Lanka. In wetlands, IR36 proved tolerant to soils some 25 million cattle in 11 coun- tries of East, Central and Southern that were saline, iron toxic or zinc defi cient. In drylands, the versatile variety held Africa — is being placed in the hands up under iron defi ciency and moderate drought. In its day, IR36 was the most of private sector partners. It is expected to save more widely grown rice variety in the world, covering some 10 million hectares. than a million cattle, with benefi ts worth up to $270 million per year in the countries where the disease But among superior rice lines, fame can be fl eeting. Today, the variety that is now endemic. epitomizes the best that international rice breeding has to offer is IR64, which occupies more than 13 million hectares in 12 countries. It is among the 300 As the impacts of climate change emerge, including CGIAR breeding lines that have been released as more than 600 varieties in major more frequent and severe drought and fl ooding, rice-growing countries worldwide. About 70% of all rice land is sown to modern CGIAR crop improvement research is developing varieties, three-quarters of which are derived from CGIAR breeding materials. new and more resilient cereal varieties. 13 More than 50 new maize varieties with drought tolerance have been adopted on a total of 1 million hectares across East and Southern Africa, giving an average yield advantage of 20-50%. A 2010 study projects that the further adoption of these maize varieties can boost harvests in 13 African countries by 10-34%, generating up to US$1.5 billion in benefi ts for producers and consumers. 14 A novel approach to seed dissemina- The CGIAR contributed tion has put a new fl ood-tolerant rice breeding materials toward variety in the hands of 100,000 three-quarters of the improved cultivars that Indian farmers within a year after its now occupy more than two-thirds of all rice land. Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 9 release in 2009. The new variety offers a yield advantage of 1 ton per hectare even if submerged 19 An estimated 80,000 professionals have received such training so far. for 2 weeks, making it an attractive option for India’s According to an external evaluation 12 million hectares of fl ood-prone agricultural land. carried out in 2006, this work is highly relevant to national capacity A world without the CGIAR needs and of high quality, judging from the results of trainee surveys. Evidence from A landmark 2003 study on the impact of crop seven country case studies suggests that CGIAR improvement research from 1965 to 1998 painted a training is a “signifi cant contributor to positive counterfactual scenario of what the global food outcomes from research.” system would be like without CGIAR research: The big picture of impact 15 Developing countries would produce 7-8% less food. A large body of evidence compiled since the 1990s indicates that gains in food production in the 16 Their cultivated area would be 11-13 developing world have contributed importantly to million hectares greater, at the reducing poverty by raising farm incomes, creating expense of primary forests and other employment for farmworkers, reducing food prices fragile environments. and fueling economic growth. 17 Their food consumption per capita 20 A 2007 study showed that CGIAR would be 5% lower on average. research on rice enabled more than 6.75 million Chinese to escape 18 Some 13-15 million more children poverty between 1981 and 1999, would be malnourished. primarily as a result of lower grain prices from increased crop production. The power of partnership 21 The numbers for poverty reduction in Achieving major development impact requires India are even more impressive, as 14 high-quality science that is relevant to the needs and million people rose out of poverty conditions of the poor. Equally important are the between 1991 and 1999. partnerships through which research products are developed and shared with national organizations, Several studies published in recent years have which do the hard work of making them available to documented the impacts of the CGIAR as a whole, farmers on a large scale. Over the years, the CGIAR either globally or in specifi c regions. Centers have built up an extensive array of partner- ships with diverse actors in research for develop- 22 The overall economic benefi ts of the ment. These are not virtual, remote arrangements but CGIAR were estimated to range from refl ect the presence of Center scientists throughout US$14 billion to more than $120 the developing world, where they work closely with billion. Even under quite conservative national partners in the fi eld. assumptions, the benefi ts of research have been roughly double the investment. Since the effectiveness of research collaboration depends on the capacity of individual colleagues, the CGIAR has made a considerable effort over the years 23 For every $1 invested in CGIAR research, $9 worth of additional to strengthen the capacity of national partners food is produced in the through formal and informal training and other developing world. learning activities that, together, absorb roughly 20% of CGIAR expenditures. 24 A 2007 review of investments in agricultural research carried out by 10 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond fi ve CGIAR Centers and their partners in South Asia since the end of the Green Revolution period in the early 1980s found average annual benefi ts of more than $1 billion from research on maize, rice and When pests from wheat alone, far above the CGIAR’s total annual cassava’s home in South expenditures in the region. America ended the crop’s pest holiday in Africa and Asia, the CGIAR introduced wasps that African success stories prey exclusively on them. CGIAR research has had less impact in Africa than in Asia, where work began a decade earlier and under quite different conditions. Even so, a number of BOX 3 impact studies suggest that African agriculture can An International Sting Operation produce successes on a par with those unfolding elsewhere, delivering large returns on the CGIAR’s Several centuries ago, Portuguese traders carried cassava from its original signifi cant investment in the region. South American home to Africa and Asia. Offering high yields even under harsh growing conditions, the tropical root crop thrived in the Old World, 25 In the late 1980s, Africa witnessed one of the CGIAR’s most spectacu- partly because of the absence of insect pests that had evolved with cassava lar research achievements since the in its native land. Green Revolution: the biological control of two devastating insect But in the 1970s, the cassava crop’s extended pest holiday came to an abrupt pests of the tropical root crop end. Two pests — the cassava mealybug and cassava green mite — caught up cassava (see Box 3 right). The economic returns with their host plant in sub-Saharan Africa, where they devastated crops — reaching a current value of US$9 billion on across the region’s cassava belt, posing a major threat to food security. research on just one of the pests, the cassava mealybug — far exceed the CGIAR’s total invest- Believing biological control to offer the quickest and most effective solution, ment in Africa since 1971. Biocontrol research in CGIAR researchers embarked on an intensive search in South America for Africa subsequently achieved notable success in natural enemies of the two pests. Their search was successful, enabling the combating other pests, particularly the mango large-scale introduction of predator species into Africa, but only after research mealybug and water hyacinth. confi rmed that they would kill only the target pests, causing no harm to other Crop research has yielded important results in insects, livestock, wildlife or people. Africa as well, particularly by providing varieties whose improved pest resistance and tolerance to A parasitic wasp (Anagyrus lopezi) proved to be the most formidable natural stresses such as drought have helped stabilize enemy of the cassava mealybug, gradually reducing its population by feeding crop yields in the region’s predominantly rainfed on it. Female wasps inject their eggs into the pest, and wasp larvae feed on environments. the host insect. 26 As a result of maize improvement in The cassava mealybug has now reached Southeast Asia, initially Thailand, West and Central Africa from 1971 where it is causing yield losses of about 20%. As the country’s cassava industry to 2005, farmers are planting generates at least US$1.5 billion in farm income each year, losses of that improved varieties, derived mostly magnitude translate into severe economic hardship. The costs will rise quickly from CGIAR research, on 60% of the total maize area, with economic if the pest is allowed to spread further in the Greater Mekong Region, where benefi ts estimated at US$2.9 billion annually. In millions of rural households depend on cassava for income. 1998, the use of improved maize accounted for an additional 2.6 million tons of grain — enough to In an emergency campaign to stop the mealybug, Thai researchers reared provide 9.4 million people with a full complement of hundreds of thousands of parasitic wasps from a colony supplied by CGIAR 2,200 kilocalories per day. researchers and released them during 2010 in selected parts of the country. Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 11 27 By the end of the 1990s, the wide the intake of this vegetable precursor of vitamin A adoption of improved cassava with a among young children in 850 households, according 50% advantage over the average to a 2007 study. yields of traditional varieties had made possible the additional Positive returns from research on production of 10 million tons of fresh roots per year — enough to provide 14 million people natural resources with 2,200 kilocalories per day. The results of CGIAR research on natural resource 28 Improved varieties of cowpea, which management have proved harder to implement and provide both food and livestock feed, evaluate than its work on crop improvement. are being widely adopted in the dry Nonetheless, a set of seven case studies published savannas of West Africa, with in 2007 indicates that this research is yielding highly estimated benefi ts of from US$299 positive returns on investment, counting only the million to $1.1 billion expected to benefi ts for agricultural productivity. If methodologies accrue from 2000 to 2020. were available for gauging the environmental benefi ts as well, the returns would no doubt be much higher. 29 Impressive gains have been regis- tered with improved common beans, The practice of no-tillage, which is developed with farmer participation 32 spreading rapidly in the rice-wheat through regional networks in East, systems of South Asia’s Indo- Central and Southern Africa. Offering Gangetic Plains, has been shown to a 30-50% yield advantage and reduce farmers’ production costs for multiple disease resistance, the new varieties have labor, machinery, chemical inputs and been adopted by 5.3 million rural households over fuel by 10% (see Box 4 opposite). The technique the past 15 years and currently occupy half of the raises crop productivity by the same amount, partly region’s total bean area, according to a 2008 study. because leaving crop residues on the soil surface While strengthening household food and nutrition improves fertility. These gains have generated security, improved bean production also provides economic benefi ts on the order of US$165 million women (who are the main bean growers) with surplus from 1990 to the present, or 47 times the investment grain to sell in local markets. The benefi ts of bean of $3.5 million. These benefi ts do not include the improvement research for Africa are estimated to substantial environmental gains that accrue from the have a current value of $200 million, more than a conservation of water, sequestration of carbon in the dozen times costs of $16 million. soil and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. 30 New Rice for Africa, branded 33 By 2002, more than 66,000 NERICA, combines the high yields of farmers in Zambia had adopted an Asian rice with African varieties’ agroforestry system called “fertilizer resistance to local pests and tree fallows,” which renews soil diseases. It has spread to 250,000 fertility using leguminous trees hectares in upland areas, helping grown on the farm. The system has reduce national rice import bills and generating been shown to boost maize production while higher incomes in rural communities. reducing production risks and soil erosion, with benefi ts of up to $20 million, compared with an 31 Recent research has begun to investment of $3.5 million. Another promising option document the nutritional benefi ts for improved fallows in Africa is to plant the from improved crop varieties. In leguminous climbing shrub Mucuna pruriens as a Mozambique, the introduction of new cover crop. During the 1990s, participatory research orange-fl eshed sweet potato rich in helped more than 10,000 farmers in Benin adopt beta-carotene signifi cantly increased this practice. 12 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond There is good scope for diversifying the rice-wheat system through the addition of maize, potato, sugarcane, vegetables and various grain legumes such as peanut. BOX 4 Innovators in Research Collaboration The Indo-Gangetic Plains of South Asia are a or reduced tillage. The new technologies offer major food-producing region, where rice-wheat immediate economic benefi ts from reduced cropping rotations supply grain for more than production costs and timely planting, which 300 million people. Researchers were therefore raises yields. In addition, farmers are rapidly alarmed to observe in farmers’ fi elds during the diversifying the rice-wheat system through the late 1980s a marked decline in the yields of rice addition of maize, potato, sugarcane, various and a leveling off of wheat yields, caused largely grain legumes and vegetables. by soil degradation. These impacts may be attributed to various Since the early 1990s, a consortium of research- features of an evolving model for collaborative ers has been addressing this problem with research. One is the farming systems perspec- remarkable success through an innovative tive adopted early on. Another is the participa- model for regional collaboration in research on tory approach to developing and disseminating natural resource management. The consortium technology, which broke the hierarchical builds on strong ties between CGIAR Centers; barriers that had previously separated research- the national agricultural research institutes of ers, extension offi cers and farmers. This gave Bangladesh, India, Nepal and Pakistan; various rise to a more dynamic process of technological advanced research institutes in the industrial- innovation, in which all of those actors, together ized world; and dozens of private fi rms. with private equipment manufacturers and input suppliers, work in teams. Thanks to their work, by the end of 2007, half a million smallholder farmers were planting some Finally, all partners have gained effectiveness 4 million hectares (nearly a third of the region’s from an emphasis on sharing knowledge total rice-wheat area of 13.5 million hectares) through traveling seminars and study tours using various resource-conserving technologies. — activities in which CGIAR scientists often This includes 1.94 million hectares under zero serve as mentors and facilitators. Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 13 34 In Malawi, an integrated aquaculture- guided the conception, evaluation and targeting of agriculture system, introduced during the initiative starting in the early 1990s. the mid-1990s with active farmer participation at a cost of $1.5 million, 38 Shifts in Syria’s policies on fertilizer has created benefi ts worth nearly distribution and barley prices in arid $3.5 million by doubling the income zones starting in the mid-1980s of rural households and dramatically increasing fi sh made fertilizer use more effi cient, consumption. The system shows great promise for contributing to increased barley other areas of Southern Africa where the agricultural output and improved livestock workforce has been devastated by HIV/AIDS. nutrition, with benefi ts worth $73.4 million. 35 New information and tools provided to conservationists during the 1990s 39 Research and advocacy to decrimi- are being used to monitor some 37 nalize the marketing of milk by million hectares of forest globally, small-scale vendors in Kenya created enabling the better management benefi ts for producers and consum- of this diminishing resource and ers with an estimated value of contributing to more sustainable $44-283 million. livelihoods for forest dwellers. 40 In the Philippines, improved policies A growing record of policy impacts on pesticides — starting in the late 1980s and involving the regulation of Achieving development impact depends highly toxic products on rice and the not just on new technologies but also on better training of rural health offi cers — has policies that offer rural people the means and so far generated benefi ts valued at incentives to invest in sustainable agricultural $117 million. production and resource use. While hard to measure, the impacts of CGIAR policy research and advocacy No grounds for complacency appear to be substantial, as suggested by recent case studies indicating benefi ts worth millions of dollars. As impressive as it may seem, the evidence of “substan- tial pro-poor impacts” compiled by Renkow and Byerlee 36 Research on the liberalization offers no grounds for complacency. On the contrary, of rice prices in Vietnam during the these authors insist, the evidence presents a “strong mid-1990s informed the relaxation of case . . . for continued and increased investment” in crop rice export quotas and of internal improvement and other key components of a “wide- restrictions on trade, generating ranging portfolio” of research. benefi ts worth US$45-91 million. To make good on greater investment requires, 37 A food-for-education program in however, a new and better way of working, which is Bangladesh catering to 2.1 million the subject of the section titled “A better way of students in 17,811 schools created working to create a better future for the world’s poor,” total benefi ts estimated at $248 starting on page 19 of this publication. million with the aid of capacity building and policy research, which 14 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond A new CGIAR Research Program will help smallholder banana farmers to access markets for higher-value products, thus raising 1980s their incomes and fostering more diverse farming systems. 1980 13 Centers 35 Members (of which 4 are developing countries) 1989 13 Centers 40 Members (of which 6 are developing countries) Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 15 From Rio to Svalbard: CGIAR GENEBANKS SAFEGUARD HUMANITY’S AGRICULTURAL HERITAGE As primary conservators, CGIAR scientists inform debate on how best to protect and equitably share genetic resources and the intellectual property derived from them When more than 150 countries signed the Convention on Biological Diversity at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, CGIAR Centers were already operating genebanks in which they collected and conserved the crop biodiversity that is the common legacy of farmers since the dawn of agriculture. The Centers recognized — as signatories of the Rio convention would in the following decade — that monoculture and other unsustainable agricultural practices threatened the wholesale extinction of traditional crop, forage and agroforestry varieties. At the same time, habitat loss through agricultural expansion, environmental degradation and other causes threatened the wild relatives of crops that harbor agronomically valuable traits such as resilience against pests, disease, drought, fl ooding, excessive cold and heat, and problem soils. The CGIAR Centers soon placed their collections under the authority of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, holding the collections in trust on behalf of humanity. In 2006, the 11 Centers with genebanks signed superseding agreements that placed the collections under the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture and adopted its standard contract for exchanging genetic materials. The CGIAR invests $6 million annually to maintain in the public domain over 650,000 samples of crop, forage and agroforestry genetic resources. Of more than a million seed samples distributed in the past decade, 80% went to national researchers in developing countries to help breed more bountiful, effi cient and resilient crops. Seed contributions from CGIAR genebanks have helped jumpstart agricultural recovery after confl ict in Afghanistan, Angola, Mozambique and Somalia. Through the CGIAR’s Systemwide Genetic Resources Program, CGIAR Centers and their partners share information and knowledge about germplasm and its discovery and conservation, conduct joint research, establish common policies and practices, and contribute to international debate on how best to protect and equitably share genetic resources and the 16 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond Among the fi rst to systematically conserve biodiversity, CGIAR Centers now maintain over 650,000 samples of crop, forage and agroforestry genetic resources. intellectual property derived from them. The partnership raising an endowment of $260 million CGIAR’s Systemwide Information Network on for conserving agricultural biodiversity. February Genetic Resources (http://singer.cgiar.org/) 2008 saw the opening of the trust-funded provides users with a single entry point for learning Svalbard Global Seed Vault. Carved into a about Center collections and identifying the Norwegian island above the Arctic Circle and materials they need. It forms the core of new efforts capable of preserving seed for thousands of to develop a more comprehensive global information years, Svalbard is the repository of last resort for system that will enable searches of genebanks humanity’s agricultural heritage. At its opening, worldwide for genetic traits needed to combat new 21 national and international institutes deposited diseases and cope with climate change. nearly 300,000 duplicate seed samples. Of them, more than 200,000 came from CGIAR genebanks, An initiative originating in the CGIAR created the which plan to deposit an additional 300,000 Global Crop Diversity Trust, a public-private samples in the coming years. Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 17 One way the CGIAR combats child malnutri- tion is by boosting the availability of foods that are naturally rich in micronutrients, such as livestock products, fi sh, vegetables and fruits. 18 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond A BETTER WAY OF WORKING To Create a Better Future for the World’s Poor Mounting crises and evolving opportunities call for a more concerted and collaborative research effort In 2008, the world food system received its biggest shock since the CGIAR was established. Sharp increases in the prices of staple foods pushed 100 million people back into poverty. Desperate consumers rioted in two dozen major cities across the developing world. In 2011, continued price infl ation and volatility prompted many observers to ask whether the world is again on the verge of a major food price crisis. In February 2011, the Food Price Index reached its highest level since its launch by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in January 1990. Since then, political upheaval in North Africa and the Middle East provides new and dramatic lessons about the close connection between food and peace. A string of recent natural disasters has contributed to uncertainty about food supplies and prices. Epic fl oods in Pakistan in 2010 ruined 1.6 million hectares of crops. And in early 2011, China’s worst drought in 60 years briefl y but worryingly threatened the winter wheat crop of the world’s largest producer of this staple cereal. Extreme weather wreaking havoc on agriculture in one country after another may or may not be a direct result of global climate change. But it certainly offers a preview of a more turbulent world, in which a fragile food system and unfavorable climate trends magnify the misfortunes of people living in extreme poverty, with the majority in rural areas and relying mainly on smallholder agriculture. Rethinking agricultural research The responsibility to create a better future for the world’s poor rests on the shoulders of many individuals and organizations. Among them are the more than 8,000 scientists and other professionals of the CGIAR. They have 4 decades of experience in successfully reducing hunger and poverty and curbing the degradation of natural resources across the developing world. Since the CGIAR’s inception in 1971, its scientists and the donors who support them have worked together toward these ends on a largely informal basis. Over the years, donors have agreed to extend the work of CGIAR researchers many times in response to growing needs and emerging opportunities. But now multiple crises in the global economy and environment have converged to confront agriculture Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 19 with challenges of unprecedented scope and those issues and explains how this research will help complexity (see Box 5 opposite). To meet them the CGIAR achieve four system-level outcomes: requires a more concerted and collaborative research reduced rural poverty, improved food security, effort than any the CGIAR has ever mounted before. improved nutrition and health, and the sustainable management of natural resources. From the early 1990s until recently, complacency seemed to place the work of the CGIAR and its The strategy further outlines how research can national partners on the backburner. But the food be organized more effectively to deliver those price crisis of 2008 and subsequent events have impacts, describing the key areas in which the shaken decision makers from their prior complacen- CGIAR and its partners have strong collective cy, restoring agriculture to its rightful place on the capacity or are building it. Finally, the strategy international development agenda. This is the clear outlines a process for creating a diverse portfolio signal of policy statements from the Group of Twenty of global collaborative initiatives called CGIAR industrialized and developing countries, the European Research Programs (CRPs). Union, and many others. The CGIAR strategy is reinforced by three supports. In response to encouraging signs of renewed One consists of a cascading series of performance commitment, the CGIAR chose to thoroughly rethink agreements between, fi rst, the Fund Council and the the way it works. This put in motion a set of far-reach- Consortium, then between the Consortium and the ing reforms, starting with the complete overhaul of the CGIAR Centers leading the CRPs, and fi nally CGIAR’s governance architecture. The result is a more between the lead Centers and their many partners. business-like partnership that links, in more binding The other supports are the streamlined Monitoring and transparent ways, donors who fund research with and Evaluation System, designed to ensure that all the scientists and others who conduct it. actors are held accountable for their performance, and the Independent Science and Partnership Under the new arrangement, donors can direct stable Council, which provides Fund donors with expert support toward major research initiatives through the advice on major issues. CGIAR Fund, which is guided by the representative Fund Council. This should curb the recent tendency The CGIAR’s new overarching structure and strategy toward fragmentary funding of dispersed research convert it from a loose coalition of like-minded but efforts. The CGIAR Centers are united under the operationally distinct research and donor organizations Consortium of International Agricultural Research into a coherent whole that is greater than the sum Centers, a new legal entity with its own chief executive of its parts. offi cer and board, which provides a stronger founda- tion for integrating research across Centers. Opportunities for global agricultural research Bridge to a better future The challenges for 21st century agriculture seem extraordinary by 20th century standards — but then The dual governance structure of the new CGIAR is so do the capacities of today’s agricultural and held together by a conceptual bridge, the Strategy ecological science. and Results Framework. Designed by the Consortium in close consultation with partners and The fi eld of functional genomics, for example, is approved by the Funders Forum, it provides, for the revealing previously unimagined knowledge about fi rst time, a common basis for collective action by all gene functions. Advanced research institutions and CGIAR Centers. private companies are rapidly putting this knowledge to use through a variety of biotechnology methods, The new strategy takes into account a range of new such as genetic transformation and the use of challenges and opportunities in today’s global molecular markers, to enhance the yield potential food-production system. It identifi es the comparative and stress tolerance of modern crop varieties. As a advantages of CGIAR research toward addressing complement to conventional breeding, biotechnology 20 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond Rising concern for the future has translated into renewed global awareness that smallholder agriculture is central to reducing poverty. BOX 5 New Challenges for Global Agriculture Global agriculture is quite different now than when and extensive agriculture that has evolved in the CGIAR was established in 1971. Most striking, the absence of policies and practices for perhaps, is the greater complexity of today’s sustainable resource management. challenges, which arose as both new and longstand- ing pressures began to converge in recent years. Among the consequences is a sharp decline in the annual rate of growth in developing country cereal The primary forces shaping global agriculture yields from 3% in the 1970s to just below 1% since include rapid population and income growth, 2000. Worsening water scarcity and land degrada- more frequent and severe drought and fl ooding, tion have kept farmers from realizing the benefi ts rising energy prices, the subsidized development of new technologies and have thus undercut their of biofuels, and counterproductive trade and incentive to adopt them. market policies. These were the principal causes of the 2008 food price crisis, according to CGIAR In the coming decades, climate change will food policy analysts, and they are the main further raise barriers to increased productivity drivers of continued price infl ation and volatility. growth. According to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Avoiding the recurrence of major food crises Climate Change, the impacts will signifi cantly requires, among other measures, faster growth in threaten food production chiefl y through more agricultural productivity. This is critical for severe weather but also through more frequent achieving the 70% production increase needed, and destructive disease and pest outbreaks. according to the World Bank and others, to feed a Smallholder producers are especially vulnerable projected population of 9 billion people in 2050. because of their limited capacity to adapt. There are major barriers to achieving such an Fortunately, though, there is a silver lining increase that did not exist or were less limiting behind these dark clouds. Rising concern 40 years ago, when the Green Revolution about new challenges for agriculture has delivered a quantum leap in the yields of rice translated into renewed global awareness that and wheat. One of the greatest obstacles is the growth in smallholder agriculture is effective at rampant degradation of the natural resources reducing poverty and, indeed, necessary. The — water, arable land, biological diversity and critical corollary of this principle is that sound forests — upon which agriculture and rural policies and institutions are essential to communities depend. To a large extent, enabling smallholders to achieve growth. degradation results from the more intensive Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 21 is rapidly becoming the standard of the trade. The resource management. The private sector has also emergence of powerful new techniques has fi lled gaps in agricultural research and development, prompted renewed interest in research toward the becoming a key supplier of new gene technologies, better understanding and use of crop and livestock improved crop seeds and veterinary products. genetic resources. A catalytic role for the CGIAR To take full advantage of the development opportuni- ties offered by this research, the CGIAR and its In the wide arena of agricultural research for partners must continue to address issues related to development, the CGIAR has an important role to intellectual property rights. Proprietary technologies play in reducing hunger and poverty globally. No are no longer the exception in agricultural research other international organization has as clear and and innovation but the norm. As the public and comprehensive a mandate to achieve this goal private sectors enter into new partnerships to through research. And few have such considerable address food and environmental challenges, they will assets, including a critical mass of scientists, wide need to handle the acquisition, protection and support from donors, global research infrastructure dissemination of intellectual property adeptly and and networks, and the world’s most comprehensive creatively, if they are to succeed in putting new collections of genetic resources. technologies to work for the poor. In keeping with their original mandates, individual As advanced science breaks down old barriers to CGIAR Centers have so far worked more or less crop improvement, new information and communica- autonomously with their partners to generate develop- tions technologies are widening the scope for ment impact through research products related to collaboration in research on crops and natural crops, farm animals, natural resources or eco-regions. resources by creating new spaces for innovation that This approach has delivered signifi cant impacts, as are partly virtual. In fact, the whole concept of described earlier, but they have been spread somewhat technological innovation has evolved in recent years unevenly across regions and research areas. into a more collaborative enterprise involving more diverse actors. This has spurred researchers to Now is the time for the CGIAR to perform a more assume new roles in development and enter into catalytic role that better realizes the potential broader partnerships that involve not just the public synergies between Centers and many other sector but private companies and civil society as well, actors in the global research system (see Box 6 on including local producer associations. page 26). Nothing less would be suffi cient to deliver the greater and wider impacts that are needed to Yet public organizations are still the backbone of the confront complex global challenges. In preparation global system of agricultural research for develop- for this more collective approach, the CGIAR put in ment. And, contrary to the overall trend of underin- place mechanisms designed to integrate research vestment in research, public organizations in some across Centers and partner organizations and to developing countries — notably Brazil, China, India, sharpen the focus of their joint work toward key Mexico and South Africa — have built up enviable development impacts. capacities in new areas of science. While expanding the global supply of agricultural knowledge, this has To implement this new and better way of working, also widened the gap between technological “haves” the CGIAR’s Strategy and Results Framework calls and “have-nots,” as the scientifi c capacity of for “results-based management.” Originating in the countries in sub-Saharan Africa and Central America business world, this concept has greatly infl uenced in particular has lagged behind in recent years. the public sector. It requires that organizations carefully defi ne the results they want to achieve, The consolidation of various regional and subregional systematically direct all their capacities and invest- organizations has compensated somewhat for the ments toward delivering them, and demonstrate loss of national capacity, employing collective action measurable progress through rigorous monitoring to tackle shared constraints in agriculture and natural and evaluation using clear performance indicators. 22 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond Bringing development impact within reach Making up for lost time and opportunities requires The CGIAR’s new strategy commits it to large investments in research toward achieving the delivering results that are closely aligned with diversifi cation and sustainable intensifi cation of the Millennium Development Goals, around which agricultural production, bringing higher and more a unique international consensus has formed. stable yields and greater resilience under stress. 1990s The strategy is particularly relevant to goals on Improved dryland cereals, root crops, grain legumes, hunger and poverty reduction and environmental agroforestry and ruminant livestock are especially sustainability, but it pertains to the others as well : important for achieving these outcomes, refl ected in primary education, gender equality, human health measurable improvement of household food and global partnership for development. The security and incomes. Strategy and Results Framework defines, as 1990 summarized below, the basis by which the CGIAR Though potent, new technologies alone will 16 Centers Centers and their partners can deliver the four not get the job done. They are rather blunt system-level outcomes. instruments for poverty reduction and must be 40 Members (of which 6 accompanied by other more precise interventions, are developing countries) These outcomes overlap in that they are mutually including microcredit, improved market access and reinforcing, but each still requires a dedicated clear property rights, especially for women. Such 1993 strategy. Strong food security contributes to lower measures are critical for enabling the rural poor to food prices, which reduces poverty and improves invest more resources in development. 18 Centers human nutrition. But if food security derives chiefl y from improved cereal productivity in irrigated areas, Opening pathways to rural prosperity requires 43 Members (of which 8 it may have only a limited effect on poverty in a research strategy that takes into account are developing countries) marginal environments, where many of the poor live. distinct regional contexts; refl ects a deep Each development impact thus requires a distinct understanding of the changes needed to 1999 research strategy, which deals carefully with overcome poverty; promotes innovation potential tradeoffs between, for example, more simultaneously in agricultural production, 16 Centers* intensive crop production and more sustainable natural resource management and market 58 Members (of which 22 management of natural resources. access; and employs novel approaches, such are developing countries) as involving community groups, to ensure gender Reduced rural poverty and ethnic inclusiveness. Some 1.4 billion people live in extreme poverty on Improved food security incomes of less than US$1.25 day. About 70% of them reside in rural areas, where most depend on Providing poor consumers with affordable food agriculture for a livelihood. Despite convincing depends heavily on ample and reliable global supplies evidence that agricultural growth is highly effective of basic staples. The global food price crisis of 2008 at reducing poverty, the sector, until 2008, received demonstrated the harsh consequences of ignoring this declining attention with negative consequences. fact. The initial price spike and continued price infl ation and volatility have deprived more than 100 In South Asia, for example, rural poverty has million people of their right to food, pushing the * In 1994, the International Livestock Center for Africa and become deeply entrenched, mainly in semi-arid number living with chronic hunger beyond 1 billion. the International Laboratory for and other neglected areas. In sub-Saharan Africa Research on Animal Diseases merged to create the — the world’s other major locus of rural poverty — Mending the fractured food security of urban and International Livestock Research it is more prevalent and widely distributed, though rural consumers worldwide requires, among other Center, and the International Network for the Improvement of particularly intense in pastoral areas of arid and things, steady growth in agricultural productivity to Banana and Plantain became a semi-arid environments. The depth and distribution make food prices lower and more stable. Since the program of the International Plant Genetic Resources of poverty in a given region determines 1960s, this growth has depended mainly on higher crop Research Institute (since the options that are most likely to prove effective yields made possible in large part by improved cereal renamed Bioversity International) . in reducing poverty. varieties that respond well to fertilizer and irrigation. Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 23 Over the past decade, though, the rate of growth in rice Stronger food security, though critical for surmount- and wheat yields in particular has declined sharply. ing malnutrition, is not enough. Further interventions Unless this trend is reversed, grain prices are likely to are needed in agriculture to bolster nutritional rise steadily in the coming decades. security and human health. Three key staple cereals — maize, rice and wheat One option that shows promise is the biofortifi cation — supply a third of the calories people consume of widely available staple foods — an approach that globally. Major investments are needed to enhance raises their micronutrient content through plant their yield potential and stability in the breadbaskets breeding. Another approach is to boost the output of the tropics and subtropics. Developing new cereal and consumption of foods that are naturally rich in varieties with higher yields and stronger stress micronutrients, such as livestock products, fi sh, resistance will require that plant genetic resources vegetables and fruits. This can be accomplished be more effectively exploited using the new tools of through initiatives that diversify food production, molecular biology. Even though farmers already strengthen agricultural value chains and support cultivate breadbaskets quite intensively, better crop school meal programs. varieties and farming practices will enable them to produce more while using water and plant nutrients Sustainable management of natural more effi ciently to cope with water scarcity, land resources degradation and climate change. Agriculture has more impact on the environment While reinforcing global food security, agricultural than any other human activity. Unsustainable research must pursue different strategies to shore up farming and livestock grazing are major causes of the food security of vulnerable regions, including deforestation, biodiversity loss, water scarcity and sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa, West Asia and the soil degradation. Agriculture accounts for as much parts of South Asia that lack irrigation. In these regions, as a third of global greenhouse gas emissions, both long-neglected crop-livestock systems offer the most directly and, as a primary driver of deforestation, potential for increasing agricultural productivity. indirectly. At the same time, the sector is highly vulnerable to climate change. Improved nutrition and health Over the past 20 years, the CGIAR built up The poor suffer not only chronic hunger but also considerable capacity for research on the sustain- malnutrition and ill health. Two billion people lack able management of forests, water, fi sheries, suffi cient micronutrients in their diets, especially vitamin rangelands and soil. Moreover, it has experimented A, iron and zinc. These defi ciencies stunt children’s with different mechanisms, such as ecoregional growth, make children and adults’ more susceptible to programs, for organizing this research toward disease, and expose mothers and infants to greater reversing current trends that degrade natural risks during childbirth. Often, the plight of these people resources. Experience teaches that new research is worsened by unsafe foods (infected with mycotoxins, in this area will likely be able to deliver signifi cant for example), diseases transmitted through animals or outcomes by following three closely related tracks. water, and other problems related to agriculture. One track is to improve the provision of ecosystem Malnutrition in children is especially severe in sub- services. Schemes involving payments to rural Saharan Africa and South Asia. In both regions, the communities for maintaining these services, such as problem occurs mainly in rural areas and is closely through sustainable forest management for carbon associated with women’s limited access to capture or better watershed management, have education. Any strategy to reduce child malnutrition sprung up around the world and show great potential. must create new options for women, since they bear the main responsibility for household diets as well A second track pursues the complementary goal of as for much crop production, postharvest handling improved farming systems. Some of the research on and food marketing. systems must be toward using natural resources and 24 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond purchased inputs more effi ciently in intensively Natural resource management cultivated breadbaskets. As mentioned above, these areas are critical for sustaining global food security. Since the early 1990s, the CGIAR has undertaken Other research should center on reversing land research on the whole range of natural resources, degradation in marginal areas, especially in sub- including soil, water, forests, rangelands, fi sheries and Saharan Africa, where rural poverty is prevalent. biodiversity. It is one of the few organizations whose work on these resources spans the local and global To be effective, both lines of research must be scales. For that reason, the CGIAR has a unique role directed along a third track addressing climate to play in linking the development of better manage- change, whose twin destinations are adaptation and ment practices with the creation of policies that pave mitigation. Better management of natural resources, the way for their wide adoption in rural areas. including the carbon stored in forests and agricul- tural systems, is critical for achieving these aims. In general, this research is well organized in the CGIAR and well connected with the efforts of the Mobilizing the capacity to deliver wider communities working in specifi c sectors. Nonetheless, pathways are open to the CGIAR and its Over the past 4 decades, the CGIAR and its partners for better integration — for example, between partners have built up strong capacities in improving land and water management and in research on the crop and livestock production and in managing use of payment for ecosystem services to benefi t the natural resources. These main lines of research rural poor in developing countries. have been organized rather differently, however, more often than not causing them to move in Social science perspectives somewhat different directions. While the social sciences have received less To deliver new research results that translate emphasis in recent years because of reduced into more rapid and measurable progress toward funding, the CGIAR still has the largest capacity in development impacts, as outlined above, the this area of any single organization engaged in public Consortium must now mobilize Center capacities agricultural research for development. Its social far more effi ciently in collaboration with partners scientists — distributed across Centers, including one (see Box 6 on page 26). The sections that follow dedicated to food policy research — have addressed describe how the CGIAR will build capacities in six a wide range of issues, such as global food supplies, areas, and how it will address crosscutting concerns. human nutrition, natural resource management, the gender dimensions of technological change and Agricultural productivity impact assessment. The CGIAR has an impressive record of success in Farming systems improving all of the crops on which global and regional food supplies chiefl y depend (see page 8). Past agricultural research has typically focused on In this work, multidisciplinary teams of Center single crops and livestock species. But farmers in scientists combine conventional breeding and developing countries seek to improve the biotechnology to reach breeding goals informed by productivity and profi tability of whole farming related disciplines such as agronomy, entomology, systems. Therefore, to deliver key development and plant pathology and physiology. These impacts, the CGIAR and its partners must broaden researchers draw on vast collections of plant their approach to improving production systems by genetic resources held in trust for humanity by learning from successful models such as collabora- CGIAR genebanks under the International Treaty tive research on South Asia’s rice-wheat system on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (see Box 4 on page 13). (see pages 16-17). All CGIAR crop research is tightly linked with that of national partners, generally A central challenge for this research is to heighten through far-reaching commodity networks. the resource-use effi ciency of quite diverse farming Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 25 BOX 6 Realizing Potential through Partnership New science must be brought to bear more research, for example, a coalition of three CGIAR effectively on the complex challenges of small- Centers and three other international organizations holder agricultural production, which is a has brought together about 900 partners world- mainstay for most of the rural poor. If this science wide. Their roles vary from upstream science to is to deliver on its promise, then clearly all policy development and the grassroots dissemina- participating organizations must work together to tion of research results. deliver the development outcomes that poor people urgently need. For research on climate change, to cite another example, CGIAR scientists spread across all 15 of This is a key purpose for which the CGIAR the CGIAR Consortium member Centers are embarked on major reforms, and it is why the forming an extensive network of global, regional Global Forum on Agricultural Research orga- and local partners. Particularly novel is their new nized in 2010 the first Global Conference on alliance with the Earth System Science Partnership, Agricultural Research for Development, to be which combines the CGIAR’s expertise in research followed by similar events every 2 years. The on agriculture and natural resources with the conference provides a venue for building a broad world’s best climate science. This combination of consensus around the steps needed to transform talents will enable higher-quality assessments of a currently fragmentary system of agricultural climate change impacts, which should provide a and environmental research into a more cohesive more reliable basis for dialogue and collaboration and effective effort. toward climate change adaptation and mitigation. Based on that consensus, the CGIAR is already All of the CGIAR Research Programs now being broadening and strengthening its partnerships to developed and launched are making similar efforts assemble the capacities needed for research that to realize the full potential of collaborative research catalyzes innovation locally and nationally. In rice through partnerships that are strong and inclusive. systems involving multiple crops, livestock and To realize the full potential of this research, however, natural resources. Since no single Center or partner the CGIAR must extend its current capacities. Better has all the capacity needed to achieve this, a more expertise in spatial modeling and risk management, integrated research approach is essential. for example, is critical to the more accurate targeting of measures toward climate change adaptation. Global climate change Likewise, stronger capacity in policy and institutional development is essential to mitigating climate change Several decades ago, CGIAR scientists began through viable schemes for carbon trading based on searching for ways to help farmers cope more the sustainable management of forests and agricul- effectively with harsh and erratic weather. For that tural landscapes. The success of the CGIAR and its reason, the CGIAR as a whole is already well along in partners in climate change adaptation and mitigation research that is relevant to global climate change, will greatly affect their progress in delivering all four of with clear comparative advantages in crop improve- the development impacts identifi ed in the Strategic ment and natural resource management. Results Framework document. 26 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond Nutrition and health participation in knowledge networks and exchange, partly through the better use of new information and CGIAR research on crop biofortifi cation provides communication strategies. — along with important efforts to combat livestock Gender and diseases, diversify agricultural systems and Data management. The CGIAR possesses a unique Diversity increase food safety — a fi rm foundation for capacity to amass data on agriculture and natural progress in generating large nutritional and health resources across the developing world. Though Program of benefi ts from agriculture. Nonetheless, to achieve costly to generate, these data are essential the CGIAR signifi cant impacts, the CGIAR’s capacities must be ingredients of useful research results. Yet, the linked more closely with those of the nutrition and project-by-project approach that has prevailed in health communities. funding research in recent years greatly complicates In July 1999 the CGIAR launched its Gender and the task of properly archiving and sharing data sets. Diversity Program to Stronger links between these historically divided help Centers leverage interests will enable them to work far more The CGIAR’s new research strategy, with its rich staff diversity to effectively to devise and target sustainable means emphasis on more-integrated research approaches, strengthen research and of reaching the most vulnerable populations with provides an opportunity to collect, analyze, use and management excellence. Between 2003 and more nutritious foods. Stronger collaboration disseminate data more systematically. This is 2008, women’s holding between them is also essential to the complex task essential not only for achieving better results from of CGIAR science of reliably measuring changes in nutrition and health collaborative research but also for more thoroughly positions rose from that result from interventions in agriculture. measuring development impacts. 20 to 26% and of leadership positions almost doubled from Crosscutting concerns A better way of working 9 to 16%. In 2008, the program launched To support new research in the areas described The CGIAR Research Programs (CRPs) are the African Women in above, the CGIAR will address three key mechanism by which the research capacities Agricultural Research crosscutting concerns, as explained here. described above will be deployed to deliver key and Development (AWARD). By 2010 development impacts. These programs mark the AWARD had reached Gender inequality in agriculture. Though women beginning of a new and better way of working in 416 scientists in 139 account for more than half of agricultural output in the CGIAR toward creating a better future for organizations. AWARD developing countries, they are underrepresented in the world’s poor. aims to strengthen the research and development. Their limited inclusion research and leadership skills of African women translates into huge missed opportunities for poverty The hallmarks of these programs are their strategic in agricultural science, reduction, stronger food and nutritional security, and focus on development impacts, their integration of empowering them to better stewardship of natural resources. Under its research capacities within and outside the CGIAR, contribute more new strategy, the CGIAR will employ gender analysis and their commitment to working through open effectively to poverty strategically to identify the most appropriate points partnerships. Implementing a comprehensive portfolio alleviation and food security in sub-Saharan of intervention — such as land rights, nutritional of CRPs will require a substantial increase in funding Africa. education, and access to inputs and services — for for international and national research. All the reducing gender inequality. It will reinforce this work programs will provide clarity about the way in which through capacity strengthening, particularly in South additional funds are used and about the results that Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, where the problem is donors can expect from increased investment. most pronounced. Two such programs were launched in late 2010: National research capacity. The quality of CGIAR research depends on the strength of its partnerships, ■ Global Rice Science Partnership. With an which depends in turn on collective and individual initial 5-year budget of nearly US$600 million, capacities at the national level. In all of its collabora- this program will deliver innovations in rice tive research, the CGIAR will emphasize strengthen- genetics, agronomy, postharvest processing ing partners’ research capacities through innovative and policy that strengthen food security learning approaches. It will seek to enhance their through large and sustainable increases in Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 27 CGIAR research aims to unlock the potential of the world’s vast drylands, which occupy 40% of the earth’s land area, support a third of its population and are especially vulnerable to climate change. BOX 7 Unlocking the Potential of Drylands As CGIAR researchers and their partners address Community-based, participatory approaches new challenges and opportunities in agriculture, have also proved their worth through integrated they must also confront various problems that have watershed programs in South Asia. Such approaches proved especially recalcitrant over the years, despite have stimulated demand for new technologies, determined research efforts. This time, though, boosting the adoption of products that had researchers expect to prevail by building on recent previously gathered dust on the shelf, including new successes and by working in a new way to mobilize varieties of cereals and grain legumes, more more research capacity and more resources. effi cient irrigation techniques, and improved livestock breeds and agroforestry techniques. As a One particularly large piece of unfi nished business result, watersheds across Asia are becoming engines for CGIAR research is to unlock the potential of the of sustainable growth in rainfed agriculture, world’s vast drylands, which occupy 40% of the delivering higher productivity, enhanced rural earth’s land area, support a third of its population livelihoods and better ecological services, such as and are especially vulnerable to climate change. groundwater recharge and reduced soil erosion. Impressive results from a number of initiatives now Impressed with the results, India’s national and under way are helping defi ne the keys to success. state governments have been especially supportive of community watershed programs. Research in North Africa, for example, that successfully integrated shrubs for livestock fodder Moreover, the stream of dryland innovations into farmers’ barley-based cropping systems continues. An innovative livestock insurance underlines the importance of focusing on whole scheme introduced in Kenya’s drought-prone agro-ecosystems rather than on single crops. A Marsabit District during 2010, for example, shows more recent regional initiative to boost water great promise for reducing pastoralists’ vulnerabil- productivity in 10 countries of the Middle East ity to catastrophic livestock losses. further demonstrates the effectiveness of an integrated systems approach. Together with Drawing on such experiences, new CGIAR research participatory methods, this has encouraged farmers will strive to get the mix of innovations right in in Egypt to adopt multiple technologies such as diverse dryland environments, channeling benefi ts supplemental irrigation and planting wheat on to women in particular, who are often the de facto raised beds, enabling water savings of 30% and a heads of households in drylands. 30% increase in farmers’ incomes. 28 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond crop yields (led by the International Rice constraints that rural households face in Research Institute). managing aquatic agricultural systems (led by the WorldFish Center). ■ Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security. With an initial 5-year budget of ■ Policies, institutions and markets to strength- US$392 million, this program will offer small- en food security and incomes for the rural holder farmers new options for climate change poor. Policies that improve rural households’ adaptation and mitigation that closely match access to markets and service institutions will their circumstances (led by the International foster the wider adoption of new technologies Center for Tropical Agriculture). that increase agricultural productivity and incomes (led by the International Food Policy Three more programs received donor approval in Research Institute). early 2011: ■ Wheat : global alliance for improving food ■ Forests, trees and agroforestry: livelihoods, security and livelihoods of the resource-poor in landscapes and governance. Better conserva- the developing world. Sharp increases in wheat tion and more sustainable management of these yield growth, stronger resistance to globally resources will mitigate climate change while important diseases and pests, and enhanced enhancing rural livelihoods (led by the Center adaptation to warmer climates will boost and for International Forestry Research). stabilize the production of this staple grain (led by the International Maize and Wheat ■ Maize: global alliance for improving food Improvement Center). security and livelihoods of the resource-poor in the developing world. More intensive, ■ Roots, tubers and bananas for food security sustainable and resilient maize-based farming and income. New methods will better enable systems will boost productivity, with essentially smallholder farmers to access markets for no expansion of area sown to this crop (led by higher-value products, thus raising their incomes the International Maize and Wheat and fostering more diverse farming systems Improvement Center). (led by the International Potato Center). ■ Integrated agricultural production systems for ■ Grain legumes: enhancing food and feed the poor and vulnerable in dry areas. Improved security, nutritional balance, economic growth technologies and policies will enable smallhold- and soil health for smallholder farmers. Grain ers to raise their incomes and better manage legumes such as chickpea, pigeonpea and risk through more diverse and sustainable groundnut will be used more effectively to systems (led by the International Center for enhance human nutrition, raise livestock feed Agriculture in the Dry Areas). quality and maintain soil health (led by the International Crops Research Institute for the Approval of more CRPs is expected in 2011: Semi-Arid Tropics). ■ Agricultural systems in the humid tropics. ■ Dryland cereals: food security and growth for Research will strengthen local capacity to the world’s most vulnerable poor. More effi cient adopt a widening array of technologies and research on inherently hardy dryland cereals innovations that improve rural livelihoods such as sorghum and pearl millet will better (led by the International Institute of satisfy the requirements of smallholder farmers Tropical Agriculture) . (led by the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics). ■ Harnessing the development potential of aquatic agricultural systems for the poor and ■ More meat, milk and fi sh by and for the poor. vulnerable. Research will address the various More productive smallholder livestock and fi sh Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 29 systems will make meat, milk and fi sh more but realistic targets, with clear timelines for affordable to poor consumers while raising rural reaching them, based on well-founded projections incomes (led by the International Livestock and a strong record of development impact. Guided Research Institute). by that analysis and experience, the CGIAR and its partners are confi dent that they can boost agricul- ■ Agriculture for improved nutrition and health. ture’s future performance in the developing world Changes in agriculture and food systems will and avoid the unacceptable human suffering that accelerate progress in improving the nutrition will surely result in the absence of a thorough and health of the poor (led by the International renewal of international and national research on Food Policy Research Institute). agriculture and natural resource management. ■ Water, land and ecosystems. Research will The large projected benefi ts of this research are pursue solutions to water scarcity and land premised on substantially increased investment. degradation while contributing to the sustainable To achieve global food security through sustainable management of ecosystems (led by the agricultural development, research funding for International Water Management Institute). developing countries will have to more than triple from US$5.1 billion annually today (including both With the likely approval of more of these national and international efforts) to $16.4 billion CRPs by mid-2011, the CGIAR’s shift to per year by 2025, according to CGIAR food research through major global programs policy experts.* will be more than 50% complete. Investment in CGIAR research amounts Striking a chord of optimism to just over 10% of total public spending on agricultural research for development. Keeping World events in recent years make it increasingly this proportion more or less constant, and diffi cult to be optimistic about fulfi lling the maintaining the CGIAR’s unique role in delivering Millennium Development Goals. The goal of halving signifi cant development impacts, would require hunger and poverty by 2015 seems remote indeed the budget of the CGIAR to increase to at least in the aftermath of the 2008 food price crisis, $1.6 billion by 2025. which swelled the ranks of the poor and hungry by tens of millions. Investing more heavily in agricultural research comes at a cost. However, this cost pales next to Against this backdrop, the CGIAR’s new research the cost of later trying to reverse the unimaginable strategy and programs strike a chord of optimism. economic, social and environmental consequences Going beyond vague promises, they set ambitious of failing to act now. 1. A. Nin-Pratt & S. Fan (2009), R&D Investment in National and International Agricultural Research: An Ex-ante Analysis of Productivity and Poverty Impact, International Food Policy Research Institute background paper for developing the CGIAR Strategy and Results Framework. 30 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond 2000s 2000 16 Centers 58 Members (of which 22 are developing countries) 2009 15 Centers* 64 Members (of which 25 are developing countries) *In 2004, the International Any strategy to reduce Service for National Agricultural child malnutrition depends Research was folded into the on enabling women, who International Food Policy bear the main responsibility Research Institute. for household diets and for much crop production, postharvest handling and food marketing. Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 31 A new CGIAR Research Program will address the various constraints that rural households face in managing aquatic agricultural systems. 32 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond CGIAR FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS, 1971-2011 Steady improvements in fi nancial management and oversight — and now institutional reform — sustain the CGIAR despite decades of mandate expansion that outpaced funding support Overview As its research agenda evolved during the CGIAR’s fi rst 40 years, its funding and fi duciary policies and practices evolved in tandem to remain relevant to the prevailing research paradigm. Four broad phases of research and fi nancing can be seen in the CGIAR’s fi rst 4 decades. During the fi rst decade, CGIAR research focused on boosting the productivity of the major cereal crops rice, wheat and maize, which underpinned the Green Revolution in Asia and Latin America. In those early days, research was conducted by autonomous Centers with mandates that sharply focused on the key commodities and seldom over- lapped. The success and promise of the Green Revolution translated into generous funding from the rising budgets of members of the Development Assistance Committee for agricultural offi cial development assistance (ODA). During the next 2 decades to the end of the 20th century, the CGIAR broadened its research to include sustainability, environmental protection, and socioeconomics and markets, as the number of Centers increased to 18. By the beginning of the 1990s, funding sources had expanded beyond traditional agricultural ODA, which was coming under competitive pressure from emerging development challenges linked to health, gender, education, the environment, infrastructure and energy. There was a sense of drift in the focus of research, and the quality of funding declined. These factors conspired in the mid-1990s to create the deepest fi nancial crisis in the CGIAR’s history. At the beginning of the new millennium, as it became clearer that agricultural research needed to demonstrate its relevance to long-term food security and sustainable natural resource management, the CGIAR began to shift toward a more collaborative and partnership-oriented approach to tackling important crosscutting issues in research. In the fi nancial realm, in addition to accelerating efforts to expand the funding base beyond maturing traditional sources, the CGIAR began to pay closer attention to sound fi nancial management policies and practices, effi ciency and cost-effectiveness, and fi nancial risk management. The latest phase in the evolution of the CGIAR’s research paradigm began to emerge toward the end of the fi rst decade of the 21st century, propelled by a need to respond to new global challenges such as climate change and the food price crisis that exploded in 2008, with political reverberations reaching all the way to the Group of Eight Industrialized Nations. The CGIAR has again attempted to respond to the latest global circumstances by undertaking far-reaching reforms affecting how it carries out and evaluates its research and how it manages fi nancial resources. Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 33 funding, and technical adjustments to accommodate The fi rst decade: the growth years infl ation and foreign exchange fl uctuations. The fi rst decade of the CGIAR was characterized by The second decade: moderation and rapid growth in funding propelled by a favorable ODA environment and the expansion of both membership consolidation and the number of Centers. The success of the Green Revolution in Asia and Latin America in the late 1960s Although the number of Centers had stabilized at 13, and early 1970s inspired confi dence that research the rapid growth in funding experienced in the fi rst could deliver results with other crops, with livestock, decade of the CGIAR’s existence continued into the and in more challenging environments. But fi rst, to fi rst half of the 1980s along with a favorable ODA meet escalating funding needs, it was necessary to environment. From 1980 to 1985, total funding bring the original four Centers under the sponsorship increased by over 41% to $170 million. However, by of a larger donor group beyond the Ford and Rockefeller the middle of the 1980s, the outlook began to look foundations. The formal establishment of the CGIAR in less rosy for the CGIAR. Although agricultural ODA 1971 coincided with a shift in ODA priorities toward continued to increase from $6.3 billion (21.3% of rural development and helping smallholder farmers in total ODA) in 1980 to peak at $7.9 billion (25.6%) in developing countries. As agricultural ODA expanded 1985, competing development priorities began to from $1.7 billion in 1971 to $7.9 billion in 1985 (www. chip away at agricultural ODA. Fatigue regarding oecd.org/dac/stats/agriculture), CGIAR funding also agricultural development seemed to emerge as expanded. CGIAR membership increased from the 18 attention in development circles shifted to emerging founding Members in 1971 to 35 in 1980, and the health crises (particularly HIV/AIDS), gender issues number of Centers expanded from the original 4 to (especially girls’ education), the environment, 13 over the same period. The result of these develop- infrastructure and energy. Agricultural ODA fell to ments was a rapid increase in CGIAR funding, which $6.2 bilion (10.2% of total ODA) in 1990, a trend grew from $20 million in 1971 to $123 million by the that continued past the end of the decade. As growth end of the fi rst decade. in CGIAR funding began to slow, funding demands began to outstrip supply. CGIAR membership Well-defi ned mandates centered on crop productiv- seemed to reach a plateau at 40 during the 1990s. ity, livestock in Africa, and overcoming constraints on agricultural development through better food In the midst of moderation in growth, the CGIAR policies, stronger institutions and germplasm started to attend to a number of internal housekeeping conservation meant that fi nancing CGIAR research matters, including the fi duciary and governance was a relatively straightforward affair. Most funding areas of programming and budgeting, policies and was provided to Centers as whole institutions to reporting, and oversight. Annual programming and carry out their approved research agendas, rather budgeting gave way to a 3-year medium-term cycle, than constrained for use in specifi c programs or and the CGIAR Secretariat coordinated the initiation projects. The 1970s were probably the period when of a fi duciary framework comprising a series of Centers enjoyed the most fi nancial fl exibility, as guidelines on accounting, fi nancial management and budgets were generally adequately funded and the auditing to complement those on budgeting. Until the quality of funding gave management and boards the mid-1980s, CGIAR decision-makers had relied solely ability to deploy resources as they judged best to on the annual integrative report for information on implement the approved research agenda. Financial the health of system programs and fi nances. The fi rst oversight was vested mainly in boards, at the Center CGIAR annual report, which included a review of level, though the annual program and budget review, fi nancial performance at the Center and system level, fi rst adopted in 1974, provided the beginnings of a was for 1984. The fi rst set of Center board guidelines, mechanism for system oversight. Financial policy complementing individual board bylaws, also was developed and promoted by the CGIAR emerged from this housekeeping exercise and Secretariat mainly through budget guidelines, established Center boards’ clear accountability annual adjustments in response to changes in regarding fi duciary matters. 34 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond to specifi c projects, which stymied fi nancial The third decade: challenging expansion fl exibility while increasing the cost of management and reporting. This expansion of non-core funding CGIAR research became more complex at the resulted partly from pressure within donor agencies beginning of the 1990s, as its mandate expanded to demonstrate the effi ciency and cost-effectiveness to include forestry, agroforestry, fi sheries, and (or value for money) of their CGIAR investments. crosscutting issues such as gender, the environ- Moreover, the perceived loss of focus of CGIAR ment, biodiversity and sustainability. Five new research and the need for structural reforms meant Centers were added to tackle the expanding that responders to other development challenges mandate, bringing the total to 18. Membership also that could demonstrate their effectiveness were expanded with the addition of fi ve developing able to divert high-quality funding away from the countries (Colombia, Cote d’Ivoire, Egypt, Iran and CGIAR. The apparent increase in funding in the fi rst Kenya) and two transitional economies (Russia and half of the 1990s masked two critical problems: Romania), bringing total membership to 58 by the (i) the widening gap between the real cost of end of the decade. Figure 1 illustrates membership approved research programs and available funding and funding growth. and (ii) infl ation at a rate that exceeded funding growth, which meant there was effectively no Despite expansion on all these fronts, the funding funding growth in real terms. Figure 2 illustrates the outlook looked grim. The funding challenges that CGIAR funding trends. Faced with these realities, had started to emerge at the end of the 1980s Centers took drastic steps to control internal costs seemed to accelerate during the early 1990s. and reduce expenses, mainly through staff Although funding seemed to be increasing in total, retrenchment, and improve operational effi ciency. there were questions about the quality of growth Unfortunately, these steps were insuffi cient, and the because much of the incremental funding was tied fi nancial crisis of the early 1990s only deepened. FIGURE 1 A Growing CGIAR 800 64+ 70 58+ 700 60 89 600 40 584 50 500 35 40 400 19 30 300 20 312 20 200 235 100 20 123 10 0 0 1971 1980 1990 2000 2010 Member funding Non-member funding Number of Members Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 35 US$ million Number of Members FIGURE 2 CGIAR Total Funding Trends Nominal and in 1972 dollars 800 $673 700 600 500 400 300 200 $115 100 0 1972 1977 1982 1987 1992 1997 2002 2007 2010 Nominal 1972 dollars Getting a grip on the fi nancial crisis The CGIAR took a number of steps to address the A ministerial-level meeting held in Lucerne, Switzerland, deepening fi nancial crisis. For the fi rst time, a in early 1995 focused on ways to increase funding standing committee on fi nance was established through increased membership. Members from the with the remit to examine the role of the World South were targeted. The new CGIAR leadership Bank’s balancing grants (which had been in effect succeeded in convincing the World Bank to provide since the 1980s) and the mechanism for resource a one-time special grant of $20 million paid over 2 allocation, as well as to formulate a strategy for years, to be matched 2 for 1 by new funding from mobilizing resources. In a continuing effort to other donors. The expected new funding materialized, rationalize research, bring about operational and the $10 million World Bank grant for each year effi ciencies and save money, two task forces was fully matched. The result of these efforts was recommended, and the CGIAR agreed, to merge the full funding of the $270 million 1995 budget the International Livestock Center for Africa and and the $305 million 1996 budget. Optimism the International Laboratory for Research on about fi nances started to return to the CGIAR, Animal Diseases to create the International as evidenced by the launching of new systemwide Livestock Research Center and to fold the and ecoregional programs. International Network for the Improvement of Banana and Plantain into the administrative and Stubborn fi nancial issues governance ambit of the International Plant Genetic Resources Research Institute (since This optimism turned out to be short-lived because, renamed Bioversity International), thus reducing despite concerted efforts in the mid-1990s, the the number of Centers to 16. (A decade later, underlying fi nancial challenges remained at the close the International Service for National Agricultural of the decade. The decline of core funding as a Research was folded into the International Food percentage of total funding appeared to be acceler- Policy Research Institute, further reducing the ating, as unrestricted funding seemed to reach a number of Centers to 15.) Figure 3 illustrates plateau at $200 million and tied funding from the evolution of Centers. non-members increased rapidly, straining Centers’ 36 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond US$ million cost structures and constraining fi nancial fl exibility. and destabilized by wide swings in foreign exchange Membership expansion did not necessarily translate values. A direct result of this was that the central into a commensurate increase in high-quality funding, CGIAR Stabilization Fund, which had been set up as several Members in the South were challenged to using resources from the World Bank and other pay even the required minimum annual contribution donors, was completely depleted by 1992. of $0.5 million. In 2000, the CGIAR reached a dubious milestone, as the amount of restricted The fourth decade: reforms to address funding matched the amount of unrestricted funding, subsequently exceeding it (Figure 4). Although not continuing fi nancial stress readily apparent, the stagnation of funding in real terms experienced earlier in the 1990s was still very In addition to the fi nancial issues that persisted after much a constraint. Finally, many Centers saw their the end of the 1990s — declining agricultural ODA, purchasing power drastically curtailed by infl ation funding stagnation in real terms, and Centers’ constrained fi nancial fl exibility — the new millennium FIGURE 3 opened with the spreading realization that the Evolution of Centers research agenda itself was challenged by exogenous issues that the CGIAR needed to play a role in addressing. The issues of climate change and 20 HIV/AIDS, for example — along with the crosscutting issues of the 1990s, such as biotechnology, gender, 15 5 1 1 5 and the many problems and opportunities addressed 10 by systemwide and ecoregional programs — only 8 8 8 6 confi rmed that CGIAR research had become more 5 complex and would become even more so in the 4 4 4 4 4 coming years. The United Nations had just adopted 0 the Millennium Development Goals in 2000, with Establishment 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s enormous implications for the work of the CGIAR. original Joined Joined Joined Clearly, the annual funding envelope of $330-340 in 1970s in 1980s in 1990s million would not suffi ce. FIGURE 4 Composition of CGIAR Funding 100 80 Restricted 60 40 Unrestricted 20 0 88 89 1990 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 2000 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 2010 Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 37 Percent The CGIAR felt that a new set of reforms was Financial Guidelines Series was regularly updated needed to address its external and internal chal- and expanded to take into account both internal and lenges. Of the package of reforms that was adopted external developments that affected accountancy in 2001, the introduction of Challenge Programs and related disciplines and to promote best fi duciary had the most far-reaching fi nancial impact. The practice. These guidelines, developed to provide the World Bank’s contribution was used to provide framework for fi duciary policies and procedures in catalytic funds for them, leveraging substantial Centers and programs, were approved by the CGIAR, amounts from other Members and non-members through ExCo, before taking effect. Financial beginning in 2003. An internal analysis showed that reporting had come a long way from the integrative Challenge Programs did not diminish unrestricted reports of the 1970s and 1980s. A comprehensive, funding and that the new funds that they generated standalone fi nancial report was produced annually helped boost funding for the CGIAR overall. beginning in 2000. In 2004, a peer review system Challenge Program funding grew from $8 million was instituted, bringing in peers from Centers in 2003 to $65 million by 2010. selected by rotation to review the audited fi nancial statements submitted by Centers for compliance with Another pillar of the 2001 reform was the establish- CGIAR fi duciary guidelines and to vouch for the ment of the Science Council, which replaced the analysis underpinning the CGIAR fi nancial report. Technical Advisory Committee. The Science Council This and the collaborative arrangement for drafting budget averaged $2.5-3.0 million, but the formula for the annual fi nancial report helped to instill a sense of funding it did not signifi cantly differ from the one for collective ownership of the various fi nancial products. funding the Technical Advisory Committee until 2005, when a stopgap measure was adopted to Trouble spots in system provide funding mainly from the World Bank’s CGIAR contribution, topped by discretionary support from From 2003, externally generated crises and other individual Members. In 2007 a permanent formula fi nancial failures jolted the CGIAR. A civil war in Côte that included a levy of up to 1% of Centers’ funding d’Ivoire, the host country of the Africa Rice Center, went into effect. required its staff to be evacuated to temporary headquarters outside the country. In 2003, the Governance and fi duciary management CGIAR decided to request the board of the in the 21st century International Service for National Agricultural Research to dissolve the Center, at a cost of $4.0 Perhaps the most important pillar of the 2001 million. During the second half of the decade the reform was the establishment of the Executive International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center Council (ExCo) as a stakeholder committee that required a substantial transfusion of $3.0 million to had as one of its main responsibilities overseeing restructure itself, followed by International Center for CGIAR fi nances, though oversight remained Tropical Agriculture, which required $2.3 million. In all formally vested in the CGIAR through its Annual of these cases the CGIAR leadership decided to use General Meeting. The impact of ExCo’s oversight some of the World Bank’s contribution under the was keenly felt across the Centers as their annual rubric of “emergencies and restructuring” to provide fi nancial performance was reported to ExCo, which resources to address these challenges, in addition to required corrective action whenever warranted. any other fi nancial assistance from individual Members. When the fi rst report was made to ExCo in 2002, These allocations were typically endorsed by ExCo more than half a dozen Centers had red fl ags on and reported internally within the World Bank. one or more of the agreed fi nancial benchmarks. By 2009, the only Center remaining in this CGIAR investment by region: focus on Africa category was on a positive trajectory to reverse that status. Out of concern that the Green Revolution had essentially bypassed sub-Saharan Africa, the CGIAR Financial policy development and fi nancial reporting began to channel more funding into research for this made signifi cant progress during the decade. The region. In 1992, it began monitoring and recording its 38 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond investments by region. Figure 5 illustrates the shift of FIGURE 5 investment to sub-Saharan Africa, whose share rose CGIAR Investment by Region from 39% in 1992 to 50% in 2010. Central and West Asia A newly favorable climate & North Africa 12% As the fi rst decade of the 21st century drew to a close, there were signs that agriculture was staging Latin America Sub-Saharan Africa and Caribbean 39% a comeback on the international development 16% agenda. The World Development Report 2008 of 1992 the World Bank called attention to expanding demand for food, feed and biofuels; the conse- quences of climate change; rising energy prices; and other issues related to agriculture. World Bank Asia 33% lending for agriculture picked up from $1.4 billion in fi scal year 2001 to $2.1 billion in fi scal year 2005, and the 2008 and 2009 summits of the Group of Central and West Asia & North Africa Eight Industrialized Nations in Hokkaido and 8% L’Aquila featured food security on their agendas. At the Rome World Food Summit in June 2008, World Latin America and Caribbean Bank President Robert B. Zoellick presented a 13% Sub-Saharan Africa 50% 10-point plan to achieve food security that called for doubling funding for the CGIAR between 2008 2010 and 2013. Augmenting stepped up efforts by traditional ODA donors, the CGIAR’s funding base expanded to include more non-members, whose Asia combined contributions swelled from $19 million 29% (6% of total funding) in 2000 to $89 million (13%) in 2010 (Figure 1). The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation became the most prominent such donor. Total funding reached $673 million in 2010, placing the CGIAR within striking distance of its target of $1 billion by 2013. Table 1 highlights the top-10 donors at the end of each decade. from Member-centered fiduciary oversight by In this positive climate, the CGIAR recognized ExCo and the Annual General Meeting to that maintaining its relevance to global challeng- Consortium-driven oversight with the Center es required it to deepen its reforms. This realiza- boards and (ii) a centralized funding pool to tion prompted the CGIAR to launch in 2008 its finance large CGIAR Research Programs, with Change Management Initiative, which culminated donors entrusting a substantial portion of their in the latest set of reforms. The most salient traditional sovereignty in resource allocation to financial aspects of these reforms are (i) the shift the Fund Council. Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 39 TABLE 1 Top Donors by Decade US$ million 1971-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 2000-2010 United States 105.7 United States 412.7 World Bank 426.8 United States 650.4 World Bank 42.9 World Bank 236.0 United States 392.3 World Bank 539.9 Canada 39.3 Japan 127.9 Japan 321.9 United 389.4 Kingdom Germany 33.9 Canada 103.0 European 159.3 European 337.5 Commission Commission Inter-American 29.2 Inter-American 88.8 Switzerland 149.7 Canada 298.2 Development Development Bank Bank United Kingdom 23.7 Germany 87.5 Germany 146.7 Bill & Melinda 218.6 Gates Foundation* Rockefeller 21.2 United 78.1 Canada 143.6 Switzerland 198.5 Foundation Kingdom Ford 20.3 United Nations 72.1 Netherlands 110.3 Netherlands 185.6 Foundation Development Programme United Nations 19.3 European 67.3 United 109.7 Japan 184.0 Development Commission Kingdom Programme Sweden 15.3 Switzerland 58.5 Denmark 102.8 Germany 170.6 Italy 58.5 * Began contributing in 2004 40 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond Improved forage technologies provide more and better quality fodder for cattle. Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 41 A 2008 study of potato improvement found varieties originating in the CGIAR sown on more than 1 million hectares, double the area documented just 5 years before. 42 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond THE CGIAR IN 2010 CGIAR FUND COUNCIL COMPOSITION FOUNDATIONS Chair: Inger Andersen Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation: Prabhu Executive Secretary: Ren Wang Pingali International Development Research Centre: DONOR COUNTRIES Jean Lebel Europe: European Commission (Marc Debois), Norway (Ruth Haug), Sweden (Philip Chiverton), CGIAR FUND OFFICE United Kingdom (Jonathan Wadsworth) Executive Secretary of the Fund Council and North America: Canada (Catherine Coleman), Head of the Fund Offi ce: Ren Wang USA (Robert Bertram) Asia: Japan (Keiichi Sugita) Pacifi c: Australia (Nick Austin) CGIAR TRUSTEE Ulrich Hess DEVELOPING COUNTRIES AND REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS Sub-Saharan Africa: Kenya (Romano Kiome), INDEPENDENT SCIENCE AND Nigeria (B.Y. Abubakar) PARTNERSHIP COUNCIL Asia: China (Huajun Tang), India (S. Ayyappan) Chair: Roelof (Rudy) Rabbinge Pacifi c: Papua New Guinea (Raghunath Members: Derek Byerlee, Ken Fischer, Ghodake) Hans Herren, Jeffrey Sayer, Central and West Asia and North Africa: Iran Beatriz da Silveira Pinheiro (Jahangir Porhemmat) Executive Director: Peter Gardiner Latin America and the Caribbean: Brazil (Luciano Nass) CONSORTIUM OF INTERNATIONAL Regional Fora: Fondo Regional de Tecnologia AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH CENTERS Agropecuaria (Mario Allegri) CONSORTIUM BOARD COMPOSITION: Carlos Pérez del Castillo, Chair MULTILATERAL AND GLOBAL ORGANIZATIONS World Bank: Juergen Voegele Carl Hausmann, Vice Chair International Fund for Agricultural Development: Tom Arnold Rodney Cooke M ohammed Ait-Kadi Food and Agriculture Organization Ganesan Balachander of the United Nations: Anton Mangstl Gebi sa Ejeta Global Forum on Agricultural Ian Goldin Research: Monty Jones Lynn Haight Lloyd Le Page, ex-offi cio board member CONSORTIUM OFFICE Lloyd Le Page, Chief Executive Offi cer Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 43 RESEARCH CENTERS CGIAR MEMBERS 2009* Africa Rice Center African Development Bank Kenya Getachew Engida, Board Chair Arab Fund for Economic and Republic of Korea Papa Abdoulaye Seck, Director General Social Development Luxembourg Bioversity International Asian Development Bank Paul Zuckerman, Board Chair Malaysia Emile Frison, Director General Australia Mexico International Center for Tropical Agriculture Austria Morocco Juan Lucas Restrepo, Board Chair Bangladesh Ruben Echeverria, Director General Netherlands Belgium Center for International Forestry Research New Zealand Andrew Bennett, Board Chair Brazil Nigeria Frances Seymour, Director General Canada Norway International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center China Julio Berdegué, Board Chair Opec Fund for Thomas Lumpkin, Director General Colombia International Development International Potato Center Commission of the Pakistan Peter VanderZaag, Board Chair European Community Peru Pamela Anderson, Director General Côte d’Ivoire Philippines International Center for Agricultural Research Denmark in the Dry Areas Portugal Henri Carsalade, Board Chair Arab Republic of Egypt Rockefeller Foundation Mahmoud Solh, Director General Finland Romania International Crops Research Institute for the Food and Agriculture Semi-Arid Tropics Russian Federation Organization of the United Nigel Poole, Board Chair Nations South Africa William Dar, Director General Ford Foundation Spain International Food Policy Research Institute France Sweden Fawzi Al-Sultan, Board Chair Shenggen Fan, Director General Germany Switzerland International Institute of Tropical Agriculture Gulf Cooperation Council Syngenta Foundation for Bryan Harvey, Board Chair Sustainable Agriculture P. Hartmann, Director General India Syrian Arab Republic International Livestock Research Institute Indonesia Thailand Knut Hove, Board Chair Inter-American Development Carlos Seré, Director General Bank Turkey International Rice Research Institute International Development Uganda Elizabeth Woods, Board Chair Research Centre United Kingdom Robert Zeigler, Director General International Fund for United Nations Development International Water Management Institute Agricultural Development Programme John Skerritt, Board Chair Colin Chartres, Director General Islamic Republic of Iran United Nations Environment Ireland Programme World Agroforestry Centre Eric Tollens, Board Chair Israel United States of America Dennis Garrity, Director General Italy World Bank WorldFish Center Japan Remo Gautschi, Board Chair Stephen Hall, Director General Kellogg Foundation * CGIAR membership as of December 2009. With reform, former CGIAR Members and others are welcomed as donors to the CGIAR Fund. 44 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond CGIAR 1971-2010 CGIAR FUND COUNCIL CHAIR, 2010- INDEPENDENT SCIENCE AND Inger Andersen, 2010- PARTNERSHIP COUNCIL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 2010- CGIAR CHAIRS, 1971-2010 Peter Gardiner, 2010- Katherine Sierra, 2006-2010 SCIENCE COUNCIL CHAIRS, Ian Johnson, 2000-2006 2004-2009 Ismail Serageldin, 1994-2000 Roelof (Rudy) Rabbinge, 2007-2009 V. Rajagopalan, 1991-1993 Per Pinstrup-Andersen, 2004-2006 Wilfried Thalwitz, 1990-1991 W. David Hopper, 1987-1990 SCIENCE COUNCIL EXECUTIVE S. Shahid Hussain, 1984-1987 DIRECTOR, 2004-2009 Warren Baum, 1974-1983 Ruben Echeverria, 2004-2009 Richard H. Demuth, 1971-1974 INTERIM SCIENCE COUNCIL CHAIR, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF THE 2002-2003 CGIAR FUND COUNCIL AND HEAD Emil Q. Javier, 2002-2003 OF THE FUND OFFICE, 2010 Ren Wang, 2010 TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE CHAIRS, 1971-2001 CGIAR DIRECTORS, 2001-2010 Emil Q. Javier, 2000-2001 Ren Wang, 2007-2010 Donald Winkelmann, 1994-1999 Alex McCalla, 1988-1994 Francisco J.B. Reifschneider, 2001-2007 Guy Camus, 1982-1987 Ralph Cummings, 1977-1982 CGIAR EXECUTIVE SECRETARIES, Sir John Crawford, 1971-1976 1972-2001 Alexander von der Osten, 1989-2001 TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Curtis Farrar, 1982-1989 EXECUTIVE SECRETARIES, 1971-2003 Michael Lejeune, 1975-1982 Shellemiah Keya, 1996-2003 Harold Graves, 1972-1975 Guido Gryseels, 1995-1996 John Monyo, 1985-1994 INDEPENDENT SCIENCE AND Alexander von der Osten, 1982-1985 PARTNERSHIP COUNCIL CHAIR, 2010- Philippe Mahler, 1976-1982 Roelof (Rudy) Rabbinge, 2010 Peter Oram, 1971-1976 Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 45 CONSORTIUM OF INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH CENTERS ROME, ITA WASHINGTON, DC, USA MEXICO CITY, MEXICO IBADAN, NIGERI CALI, COLOMBIA COTONOU, BENIN NAIROBI, KE LIMA, PERU Placement markers are approximate and indicate city locations. Original 4 Centers 46 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond ALY Original Centers at founding in 1971 ALEPPO, SYRIA CIAT CIMMYT IITA IRRI PATANCHERU, INDIA Joined the CGIAR IA PENANG, MALAYSIA in the 1970s ICRISAT, 1972 LOS BAÑOS, PHILIPPINES CIP, 1973 ILRI (ILCA & ILRAD), 1973-1974 BATTARAMULLA, SRI LANKA Bioversity, 1974 ENYA ICARDA, 1975 Africa Rice, 1975 IFPRI, 1979 BOGOR, INDONESIA NAIROBI, KENYA Joined the CGIAR in the 1990s IWMI, 1991 World Agroforestry, 1991 WorldFish, 1992 CIFOR, 1993 Impacts that Matter for the Poor and the Planet 47 ABBREVIATIONS AWARD African Women in Agricultural Research and Development CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research CIAT Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (International Center for Tropical Agriculture), Colombia CIFOR Center for International Forestry Research, Indonesia CIMMYT Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maiz y Trigo (International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center), Mexico CIP Centro Internacional de la Papa (International Potato Center), Peru CRP CGIAR Research Program ExCo Executive Council of the CGIAR HIV/AIDS human immunodefi ciency virus/acquired immune defi ciency syndrome ICARDA International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas, Syria ICRISAT International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, India IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute, USA IITA International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Nigeria ILRI International Livestock Research Institute, Kenya INIAP Instituto Nacional Autónomo de Investigaciones Agropecuarias (National Institute for Agricultural Research), Ecuador IRRI International Rice Research Institute, Philippines IWMI International Water Management Institute, Sri Lanka NERICA New Rice for Africa ODA Offi cial development assistance 48 The CGIAR at 40 and Beyond Photo Credits: Front Cover: CGIAR, Dominic Chavez, CGIAR Gender and Diversity Program (Mike Goldwater) ● Inside Front Cover: background — Peter Fredenburg, (p.1) background — Peter Fredenburg, ILRI (Stevie Mann) ● (p.2) The World Bank (Tran Thi Hoa) ● (p.3) background — CIAT (Neil Palmer), The World Bank (Simone D. McCourtie) ● (p.4-5) Dominic Chavez ● (p.6) IRRI ● (p.7) CGIAR Gender and Diversity Program (Mike Goldwater) ● (p.8) CIAT ● (p.9) Dominic Chavez, IRRI ● (p.10) CGIAR Gender and Diversity Program (Mike Goldwater) ● (p.11) CIAT ● (p.12) CGIAR Gender and Diversity Program (Mike Goldwater) ● (p.13) IRRI ● (p.15) ILRI (Stevie Mann), CGIAR Gender and Diversity Program (Mike Goldwater) ● (p.16) background — CIAT (Neil Palmer), CIMMYT ● (p.17) Bioversity ● (p.18) CIAT ● (p.19) ILRI ● (p.20) Dominic Chavez ● (p.21) The World Bank (Anatoliy Rakhimbayev) ● (p.22) The World Bank ● (p.23) CIAT (Neil Palmer) ● (p.24) CIAT ● (p.25) ICARDA (Mohammad Maatougui) ● (p. 26) ILRI (Apollo Habtamu) ● (p.28) ICARDA ● (p.29) ILRI (Stevie Mann) ● (p.31) CGIAR Gender and Diversity Program (Mike Goldwater), CIAT ● (p.32) WorldFish Center ● (p.33) ILRI (Stevie Mann) ● (p.41) CIAT ● (p.42) CIP ● (p.45) Bioversity International (Jeffrey Oliver) ● (p.46) Africa Rice Center (Abou Togola), Bioversity International (John Ocampo), CIAT (Neil Palmer), The World Bank (Curt Carnemark), ILRI (Stevie Mann), CIP, ICRISAT, ICARDA (Venka Govindan) ● (p.47) CIAT, IITA ● Inside Back Cover: ICARDA Production Credits Design: Patricia Hord.Graphik Design Editing: Peter Fredenburg Printing: Professional Graphics Printing Company Production: CGIAR Fund Offi ce CGIAR Fund Offi ce 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433 USA TELEPHONE: 1 202 473 8951 FAX: 1 202 473 8110 EMAIL: cgiarfund@cgiar.org www.cgiar.org Printed on environmentally friendly paper June 2011