Report of the Center-Commissioned External Review (CCER) of the International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR) Division Review Team: Franz Heidhues Harris Mule International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) Washington, D.C. September 2007 i Table of Content Executive Summary and Recommendations............................................................................. iv 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 History and Conduct of the IFPRI-ISNAR Merger ..................................................... 1 1.2 Purpose of CCER ......................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Conduct of Review....................................................................................................... 4 1.4 Structure of the Report ................................................................................................. 5 2. ISNAR’s Mandate and Objectives, Strategy and Concept................................................ 5 2.1 ISNAR Division Priority Setting Process .................................................................... 5 2.2 ISNAR Divison Subthemes.......................................................................................... 6 Subtheme 10.2 “Agricultural Science and Technology Policy” .................................. 6 Subtheme 13.1 “Institutional Change in Agricultural Innovation Systems”............... 6 Subtheme 15.1 “Organization and Management of Agricultural Research”.............. 7 Subtheme 15.2 “Learning and Capacity Strengthening (L&CS)” .............................. 7 2.3 ISNAR Division Outputs ............................................................................................. 7 2.4 Assessment................................................................................................................... 8 3. Subtheme Activities and Achievements............................................................................ 8 Subtheme 10.2 “Agricultural Science and Technology Policy” ....................................... 8 Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 8 Activities ........................................................................................................................ 8 Agricultural Science and Technology Indicator (ASTI).............................................. 8 Comparative S & T policy systems............................................................................ 10 Moving agricultural science policy into practice ....................................................... 10 Promoting pro-poor science and technology processes ............................................. 11 Assessment ................................................................................................................... 11 Subtheme 13.1 “Institutional Change in Agricultural Innovation Systems” .................. 12 Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 12 Activities ...................................................................................................................... 12 Innovation Systems and PPP...................................................................................... 12 Capacity strengthening activities to two Mexican Produce Foundations .................. 13 CGIAR Related Projects ............................................................................................ 13 Assessment ................................................................................................................... 13 Theme 15: Capacity Strengthening ................................................................................. 14 Subtheme 15.1 “Organization and Management for Strengthening Agricultural Research (O&M)”........................................................................................................... 14 Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 14 Projects ......................................................................................................................... 15 Strengthening management for impact of agricultural projects in eastern and southern Africa (SMIP) ............................................................................................................ 15 Strengthening organization and management of agricultural research in Mozambique............................................................................................................... 16 Strengthening organization and management of agricultural research in Sierra Leone.......................................................................................................................... 16 Assessment ................................................................................................................... 17 Subtheme 15.2 “Learning and Capacity Strengthening” ............................................... 17 Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 17 Activities ...................................................................................................................... 17 Global public goods project ....................................................................................... 18 Global Open Food and Agriculture University.......................................................... 19 Assessment ................................................................................................................... 20 ii Capacity Strengthening in ISNAR ............................................................................... 20 Research in Capacity Strengthening in the Service – Research Continuum................ 21 4. ISNAR Division Administration and Program Management ......................................... 22 4.1 Administration and Finance ....................................................................................... 22 4.2 Program Management ................................................................................................ 23 4.3 Linkages with other IFPRI Divisions......................................................................... 25 4.4 External Networking .................................................................................................. 25 4.5 Africa vs Global Focus............................................................................................... 25 4.6 Impact of the Program Advisory Committee ............................................................. 26 5. Stakeholder Perception.................................................................................................... 27 5.1 Donors ........................................................................................................................ 27 5.2 Users........................................................................................................................... 27 5.3 CGIAR ....................................................................................................................... 28 5.4 Assessment................................................................................................................. 28 6. Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 28 Annexes Annex 1: ISNAR-CCER 2007, Terms of Reference................................................................ 32 Annex 2: Itinerary .................................................................................................................... 34 Annex 3: Professional Staff Profile 2004-2007 ....................................................................... 36 Annex 4: ISNAR Collaboration 2005 ...................................................................................... 39 Annex 5: ISNAR Collaboration 2006 ...................................................................................... 43 Annex 6: New ISNAR Collaboration 2007.............................................................................. 47 Annex 7: ISNAR Division Outputs 2005-2007 ....................................................................... 48 Annex 8: Status of projects from the old ISNAR..................................................................... 61 Annex 9: Interdivisional Projects ............................................................................................. 62 Annex 10: Materials used......................................................................................................... 66 Acronyms and Abbreviations AICDD…………….. African Institute for Community Driven Development APAARI…………… Asia-Pasific Association of Agricultural Research Institutions ASARECA………… Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa ASTI……………….. Agricultural Science Policy and Technology Indicator Initiative AU…………………. African Union AVU……………….. African Virtual University BASICS II…………. Basic Support for Institutionalizing Child Survival CAADP……………. Comprehensive Africa Agricultural Development Programme CAPRi……………... Collective Action and Property Rights CCER……………… Center Commissioned External Review COFUPRO………… Coordinadora Nacional de Fundaciones Produce COMESA………….. Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa CORAF/WECARD... West and Central African Council for Agricultural Research and Development EDRI………………. Ethiopian Development Research Institute EIRAD…………….. European Initiative for Agricultural Research for Development Embrapa…………… Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation EPMR…………….... External Program and Management Review ESSP……………….. Ethiopian Strategy Support Program FARA……………… Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa iii GFAR…………….... Global Forum for Agricultural Research GO-FAU…………... The Global Open Food and Agriculture University GRP………………... Global Research Program IAASTD…………… International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development IAC………………… InterAcademy Council IFAD……………….. International Fund for Agricultural Development IIAM……………….. Instituto Investigação Agraria de Mozambique IICA.……………...... Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture ILRI………………... International Livestock Research Institute IPG…………………. International Public Good IRS…………………. Internationally Recruited Staff IRT…………………. ISNAR Restructuring Team L&CS……………… Learning and Capacity Strengthening NARCC……………. National Agricultural Research Coordinating Council NARI………………. National Agricultural Research Institution NARO……………… National Agricultural Research Organization NARS……………… National Agricultural Research Systems NEPAD…………….. New Partnership for Africa’s Development PAC………………... Program Advisory Committee PPP………………….Public private partnership RENEWAL…………Regional Network on AIDS, Livelihoods, and Food Security RUFORUM…………Regional Universities Forum for Capacity Building in Agriculture SADC/FANR……….West and Central African Council for Agricultural Research and Development SMIP……………….. Strengthening management for impact of agricultural projects in Eastern and Southern Africa SRO…………………Sub-Regional Organization S&T…………………Science & Technology WDR………………..World Development Report iv Executive Summary and Recommendations (i) Background. Following CGIAR’s decisions at its Annual General Meeting in October 2003 to merge ISNAR with IFPRI and to relocate operations from The Hague to Addis Ababa, the new ISNAR, as a Division of IFPRI, came into being on April 1, 2004. A Program Advisory Committee (PAC) was established to provide guidance on the ISNAR research and program development. To manage the integration of ISNAR within IFPRI, a Special Advisor to the Director General of IFPRI was recruited on a four month consultancy from April, 2004. The complex process of the merger, involving many players – the CGIAR, the Science Council, the Board of IFPRI and ISNAR, the Senior Management of the two institutions, relocation of ISNAR to a new site, and hosting of ISNAR to ILRI was handled efficiently within a short period of 6 months. This review was carried out in July – September 2007 upon the recommendation of the External Program and Management Review of IFPRI. (ii) Program Development. Six months after the establishment of the ISNAR Division its Research and Capacity Strengthening Strategy came out in October 2005. The strategy was informed by the PAC and consultations with a wide range of stakeholders. The ISNAR Division undertook extensive needs assessment surveys to determine the priorities of users of its products and services. It aligned its programs with the CGIAR priorities. On the basis of this strategy, research, capacity strengthening and outreach projects were identified. Conscious efforts were made to address concerns and accommodate recommendations of previous reviews of ISNAR. (iii) ISNAR Division’s strategy to achieve the above objectives involves pursuing four programs, called subthemes in the ISNAR division terminology: Subtheme 10.2 “Agricultural Science and Technology Policy” This subtheme addresses the overall level of investments for agricultural research, subsector priorities and allocations, and addresses issues in the political and socio-economic environments that inhibit or enhance the performance of agricultural science and technology. It also identifies policy options and recommends policies that can foster improved efficiency and effectiveness. Subtheme 13.1 “Institutional Change in Agricultural Innovation Systems” The goal of this subtheme is to increase knowledge and help better understand how innovation processes function and how, through (agricultural) research, innovation processes can be made more dynamic, effective, innovative and pro-poor oriented. It focuses on analyzing the structure and organizations of innovation systems, the agents involved, interactions, partnerships and networks, rules and behavior/incentive systems and impact of innovation on poverty reduction. Subtheme 15.1 “Organization and Management of Agricultural Research” The subtheme aims at developing and testing innovative approaches and methods for prioritizing the research agenda within organizations engaged in agricultural research; for sorting out the division of labor within food and agricultural research organizations; and for diversifying and pooling resources for shared goals and objectives. In its methods it employs action research engaging key stakeholders, such as researchers, extension agents, practitioners and farmers’ representatives. Subtheme 15.2 “Learning and Capacity Strengthening (L&CS)” In its overall goal of alleviating poverty through capacity strengthening in agricultural research and policy in developing countries the subtheme pursues the strategic objectives of v • creating synergies within ISNAR; • creating synergies with IFPRI divisions; • developing alliances with other CGIAR Centers, international institutions and universities in developed and developing countries. Its key activities focus on both, institutional and human capacity strengthening through • research on the “why” and “how” of capacity strengthening; • collaborative programs and university partnerships (workshops, learning modules and materials, E-learning courses) and • communicating and disseminating the research results of the ISNAR Division, other IFPRI divisions and CGIAR Centers. The activities also include the Global Open Food and Agriculture University (GO-FAU). (iv) ISNAR Division’s strategy and concept are still under development. ISNAR Divsion has made substantial progress in the last 6 months in clarifying priorities and translating them into strategy, presenting more clearly and convincingly its concept and linking more consistently individual programs and activities to subthemes and strategy. Also, their contributions to ISNAR’s mandate and the creation of IPGs are more clearly elucidated. Of the four subthemes flagship activities and key achievements are highlighted here: − Subtheme 10.2 “Agricultural Science and Technology Policy” Without doubt the Agricultural Science Policy and Technology Indicator Initiative (ASTI) is the flagship activity under this subtheme. ASTI is comprised of a network of national, regional and international agricultural R&D agencies in an effort to compile, process, and make available internationally comparable data on institutional developments and investments in public and private agricultural R&D worldwide. ASTI inputs have provided research managers and policymakers with vital information about agricultural R&D expenditure levels and trends, thus providing them with the necessary evidence to advocate an increased funding. ASTI research has also contributed to the wider, global discourse on agricultural R&D among key stakeholders both within and outside the CGIAR. Clearly, the ASTI work is well established. Its value and importance is highly recognized by IFPRI insiders, but apparently not yet sufficiently by outsiders, and donors, as evidenced by a decline in funding. To maintain its database and ensure the continuity, the Review Team recommends, that ASTI be allocated the necessary long-term financing. Also, a wider use of ASTI data in research and policy advice is recommended to underline the priority of these activities and to convince donors of its importance. Credible research work has been undertaken in the other programs under subtheme 10.2, i.e. Comparative S&T Policy Systems, Science Policy and Practice, and Pro-poor Science and Technology Processes. However, the capacity building components of the programs need to be spelt out more explicitly. The Review Team recommends that the capacity building components for these and future projects in the form of outputs, outcomes, and impacts be clearly identified and be subjected to rigorous monitoring and evaluation. vi − Subtheme 13.1 “Institutional Change in Agricultural Innovation Systems” The flagship activities of this subtheme are the work on public-private partnerships (PPP) in the CGIAR. The purpose of this project is to examine the role of PPPs in international agricultural research and to provide policymakers, research managers, and business decision makers with an understanding of how PPPs evolve, operate, and contribute to enhancing food security and poverty alleviation in developing countries. In total eight activities are listed to have been or as being carried out during 2005 to mid 2007 under this subtheme. While the PPP work was based on long term research projects and is well rooted in research, some of the other activities were of a duration of 2 to 6 months only. These short running projects emphasize more a capacity strengthening service, where their contribution has been significant and where the lessons learned from capacity strengthening could also be applicable to similar institutional setups. The Review Team recommends a continued emphasis on research in these activities. Subtheme 15.1 “Organization and Management of Agricultural Research” The O&M program directly contributes to the CGIAR’s System Priority 5 in enhancing the structure, conduct, and performance of knowledge-intensive institutions, emphasizing public and private research agencies and their inter-relationships. In this way it promotes the role of rural organizations, institutions, and partnerships in maximizing impact from agricultural research. The work under this subtheme is carried out in three projects as • Strengthening management for impact of agricultural projects in Eastern and Southern Africa (SMIP) • Strengthening organization and management of agricultural research in Mozambique • Strengthening organization and management of agricultural research in Sierra Leone The entirety of activities under this subtheme is on capacity strengthening. This is achieved through the action-research process, and through seminars and workshops in which ISNAR researchers run or participate in. It is advisable to accompany the service activities with proper data recording and information monitoring which at a later stage can serve as the base material for research that creates the knowledge applicable to and by other countries and institutions. The work of this subtheme has led to more service output and less to peer-reviewed publications. The Review Team recommends a shift in the balance between service and research towards giving higher emphasis to research. Subtheme 15.2 “Learning and Capacity Strengthening (L&CS)” In the merger process IFPRI consolidated its capacity-strengthening program under the ISNAR Division, as the Learning and Capacity Strengthening (L&CS) program. The L&CS activities are well focused on strengthening national agricultural research systems (NARS) and the capacity of researchers, policymakers, trainers, practitioners, extension workers, and community leaders. The major strategic areas of the L&CS program include • providing institutional integration of capacity strengthening activities across IFPRI’s divisions, themes, projects, and activities; • providing capacity strengthening to developing-country NARSs as part of the ISNAR Division’s programs; and • contributing to linkages with other CGIAR Centers and CGIAR–wide capacity strengthening activities for NARSs. vii The performance of this program and research output has been outstanding. The senior researcher who transferred in 2005 from IFPRI’s Communication Division into the ISNAR Division has been central in establishing and fostering IFPRI’s research culture in ISNAR. In several ways, the outstanding performance of the L&CS program provides lessons of a generic nature to be considered in research merger processes as summarized below. (v) Priority Setting, Planning and Criteria. The ISNAR Division has devoted a substantial amount of time and resources to defining priorities and setting up the plan for the new ISNAR Division (essentially done in 2005) and translating these into programs (done in 2006). For that purpose IFPRI staff from headquarters was sent to assist in the exercise. A fairly large undertaking was devoted to a “needs assessment” survey involving particularly the user side of ISNAR’s work. The results were then pulled together into “The ISNAR Division Research and Capacity Strengthening”, also called ISNAR’s Medium Term Strategy (October 2005). As part of its strategic planning, the ISNAR Division took into account IFPRI’s Medium Term Strategy, the priorities set forth by the IRT (2003) and the CGIAR Science Council priorities (CGIAR 2005). It conducted an internal analysis of its comparative advantage, opportunities and challenges. A particular focus was placed on key stakeholder and end user priorities. Thus, the process of developing the ISNAR Division’s medium-term strategy, defining its concept and formulating its priorities has been in the Review Team’s view transparent and systematic. However, translating the concept and priorities into a work program with individual projects and activities has not been pursued in all cases with the same consistency and rigor. The Review Team recommends that in selecting projects and activities their integration into ISNAR Division’s strategy and concept be given priority. It should also be noted that funding during 2005 and 2006 declined, putting increasing pressure on staff to pursue projects even if they were not in line with subtheme priorities. The concerns relate particularly to developments in 2006. With a new Division leadership providing convincing guidance and with young, high quality and dynamic staff on board, although few in number, the prospects for the future look good. Nevertheless, the Review Team sees a high priority in recruiting additional high caliber senior researchers. The Review Team understands that a senior researcher position is being advertised in August 2007. Further efforts are needed to build up ISNAR research staff to attain the critical mass needed. (vi) In assessing ISNAR Division’s work it has to be seen that output suffered under a relatively weak leadership during the first 2½ years and the departure of 4 Senior Research Fellows. As a result of these changes the work of ISNAR has been carried out by one Senior Research Fellow, four young Research Fellows and the Head of ASTI. They are to be commended for their excellent work, particularly considering the enormous pressure on them for fund raising, in which younger staff are still less experienced. Still, there is room for ISNAR Division’s research work to be made better known to the outside world; particularly donors find the ISNAR Divison hardly visible on their screen. The perception on the user side is different. ISNAR Division’s outputs, particularly its L&CS program and the service components of the other subthemes are much appreciated, particularly in anglophone Sub-Saharan African countries, but less so in francophone Africa. The Team recommends to review the regional balance in SSA and consider a shift in ISNAR Division’s regional orientation towards greater emphasis on francophone Africa. (vii) Capacity Strengthening. ISNAR Division has recorded some successes in its capacity strengthening efforts among its users, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa. Its services and some of its research products are greatly appreciated by its clients and will be in increasing demand especially by CAADP. Its capacity strengthening activities under the L&CS program are viii innovative and some of them, especially the GO-FAU program, hold great potential as a tool for capacity strengthening of universities. ISNAR has also made some progress, although modest, in up-scaling its activities from service provision to research. There are four challenges which ISNAR will need to address. The first challenge is for the Division to shift its focus from service provision to research. As an initial step, ISNAR researchers have adopted a tool of action research as an interactive mechanism for problem solving. The effectiveness of this tool will need to be reviewed. The second challenge, also related to the first, is the need to shift focus from the national level interventions to SRO’s and regional organizations. Success so far has been limited. The third challenge is in connection with internal mechanisms and processes inside ISNAR programs for identifying capacity strengthening components and their monitoring. The Concept Note Format which guides research design for ISNAR programs is silent on capacity strengthening as a principal objective of ISNAR. The final challenge is on the need to inculcate capacity strengthening culture within the rest of IFPRI. A Task Force established by the Director General is addressing this challenge. Its findings are expected by mid-next year. The Review Team recommends that ISNAR continues with its efforts to shift focus from services to research. It further recommends that the IFPRI Task Force on capacity strengthening comes forward with incentive systems which will encourage researchers, both in ISNAR and the rest of IFPRI, to undertake capacity strengthening research and outreach. (viii) The integration of the ISNAR Division into IFPRI and the linkages with other divisions is proceeding well. With the ISNAR merger two previously joint IFPRI-ISNAR programs (Biosafety and RENEWAL (on HIV/AIDS)) were transferred from ISNAR to IFPRI divisions. In a reverse move two major former IFPRI activities were transferred to the new ISNAR Division (IFPRI’s Agricultural Science Policy work and the L&CS). These cross- transfers were essential steps in increasing the efficient use of resources (avoiding duplication), in transferring IFPRI’s research “culture” into ISNAR Division’s work, and in enabling IFPRI divisions to make use of ISNAR’s connections with NARS, its competences in training and module preparation and in bringing into IFPRI new methods in analyzing complex innovation systems. ISNAR-IFPRI interdivisional interactions have greatly improved and, as of July 2007, more than 20 projects are listed as involving both the ISNAR and other IFPRI divisions. A particularly close cooperation is developing in IFPRI’s Africa program. The Africa Coordinator is to bring together IFPRI’s entire expertise on Africa and make it available in a coherent and systematic way to the NEPAD policy decision process in Africa. ISNAR Division with its extensive Africa experience and its networks in Africa plays an essential role in IFPRI’s Africa Strategy Program. While interdivisional cooperation with the ISNAR Division is good and on its way of intensifying, ISNAR staff in Addis still see a challenge in overcoming a distinctly felt “we- they” attitude. The Review Team recommends that IFPRI management consider the possibility of seconding more of its senior researchers to the ISNAR Division. (ix) The ISNAR Division maintains a large external network of collaborating institutions, researchers and users of ISNAR products. They number approximately 65 in addition to many institutions and individuals using ISNAR products. The assessment of a sample of collaborators and users of ISNAR Division products was largely (about 90%) positive, emphasizing the enormous needs of particularly African institutions for ISNAR Division’s work, pointing out the high relevance of its mandate and greatly appreciating the guidance, help and training they received. They also underlined that with the NEPAD process gaining momentum in implementation the need for ISNAR Division’s work is rising. However, this assessment, while widely shared in anglophone Sub-Saharan Africa, is more reserved in francophone Sub-Saharan African countries as mentioned above. ix (x) ISNAR Division’s accounting and finance is controlled by IFPRI’s Finance and Administration Division. Local recruitment and procurement and their accounting are undertaken by ILRI on behalf of ISNAR. The Division’s accounts are subjected to regular internal audit by IFPRI head office, and annual external audits by reputable international audit firms. (xi) The Division has been reliant on unrestricted funding over the last few years. Unrestricted funding has been declining: $3.445m in 2004, $3.817m in 2005, $2.993m in 2006 and an estimated $2.143m in 2007. Restricted funding has been low at about 30% of the budget. The Review Team recommends increased efforts by the Division on fund raising. The ISNAR merger combined a programmatic and organizational restructuring with a change in location at the same time. An organizational change of this magnitude requires time and endurance. The departure of senior research staff and the Division Director midstream made the process even more time consuming and difficult. The Review Team recommends maintenance of unrestricted funding by the donors over the next 2 to 3 years at approximately the level of 2006. (xii) Name of ISNAR. There have been suggestions to adapt the name of the ISNAR Division to better convey its program and research activities, in line with the names of the other IFPRI divisions. Also, the name seems to be at odds with a move upwards on the service – research continuum, as recommended by the Review Team. On the other hand, some donors maintain a separate budget line for ISNAR and a change of name may have adverse budgetary consequences. The Review Team was not in a position to pursue the issue in detail. Also, it is not a matter that needs to be addressed urgently. The Review Team recommends that IFPRI consider getting professional advice on brand naming the ISNAR Division. (xiii) GO-FAU is a CGIAR-wide initiative whose objective is to support and facilitate university teaching in agriculture and related disciplines through both distance learning and traditional methods. It plans to provide training and course modules to about 10 African and 10 Asian universities who will take the lead in selecting and designing courses, supporting students, providing accreditation, and awarding degrees. In response to a concern expressed by IFPRI’s Fourth EPMR whether IFPRI had a comparative advantage in managing GO-FAU, the ISNAR Team Leader for GO-FAU has taken several measures to address these concerns. The program is now seen as system-wide in which all CG Centers are encouraged, alongside IFPRI, to participate by way of providing teaching materials, instruction modules, and teachers. The panel believes that the initial concern of EPMR concerning the comparative advantage of ISNAR/IFPRI vis-à-vis other centers in running the program has been addressed by redefinition of the role of ISNAR as one of coordinator and manager of a developing country universities driven teaching program. GO-FAU is a program with great potential, but also major challenges. Distance learning is a complex process, and is still in its infancy particularly in Africa. The financial sustainability of the program, both within the universities, and the GO-FAU secretariat needs to be assured and demand for the Program and its content assessed. The Review Team notes the great potential and complexity of the program, and also notes that the International Program Advisory Committee (PAC) of GO-FAU handles the monitoring and review of the activity. (xiv) The outstanding performance of ISNAR Division’s L&CS program provides lessons of a generic nature that might be of relevance in future research merger processes. These include: (i) transfer of recognized senior staff from the mother to the merged institution helps to establish the mother institution’s research culture; it also fosters the merged institution’s self- confidence and reputation within the mother institution; (ii) to overcome the „we“ - „they“ x attitude and vocabulary requires continuous attention by management and senior staff on both sides of the merger; (iii) the proper staffing with senior researchers is important to avoid undue pressure on young researchers (post-docs) to mobilize funding – a function in which they are not yet experienced. 1 1. Introduction 1.1 History and Conduct of the IFPRI-ISNAR Merger History The Fourth External Program and Management Review (EPMR) of July 2002 concluded that ISNAR could not continue to exist as a free standing center of CGIAR. It outlined three possible scenarios of ISNAR’s future. Arising from its recommendation, the CGIAR appointed an ISNAR Restructuring Team (IRT) to formulate a plan for the restructuring of the center. The team submitted its report to CGIAR April on 30th, 2003. In October 2003 the Annual General Meeting of the CGIAR, on the basis of IRT’s recommendations, resolved that ISNAR be merged with IFPRI, and that the operations of the former be relocated from The Hague to Addis Ababa. In line with that decision, the ISNAR Board of Trustees adopted a resolution to dissolve itself and ISNAR. ISNAR ceased to exist on March 31st, 2004. To oversee the merger, an ISNAR/IFPRI transition team including the Board Chairs of the two centers, the two Director Generals, one senior research manager from each center, and the Directors of Finance and Administration of the two centers was established. The transition process was deemed as satisfactory (Minutes of ISNAR Transition meeting, March 19, 2004) and the team was wound up in March 2004, and with it the old ISNAR. The new ISNAR, as a Division of IFPRI, came into being on April 1, 2004. A Program Advisory Committee (PAC) made up of international experts in agriculture, including some IFPRI Board members was established. The PAC provided programmatic guidance to ISNAR’s research, and reported to the Board. The relocation of ISNAR from The Hague to Addis Ababa, the signing of a memorandum of understanding between IFPRI and ISNAR’s host center ILRI in Addis Ababa, and the legal requirements for ISNAR’s closure were finalized. On staffing, two former Internationally Recruited Staff opted for separation, and seven were invited to apply for positions in the new ISNAR of whom six were unsucessful. The services of the locally recruited staff were terminated and terminal benefits were awarded in line with the provisions of their contracts. To manage the integration of ISNAR within IFPRI, a Special Advisor to the Director General of IFPRI was recruited on a four month consultancy from April, 2004. The complex process of the merger, involving many players – the CGIAR, the Science Council, the Board of IFPRI and ISNAR, the Senior Management of the two institutions, relocation of ISNAR to a new site, and hosting of ISNAR to ILRI was handled efficiently within a short period of 6 months. The Merger Process The ISNAR reviews and CGIAR decision leading to the merger of ISNAR with IFPRI posed many questions of strategic, tactical and operational nature on the status of the center. Among these were the trade-offs between service provision and research, the relevance of ISNAR’s research to International Public Goods, the definition of ISNAR’s niche and its comparative and competitive advantage within the system, and the impacts of ISNAR’s research and service on capacity strengthening. While our terms of reference are forward looking, it will be instructive to review briefly how these concerns were addressed in the strategies and work plans of the new ISNAR. 2 Upon establishment of the new ISNAR, the Division’s management and staff held a brainstorming session to formulate its future strategy and work programs. The issues covered were wide ranging. Although the outcome of the session was not available in detail to the reviewers, they are summarized in the Inception Report for the ISNAR Program of June 1, 2004 (Inception Report for the ISNAR Program, June 1, 2004). The report reaffirmed ISNAR’s shift from primary focus on NARS to a broader focus on agricultural innovation systems, a shift from service to research in the service – research continuum, and a shift of focus from NARS to Sub-Regional Organizations (SROs) and Regional Organizations. It also provided a rationale for ISNAR’s research in country, region, and institutions-bound activities vis-à-vis IPGs. While geographic or institution-bound research may not generate strong IPGs, they generate information and capacities for effective utilization of IPGs generated by other CGIAR Centers. The report identified the Program areas of ISNAR as: • Agricultural science policy research • Institutional change in agricultural innovation systems for enhancing the impact of agricultural research • Organization and management for strengthening of agricultural research institutions to improve performance of agricultural research Additional to the three Programs, learning and capacity strengthening was transferred from IFPRI’s Communications Division to ISNAR. Other rearrangements included placement of the ASTI project, previously jointly managed by IFPRI and ISNAR, in ISNAR, and placement of the Program on Biosafety systems, and the RENEWAL project from the old ISNAR to EPT and FCN Divisions. The most intensive collaboration, in terms of the number of researchers involved, is between ISNAR and DSG and FCN Divisions, and the least intensive is between ISNAR and MTID. The ISNAR research programs were aligned with those of IFPRI in line with the latter’s classification of themes and subthemes, and the vision and the mission of the two were merged. Altogether, the former ISNAR brought on board 7 projects to the new ISNAR; of these, two were transferred to other IFPRI divisions, five remained in the new ISNAR Division and two programs moved from IFPRI to the new ISNAR Division. Three of the projects have since been closed and four are ongoing (Annex 8). ISNAR’s Niche The necessity for ISNAR to define its niche within the CG system and the broader agricultural research and development arena has been a recurrent theme since the 1997 EPMR. It featured prominently in the deliberations of the first and second PAC meetings. In its Strategy Report ISNAR management has defined the Division’s strategic orientation within the framework of the agricultural commodity chain. It will focus on institutional and organizational innovations along the food chain, and bring synergy with other work in IFPRI. While this approach provides useful orientation to the Division’s work, it does not define the niche. ISNAR is a small organization with a total budget of about US$ 4 million in 2006, and an Internationally Recruited Staff compliment of 9 in early 2007. The budget is proposed to increase to US$ 4.2 million in 2009. This places the Division under the classification of “Small ISNAR” as defined in the ISNAR Restructuring Team. Sharper focus is required to align the Division’s research and capacity strengthening initiatives to the available and prospective resources. The Division’s comparative advantage is on production – related activities. Other divisions of IFPRI have comparative advantage on governance, policy, markets, and consumption end of the chain. 3 1.2 Purpose of CCER The new ISNAR Division began operations on April 1, 2004. It “focuses on improving agricultural innovation systems and strengthening capacity in national agricultural research and knowledge systems. IFPRI assumed responsibility for this program based on the work of the former International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR). Key elements of this program now reside in the ISNAR Division, based in Addis Ababa. The ISNAR Division continues the efforts of its predecessor, responding to the needs and demands of stakeholders, partners and collaborators throughout the developing world. In doing so, the division embraces a broad perspective on agricultural research and innovation systems by emphasizing the roles of and relationships among diverse actors engaged in generating and using new knowledge. With this broad understanding, the Division seeks to foster policy, institutional, and organizational change in order to enhance the impact of innovations on food security, poverty reduction, economic growth, and sustainable development. The division maintains a global focus in line with IFPRI’s mission to end hunger and malnutrition, and places particular emphasis on Sub-Saharan Africa, where the needs for innovation is most acute” (CCER Terms of Reference, Annex 1). The External Program and Management Review of IFPRI, at the CGIAR Annual General Meeting (AGM), December 2005, recommended that a Center Commissioned External Review (CCER) of the ISNAR Divison should be done within two years to review its strategy and progress in implementing it. The CCER TOR’s state as follow: Objectives and Scope The Panel will review ISNAR’s research and capacity strengthening activities to: a) Assess the relevance and quality of the activities and the supporting evidence for that assessment; b) Evaluate the planning and priority-setting processes of the programs; c) Assess whether the activities in the programs were shaped and guided by clear objectives; d) Assess whether the rationale and lines of logic for arriving at the research agenda are transparent, systematic and rigorous; e) Assess the transparency of the criteria used for making strategic choices and identifying best bet opportunities and their consistency with those employed by the CGIAR in developing its own priorities and strategies; i.e. the contribution to CGIAR goals, the production of international public goods, probabilities of success and cost effectiveness, and alternative sources of supply and comparative advantages; f) Assess the outcomes and impacts, cost effectiveness and relevance to IFPRI goals; g) Assess the nature and effectiveness of the Division’s partnerships through review of joint products and h) submit recommendations for more efficient and effective ways, in line with assessments of a) to g) above [added subsequently to the TORs by PAC]. Management of the ISNAR Division The Panel will assess the management of the division. This will include reviewing the quality of the inputs including staff and infrastructures, processes that were put in place to assure quality, as well as the location of the program in Addis Ababa with components in other locations. 4 With these objectives in mind the purpose of the CCER is to evaluate the process of ISNAR’s merger into IFPRI, the new Division’s adjustment to IFPRI’s environment, its performance since the merger and its present position to address its mandate in the future. While the review assesses past development, the focus is strategic and forward looking (as reconfirmed by the PAC during the review). The historical perspective together with today’s assessment of future needs of ISNAR Division’s research and services and the prospects for mobilizing adequate funding is laying the basis for the future oriented assessment of the CCER. The final question to be addressed is, whether ISNAR should continue to exist. If the answer is yes, the review is to give recommendations that will make ISNAR’s activities more effective in the future. The experiences made and lessons learned from the ISNAR integration process could also provide valuable input into CG’s and donors’ thinking about possible future mergers of CG Centers or the formation of clusters among them. 1.3 Conduct of Review Originally the CCER was planned to be conducted between December 1, 2006 and June 30, 2007. With the ISNAR Division Director resigning his position at the end of December 2006 it was decided to postpone the review to start in July 2007. The Review Team visited IFPRI’s headquarters in Washington D.C. from July 8 – 12, 2007 (for itinerary see Annex 2). The Team received briefings from the Director General and the Senior Management Team (SMT), project leaders (including Finance and Administration), the Africa Coordinator and from individual program and administrative staff. These briefings served as a basis for the Team to gain an understanding of IFPRI’s and ISNAR Division’s goals, priorities and strategies as well as to gauge IFPRI’s inter-IFPRI divisional linkages and cooperation, with particular emphasis on IFPRI-ISNAR division relationships during the review period. In addition it gave the Team a sense of IFPRI’s own views on the future challenges and how it proposes to address these with the ISNAR Division integration. The Team had a telephone conference discussion with the ISNAR Program Advisory Committee (PAC) and received valuable advice on PAC’s main interests and specific questions to be addressed by the review. The purpose of the Washington visit was for the Team to identify IFPRI-ISNAR program and management issues that require further examination, reach tentative conclusions, and plan a strategy for completing the Review. The Team visited the Addis Ababa IFPRI-ISNAR office from July 22-28, 2007 and had discussions with the ISNAR Division Director, the head of Finance and Administration, senior and junior staff of the ISNAR Division and MTID (located in IFPRI’s Addis Office) and support staff. It also met with the Director of Partnerships and Communication and the Information Center of the host institution ILRI, the Director of Rural Economy and Agriculture Commission of the African Union, the Ethiopian State Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development, the collaborators of Harayama University (Ethiopia), and collaborators of the Ethiopian Institute for Agricultural Research. The Team also interviewed or contacted via Email a number of ISNAR cooperators, such as the Agricultural Research Institute of Mozambique (Director General); the National Agricultural Research Coordinating Council, Sierra Leone; the Dean of the Faculty of Agriculture, Makerere University; the Asia Pacific Association of Agricultural Research Institutions and Executive Secretary of the CGIAR Program for Central Asia and the Caucasus; Foundacion PROVIA in Bolivia; CORAF, ASARECA and FARA. The Team’s draft report was shared with the DG of IFPRI and relevant senior staff for factual correction. On September 27, 2007 the final report was sent to IFPRI. 5 1.4 Structure of the Report The next chapter 2 reviews the ISNAR Division’s objectives, strategy and concept. Chapter 3 assesses ISNAR’s activities and achievements by subtheme, both in the area of research and learning and capacity strengthening. Chapter 4 evaluates the Division Management and integration in IFPRI. The views and perspectives of selected donors, users as well as of selected other CG Centers are reviewed in chapter 5. Chapter 6 presents the conclusions. 2. ISNAR’s Mandate and Objectives, Strategy and Concept ISNAR was founded to achieve the twin objectives of increasing the levels of investment in agricultural research in developing countries and raising the investments’ effectiveness and efficiency by helping to strengthen national agricultural research systems (NARS). ISNAR has broadened the focus from NARS to a wider innovation systems framework recognizing the linkages between research, extension, education organizations and private sector stakeholders including farmers and their knowledge. In the restructuring process it was also asked to build up close links with advanced research organizations in developing and developed countries. Furthermore, the restructuring team strongly recommended that ISNAR have identifiable links to poverty alleviation which was to become ISNAR’s main thrust in designing its strategy. A rationale for ISNAR Division as part of the CGIAR system is to contribute through its work to the production of international public goods (IPG) and thereby justifying CGIAR funding. While ISNAR Division’s research output, like that of other CG Centers, is generally recognized as of IPG nature, its service work, such as capacity building for a national agricultural research organization, may not directly generate IPGs. ISNAR Division is aware of the issue and is moving its capacity strengthening activities from the retail level upstream to subregional and regional levels. It is also changing the nature of its capacity strengthening work by shifting from direct intervention to developing systems and networks to be applied by national organizations. ISNAR then steps back to train trainers and guide the process, give advice and use the experiences gained for comparative analysis and research. 2.1 ISNAR Division Priority Setting Process ISNAR Division’s Research and Capacity Strengthening Strategy came out in October 2005. The strategy was informed by the PAC, consultations with users of ISNAR products and services and other stakeholders. The ISNAR Division undertook extensive needs assessment surveys to determine the priorities of users of its products and services1. It aligned its programs with the CGIAR priorities. On the basis of the strategy, research, capacity strengthening and outreach projects were identified. Conscious efforts were made to address concerns and accommodate recommendations of previous reviews of ISNAR. However, major challenges still remain. These will be addressed in later sections of this report. ISNAR’s new strategic concept is shown in the figure below. 1 Some ISNAR staff were of the view that the findings of the needs assessment were not adequately taken into account in the priority setting exercise. 6 Figure 1: ISNAR’s Strategic Concept It places, in line with its mandate, the contribution to knowledge and innovation for the advancement of innovation systems clearly in the center of its work (inner core circle). To achieve this it directs its activities to the three relevant levels: the macro-policy level with its subtheme Science and Technology Policies; the mid-level with the subtheme Innovation Systems; and the micro-level, i.e. the research organizations and higher education institutions with the subtheme Organization and Management and Learning and Capacity Strengthening, shown in the (off-white) second circle. To implement these programs ISNAR will be active in research, in capacity strengthening and communication, shown in Figure 1 in the outer (green) circle with arrows indicating that all three types of activities apply to all subthemes and to achieving its overall mandate. 2.2 ISNAR Divison Subthemes ISNAR Division’s strategy to achieve the above objectives involves pursuing four programs, called subthemes in the ISNAR Division terminology. Subtheme 10.2 “Agricultural Science and Technology Policy” (it is part of IFPRI’s Theme 10 “Science and Technology Policy” and was formerly located in IFPRI’s Communication Division). This subtheme addresses the overall level of investments for agricultural research, subsector priorities and allocations, and addresses issues in the political and socio-economic environments that inhibit or enhance the performance of agricultural science and technology. It also identifies policy options and recommends policies that can foster improved efficiency and effectiveness. Subtheme 13.1 “Institutional Change in Agricultural Innovation Systems” The goal of this subtheme is to increase knowledge and help better understand how innovation processes function and how, through (agricultural) research, innovation processes can be made more dynamic, effective, innovative and pro-poor oriented. It focuses on analyzing the structure and organizations of innovation systems, the agents involved, interactions, partnerships and networks, rules and behavior/incentive systems and impact of innovation on poverty reduction. 7 Subtheme 15.1 “Organization and Management of Agricultural Research” The subtheme aims at developing and testing innovative approaches and methods for prioritizing the research agenda within organizations engaged in agricultural research; for sorting out the division of labor within food and agricultural research organizations; and for diversifying and pooling resources for shared goals and objectives. In its methods it employs action research engaging key stakeholders, such as researchers, extension agents, practitioners and farmers’ representatives. Subtheme 15.2 “Learning and Capacity Strengthening (L&CS)” In its overall goal of alleviating poverty through capacity strengthening in agricultural research and policy in developing countries the subtheme pursues the strategic objectives of • creating synergies within ISNAR; • creating synergies with IFPRI divisions; • developing alliances with other CGIAR Centers, international institutions and universities in developed and developing countries. Its key activities focus on both, institutional and human capacity strengthening through • research on the “why” and “how” of capacity strengthening; • collaborative programs and university partnerships (workshops, learning modules and materials, E-learning courses) and • communicating and disseminating the research results of the ISNAR Division, other IFPRI divisions and CGIAR Centers. The activities also include the Global Open Food and Agriculture University (GO-FAU) 2.3 ISNAR Division Outputs In the past three years, ISNAR Division has produced outputs of several kinds, including peer reviewed journal articles, books, etc. The outputs are summarized in Table 1: Table 1: ISNAR Outputs: 2005 – 2007 2004 2005 2006 2007 Date not shown 1. Conference, workshop and seminar - 2 37 6 2 2. Other (publications) - 2 24 1 3. Peer Reviewed Journal Articles 4 11 8 4. IFPRI Research Reports, Food Policy Reports, 2020 Division 2 12 4 Reports and Country Reports 5. Books, Book Chapters, etc. 18 12 7 6. IFPRI discussion and Project Papers 2 13 4 1 7. Datasets etc. - 8 - 1 8. Media Articles etc. (learning Events) 2 8 3 9. C&S and other Outreach Activities - 15 3 10. Learning Modules - 13 1 8 2.4 Assessment ISNAR’s strategy and concept, particularly the formulation of programs are still under development. However, it has made substantial progress in the last 6 months in clarifying priorities and translating them into strategy, presenting more clearly and convincingly its concept and linking more consistently individual programs and activities to subthemes and strategy. The guiding criteria for priority setting and program implementation are their contribution to ISNAR’s mandate and creation of IPG. The Review Team views the concept presentation as a substantial step forward in clearly and convincingly explaining its strategic concept and how ISNAR intends to achieve its mandate and implement the concept. This new strategic concept is the result of extensive discussions defining and ranking priorities; it was developed in a participatory way with different stakeholders, particularly users, and professional staff involved. While it was mentioned as a time consuming process, staff also appreciated the outcome and follow up, noting the improvement over similar processes before. 3. Subtheme Activities and Achievements ISNAR’s four subtheme activities involve both research and capacity strengthening. The work in subthemes 10.2 and 13.1 focuses more on research as compared to capacity strengthening while subthemes 15.1 and particularly 15.2 give primary attention to capacity strengthening which then is used as base material for research that is analyzing processes, identifying key bottlenecks and drawing lessons learned as generic products for wider application. Subtheme 10.2 “Agricultural Science and Technology Policy” The program activities under this subtheme are formulated responding to a changing context for agricultural innovations. These changes are driven by rising demographic and agroecological pressures, growing markets as drivers of technological and institutional change, trade liberalization and the emergence of new economic regimes, growing private investment in knowledge markets, expanding information and communication technology and increased availability of qualified expertise in developing countries. Objectives The program intends to focus on three objectives: (i) identifying policy options that enhance productivity, reduce poverty, and help to conserve natural resources; (ii) building mutual understanding among stakeholders on the high priority that science and technology policies deserve and how these policies influence and have impact on pro-poor agricultural development; and (iii) strengthening global, regional, sub-regional and national capacity to undertake research, communicate research results and get policies implemented. Activities Agricultural Science and Technology Indicator (ASTI) The activities of this program include four projects: first is the analysis of trends in agricultural R&D based on the Agricultural Science and Technology Indicator (ASTI) 9 initiative. This is an ongoing World Bank funded project started in 2001. Prior to the merger of ISNAR and IFPRI, it was a joint ISNAR-IFPRI project. Since 2004, it has been located within ISNAR. ASTI is a network of national, regional, and international agriculture research agencies. It compiles internationally comparable information on agricultural R&D investments in developing countries, and publishes country briefs, regional and global synthesis reports. In the current year, ASTI plans to combine its work on data updating, production of country and regional briefs, and undertake in-depth analysis to demonstrate impact of national and global investments in R&D. ASTI’s main objective is to assist policymakers and donors in making informed decisions about the funding and operation of public and private agricultural science and technology agencies. The quality of such decisions has a direct impact on the efficiency and effectiveness of agricultural R&D systems and ultimately on their ability to promote agricultural productivity growth. The ASTI initiative is recognized as the authoritative source of information on the structure and status of agricultural R&D worldwide. Thus, ASTI’s data show that during the 1990s, for the first time, developing countries as a group undertook more of the world’s public agricultural research than industrialized countries. Yet agricultural R&D is concentrated in just a few countries. Four countries—the United States, Japan, France, and Germany—invested about two-thirds of total public research spending by industrialized countries in 2000. Similarly, just five developing countries—China, India, Brazil, Thailand, and South Africa—undertook 53 percent of the developing world’s public agricultural R&D in 2000. Eighty other countries—home to some 625 million people in 2000—conducted only 6 percent of agricultural R&D worldwide. ASTI analysis also shows that 36 percent of public and private investments in agricultural R&D went to private-sector agencies in 2000, and nearly 94 percent of all private R&D was performed in industrialized countries. The success of ASTI activities has demonstrated how comprehensive regional data can significantly influence R&D decision making in development organizations and developing countries. ASTI inputs have provided research managers and policymakers with vital information about agricultural R&D expenditure levels and trends, thus providing them with the necessary evidence to advocate an increasing funding. ASTI research has also contributed to the wider, global discourse on agricultural R&D among key stakeholders both within and outside the CGIAR. Ongoing research, capacity strengthening, and communication efforts are geared to expand and strengthen these linkages to further influence policy discourse in the global agricultural R&D community. To this end, the initiative’s long-term goal is to contribute to IFPRI’s role as a provider of primary research; a catalyst in promoting research results; and a facilitator of informed debate at the national, regional, and global levels. Recent Achievements. The initiative conducts a high volume of survey activity focused on developing countries and also maintains access to relevant developed-country data. In recent years work has focused on building a network of collaborators both to initiate institutional survey rounds in Sub-Saharan Africa (2001–04), Asia and the Middle East (2003–07), and Latin American countries and the Caribbean (2007–08) and to develop accompanying country briefs and regional synthesis reports quantifying, analyzing, and discussing the major investment and institutional trends in various regions. The ASTI initiative has started a new series of briefs that contain a more comprehensive analysis of various aspects of the ASTI database. The first brief on the role of female scientists in developing countries has been published and was presented at the 2006 Annual General Meeting of the CGIAR. ASTI outputs and databases are made available through the initiative’s website, which has recently 10 been revised and upgraded to make information more easily accessible. ASTI outputs have also been presented at a large number of meetings and conferences throughout the world and have contributed to a number of influential initiatives. Thus, it has provided inputs into the WDR 2008, for the Inter Academy Council (IAC) and the International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD). ASTI does not provide direct capacity building outputs as such. It provides information to researchers and other users which can be used for capacity strengthening research and other agricultural development activities. Through its networking arrangements with developing countries research organizations, ASTI strengthens the skills of its collaborators in data collection and analysis methodologies. Partners. Over the years, the ASTI initiative has worked with more than 50 national partners (12 in Latin America, 27 in SSA, 6 in WANA and 12 in Asia) —often the main agricultural research agencies—to implement national surveys and prepare and disseminate the ASTI country briefs. In addition, the initiative has forged partnerships with a number of regional and international organizations. Funding. To maintain its database as an accessible international public good and ensure the continuity, international comparability and high quality of its country indicators, ASTI needs secured long-term financing. ASTI has since 2006 encountered increasingly difficulties in securing adequate funding. National statistical offices, particularly in developing countries, regularly do not record these data. Thus, ASTI collaborates with a network of national research organizations, assisting them in the design and implementation of surveys. These activities need to be included in these organizations’ planning process; without secured funding the data collection activities may get dropped. Thus, data collection fell behind particularly in Asia, and may lead to interrupted data series. It seems that, although ASTI has been declared of CG-wide interest, the CG and donors need to better recognize the high importance of ASTI’s work and mobilize joint support for it. Comparative S&T Policy Systems The second activity of subtheme 10.2 is the analysis of comparative S&T systems. Research on this project started in 2006 initially by preparing a series of discussion papers to build the foundation for further research on methodology and cross country comparisons. The project aims at developing innovative benchmarks as a tool for improving national innovation and economic performance, guide science, technology and innovation policy making, and provide public goods in science, technology, and innovation. The benchmarks also help countries to see where they are placed in their innovative efforts internationally. Research under this project also helps to guide science, technology and innovative policy making and provides information and evidence for national, regional, and global discussions on science, technology, and innovation. The project has strong links with other IFPRI divisions, and strong collaborative arrangements with national research organizations, especially with the Indian Council for Agricultural Research and the Vietnamese Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development. Moving agricultural science policy into practice The third effort of the subtheme is directed at moving policy into practice. Research work is related to analyzing alternative agricultural extension approaches and their contribution to innovation adoption and poverty reduction. Issues addressed include strengthening rural 11 sciences and institutions to better serve smallholder farmers; formulating evidence-based policy options to improve extension systems; examining social discrimination, gender biases and women empowerment; and introducing new tools and methods for analysis, such as social network analysis. As a part of research under this project, a short term project (4 months) was undertaken to develop a conceptual framework on agricultural education and training in Ethiopia and Mozambique. The project investigates the contribution of alternative extension approaches to agricultural development through, among others, introduction of new tools and methods of analysis. The project has strong linkages with items within the ISNAR Division and with the rest of IFPRI. It has also intensive outreach activities with extension agents. Promoting pro-poor science and technology processes The fourth focus, promoting pro-poor science and technology processes is directed at identifying the relationship between science policy research and policy, particularly looking at factors that influence the adoption of research findings into policy. This should help to improve the impact of science policy research on policy design and implementation. Assessment ASTI output has been published in conference proceedings and book chapters, background papers, briefs and country briefs, and ASTI staff has presented ASTI output at numerous conferences, both national and international, workshops and seminars. Clearly, the ASTI work is well established. Its value and importance is highly recognized by IFPRI insiders, but apparently not yet sufficiently by outsiders, notably the CG system and donor community, as evidenced by a decline in funding. A wider use of ASTI data in research and policy advice should help to underline the priority of these activities and to convince donors of its importance. Also, the research output of the other programs of this subtheme has been presented at international conferences and symposia; from 2005 up to June 2007, five peer reviewed journal articles have been published and two discussion papers. This is a respectable output of a young and dynamic research staff, produced in a difficult environment of senior researchers’ departures and a change in the Division’s management. The main emphasis of the subtheme 10.2 programs is research; capacity strengthening plays a significant role in the latter two only. Thus, ASTI’s primary objective is to produce information (tools) which are useful inputs to further research which may build capacity. The capacity strengthening content of the project is weak. Credible research work has been undertaken in the other programs under subtheme 10.2, i.e. Comparative S&T Policy Systems, Science Policy and Practice, and Pro-poor Science and Technology Processes. However, the capacity building components of the programs need to be spelt out more explicitly. The projects on agricultural science and policy and pluralistic extension systems, on the other hand, have strong capacity building components. Outreach is built into the research projects, and regular workshops and seminars are conducted as the research process goes along. The training is conducted for trainers of trainers and farmers. The Review Team recommends that the capacity building components for these and future projects in the form of outputs, outcomes, and impacts be clearly identified and be subjected to rigorous monitoring and evaluation. 12 Subtheme 13.1 “Institutional Change in Agricultural Innovation Systems” Objectives The objectives of the institutional change subtheme is to improve through research the understanding of smallholder innovation processes, particularly the dynamics of innovation networks; drivers of innovation; and the role of research, extension, and development agents in innovation processes. The program focuses on four areas of research and outreach: (i) understanding innovation processes within the context of socioeconomic constraints and local conditions; (ii) analyzing linkages and collaboration mechanisms, such as networks, partnerships, funding arrangements, need assessment tools, and learning models to foster innovation in local contexts; (iii) analyzing the roles of agents and institutions at the national and system levels and their governance, interactions, and contributions to the generation and diffusion of pro-poor innovation; and (iv) analyzing the impact of innovation on poverty reduction and the scope for project and policy design. Activities The flagship activities of this subtheme are the work on public-private partnerships (PPP) in the CGIAR. The purpose of this project is to examine the role of PPPs in international agricultural research and to provide policymakers, research managers, and business decisionmakers with an understanding of how PPPs evolve, operate, and contribute to enhancing food security and poverty alleviation in developing countries. A specific focus is placed on PPPs in the CGIAR. In total eleven activities are listed to have been or as being carried out during 2005 to mid 2007. Three of them in Bolivia on innovation systems governance, innovation partnerships and on the design of innovation systems and policies, the latter two lasting for six and two months, respectively. Similarly, the study on absorptive capabilities for innovations in agri- chains in Nicaragua lasted for six months only. These short running projects emphasize more a capacity strengthening service (see below) and have less relation to research and the production of IPGs, although the lessons learned from capacity strengthening could also be applicable to similar institutional setups. Two further projects, one on smallholder capacity to innovate (and the determining factors) in Ethiopia and the other on institutional assessment of “produce foundations” in Mexico, also appear less research oriented. Innovation Systems and PPP The bulk of capacity strengthening under subtheme 13.1 has been in the category Innovation Systems and PPP. Seven of the eleven projects undertaken during the last three and a half years have been in Innovation Systems and PPP. Of these, two were region-wide and five were country-specific. Two projects were on organizational capacity strengthening, and two were CGIAR system-wide. Capacity strengthening efforts under the innovation systems approach take into account the major changes in the agricultural environment at the agricultural research, processing, and market levels. It recognizes the innovation capabilities and outputs of the agents in the agri- value chains, and devises methods of how to strengthen their capacities through networking 13 arrangements, incentive systems, and other ways. ISNAR Division researchers work in close collaboration with agents in the entire agri-chains, and help the latter strengthen their capacities both through collaboration and through imparting of new knowledge and insights. The researchers also, in addition to the traditional outreach activities, organize specific capacity strengthening activities in form of workshops and seminars. In 2005 and 2006, nine capacity strengthening events were conducted. ISNAR Division has also published a Discussion Paper, “Building PPP for Agricultural Innovation in Latin America: Lessons from Capacity Strengthening” which distills lessons learned from previous experiences and highlights viable approaches to capacity strengthening. An important output of the lessons learned is the progress from the “what” of capacity strengthening to “how to”. On individual projects, there is anecdotal evidence that there were significant capacity strengthening outputs. In the Bolivia Project on Innovative Systems and PPP, many innovation agents were involved in research and networking. In the Uganda Project on Enhancing Innovation Processes, there was an in-built mechanism for collaboration between Uganda researchers and ISNAR on research design, execution, and publication, and in the New Paradigm Network Project over 2000 stakeholders were involved both in research and outreach. In the Ethiopian Project on Innovation Systems, workshops and seminars have been held with extension agents and farmers’ groups on innovative ways of disseminating agricultural innovations. Capacity strengthening activities to two Mexican Produce Foundations ISNAR Division, under subtheme 13.1 has undertaken capacity strengthening activities to two Mexican Produce Foundations. One project involved enhancement of capacities of a Mexican Foundation to award competitive grants for agricultural research. The other one attempted to strengthen the capacity of another Foundation (COFUPRO) to design and implement innovative programs. In both cases, the ISNAR Division researchers, in collaboration with their Mexican counterparts, undertook in-depth institutional assessments of the Foundations, and came forward with findings of how to improve performance. CGIAR Related Projects In connection with two CGIAR related projects ISNAR/IFPRI organized in 2006 a conference on private-public partnerships bringing together decision-makers, policy experts, and practitioners in the agricultural research community to share knowledge based on research on PPP. This was a dissemination activity to the benefit of the CGIAR system and other agricultural stakeholders. The other CGIAR project, PPP in CGIAR, is important in generating knowledge, but its immediate capacity strengthening content is weak. Assessment Research Output. Project research outputs under this subtheme include six peer-reviewed journal articles (of which one is forthcoming), four IFPRI food policy reports/briefs, discussion papers and country reports, a discussion paper entitled "Sharing science, building bridges, and enhancing impact: Public–private partnerships in the CGIAR", a searchable online database of 75 PPPs in the CGIAR, and numerous presentations of the results at various conferences, workshops, and meetings. Further publications have been submitted to peer-reviewed journals and are under review. Again, with a dynamic and active young research staff, this group has the potential to substantially contribute to ISNAR’s output and impact. The program could benefit from some guidance in selecting and focusing individual activities to become more in line with subtheme objectives. 14 Capacity Strengthening. There has been significant capacity strengthening under subtheme 13.1 since 2004. For the purpose of capacity strengthening assessment, the projects under this subtheme fall under four broad categories: innovative systems and PPP; organizational and institutional strengthening; communications and outreach, and system-wide capacity strengthening. Under the innovative systems/PPP approach, ISNAR has defined an approach unique to itself in the CG system. In Africa, where NARS are important vehicles for agricultural research and agri-chains are weak, the approach has not been widely applied. In Asia, no projects have been carried out under this subtheme. On capacity strengthening, performance under this subtheme has been commendable. Theme 15: Capacity Strengthening Capacity strengthening (CGIAR Theme 15) is an important goal of CGIAR. Fully 20% of the CG system’s expenditures are devoted to capacity strengthening, and within IFPRI, 10 – 15% of the Institute’s budget is earmarked to this activity. ISNAR Division and more so subthemes 15.1 and 15.2 are unique in the sense that it is the only organization in the CG system with the sole mandate of addressing capacity strengthening issues. The Division’s activities address capacity strengthening under this theme, and the subthemes 10.2 and 13.1 (already discussed). Strengthening of capacity is achieved by enhancement of skills and provision of analytical tools to individuals, strengthening of organizational structures and processes to enhance efficiency and improvement of the policy environment and institutional arrangements. The end result of capacity strengthening is measured by the outputs, outcomes, and impacts of the effort. Because of the limitations of time and information, this review will limit itself to broad assessment of outputs achieved and the processes followed in the capacity strengthening initiatives of ISNAR during the past three years. Assessment of the outputs has been informed by literature review of ISNAR and IFPRI reports, staff interviews, and limited interviews of users of ISNAR services and products. Subtheme 15.1 “Organization and Management for Strengthening Agricultural Research (O&M)” Objectives Agricultural innovation is a complex process, often hampered by technological, institutional, organizational, and managerial constraints. A key challenge facing agricultural research systems is how to minimize such constraints by identifying effective organizational and management (O&M) strategies. The ISNAR Division’s O&M program endeavors to respond to organizational challenges and opportunities facing agricultural research systems in developing countries by conducting O&M research, capacity strengthening, and outreach activities in support of pro-poor agricultural innovation. The objective of the O&M program is to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of food and agricultural research organizations in developing countries with a view to fostering poverty reduction and improved food and nutrition security. O&M has been at the core of ISNAR’s activity since its founding. Its operations and the impact of its activities were assessed in the 1996 and 2002 EPMRs and evaluated by the 2004 Impact Assessment Study. The reviewers recommended, among other things, that ISNAR should de-emphasize service provision in favor of research, and should shift its focus from 15 NARS to SROs and regional organizations. Since 2004, there has been a discernable movement in that direction. Of the nine projects undertaken in the last two years, two were in support of regional initiatives, five were on generic issues pertaining to O&M in Africa, and three were country-specific2. Of the latter, two projects were on countries emerging from conflict (Liberia and Sierra Leone). The O&M program collaborates closely with other programs within ISNAR Division, and with other IFPRI divisions. In particular, it collaborates with Institutional Change in Agricultural Innovation Systems and Agricultural Science and Technology Policy Programs. The O&M program directly contributes to the CGIAR’s System Priority 5. Specifically, Goal 4 under System Priority 5A deals with enhancing the structure, conduct, and performance of knowledge-intensive institutions, emphasizing public and private research agencies and their inter-relationships. Similarly, System Priority 5C focuses on enhancing the role of rural organizations, institutions, and partnerships in maximizing impact from agricultural research. Projects The work under this subtheme is carried out in three projects, one in eastern and southern Africa, one in Mozambique and one in Sierra Leone: Strengthening management for impact of agricultural projects in eastern and southern Africa (SMIP) This project is a three-year collaboration by the ISNAR Division’s O&M and L&CS programs, Wageningen International University, Haramaya University (Ethiopia), and the African Institute for Community Driven Development (AICDD-Khanya, South Africa). The project is funded by the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) and has a value of US$1.4 million. SMIP seeks to enhance understanding of the implications of various O&M arrangements on the performance of organizations within food and agriculture innovation systems in eastern and southern Africa. Working alongside a range of service providers, SMIP employs action research methodologies as a means of (a) strengthening the capacity of pro-poor agricultural service providers; (b) generating, sharing, and disseminating knowledge and lessons learned; (c) enhancing O&M capacities and effectiveness; and (d) facilitating the establishment of linkages, partnerships, and networks among producers, service providers, policymakers and other stakeholders. SMIP conducts two types of activities: (a) action learning sites (for example, in Tanzania and Mozambique) where comprehensive and sustained action research is scheduled throughout the project period and (b) ad hoc project interventions based on O&M service requests from IFAD–funded and other projects. The ISNAR Division’s O&M program is the lead agency for the Tanzania action learning site and plays a supportive role in the Mozambique site. The SMIP project commenced in January 2007. Service providers from across East and Southern Africa were trained in the “managing for impact” approach, enabling them to critically analyze, review, and document their experiences working on IFAD–funded and other (ad hoc) projects with the support of IFPRI’s O&M team. Some of these trained service providers have been deployed on projects funded by the Department of Social Services in South Africa and on an IFAD–funded agricultural project in Lesotho. An action learning site project in Tanzania began with a diagnostic analysis of a US$30 million project funded by IFAD entitled, Poverty Reduction Through Improved Organization and Governance of 2 Of the three projects, one was a country study (Liberia), and two are ongoing (Mozambique and Sierra Leone). 16 Agricultural Commodity Value Chains in Tanzania. Other project partners in Tanzania include the Smallscale Industrial Development Organization, regional governments, and ministries of agriculture and finance. Strengthening organization and management of agricultural research in Mozambique This project is a three-year collaboration by the ISNAR Division’s O&M and L&CS programs and the Institute of Agrarian Research of Mozambique (IIAM). The project is funded by PRO-AGRI, a consortium of donor agencies in Mozambique, has a value of US$ 100,000 and started in January 2006. The purpose of the project is to facilitate the establishment of a development-oriented O&M system for agricultural research in Mozambique. This involves collaborative efforts to identify appropriate priority-setting mechanisms for research that respond to client needs, establish research-friendly O&M arrangements, disseminate research results, and promote their use. This also necessitates determining comparative organizational advantages of agricultural research entities in Mozambique, including IIAM, the University of Eduardo Mondlane, and the Ministry of Science and Technology, as well as nongovernmental organizations, farmer associations, and private enterprises. A diagnostic study of the state of O&M in the national research system was conducted in March 2006. Based on that study’s recommendations, a sensitization workshop for senior research managers within IIAM was conducted in August 2006 in preparation for strategic planning toward the creation of a development oriented O&M system for agricultural research. Strategic planning began in May 2007 and is scheduled to continue until September 2007, after which the O&M program will provide technical support and research as needed during the implementation phase. Strengthening organization and management of agricultural research in Sierra Leone This project is a three-year collaboration by the ISNAR Division’s O&M and L&CS programs and the National Agricultural Research Coordinating Council (NARCC), Sierra Leone. The project is funded by the Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA) and NARCC, and has a value of US$200,000. The purpose of the project is to facilitate the establishment of a development-oriented O&M system for agricultural research in Sierra Leone. This involves collaborative efforts to identify appropriate priority-setting mechanisms for research that responds to client needs, establish research-friendly O&M arrangements, and disseminate research results and promote their use. This also necessitates determining the comparative organizational advantages of agricultural research entities in Sierra Leone, including the Rice Research Institute, the Institute of Agricultural Research, NARCC, and Njala University College of Agriculture, as well as nongovernmental organizations, farmer associations, and private enterprises. Work under this project started with an assessment of the state of Sierra Leone’s agricultural research system and a sensitization workshop for senior research managers in preparation for strategic planning toward the creation of a development-oriented O&M system for agricultural research. FARA, in April 2007, was approached for financing and committed to contributing US$200,000 to NARCC for the strategic planning process. FARA also launched a larger project proposal with IFPRI involving the establishment of a National Agricultural Productivity Program in Sierra Leone. Strategic planning is scheduled to begin by September 2007 and to conclude by February 2008, after which the O&M program will provide technical support and research as needed during the implementation phase. 17 Assessment The entirety of activities under this subtheme is on capacity strengthening. This is achieved through the action-research process, and through seminars and workshops in which ISNAR researchers run or participate in. It is advisable to accompany the service activities with data recording and information monitoring which can serve as the base material for research that creates the knowledge applicable to and by other countries and institutions. Division staff has actively disseminated experiences in conferences, workshops and seminars which found their way into conference proceedings. Four peer-reviewed journal articles were published between 2005 and 2007, although two of these based on work done before joining ISNAR. Also contributions to books (partly conference proceedings) and an ISNAR discussion paper were the result of this subtheme’s work. Thus, work of this subtheme has led to more service output and less to peer-reviewed publications (except, as mentioned above, four publications based on previous research). The Review Team recommends for the future a shift in the balance between service and research towards giving higher emphasis to research. Subtheme 15.2 “Learning and Capacity Strengthening” Capacity development has been a strong contributor to agricultural growth, poverty reduction, and economic development. As a global leader in food policy research, IFPRI can play a key role in improving analytical capacity for policy research and analysis through the development of a broad strategy for capacity strengthening. To be more effective in promoting learning to achieve its mission, in 2005 IFPRI consolidated its capacity- strengthening program under the ISNAR Division, as the Learning and Capacity Strengthening (L&CS) program. Objectives The overall goal of the L&CS program is to improve institutional and human capacity to provide food policy solutions through research, outreach, and communications. The broad objective is to provide research-based knowledge to policymakers, policy researchers, and analysts through capacity strengthening activities. Specific objectives include • conducting research to generate information in support of effective and efficient capacity strengthening in agricultural development to reduce poverty, food insecurity, and natural resource degradation; • implementing capacity strengthening activities based on IFPRI research to increase institutional and human capacity in developing countries; and • communicating and disseminating results of capacity strengthening research and sharing best practices and course content to improve teaching and learning outcomes. Activities The L&CS activities are well focused on strengthening national agricultural research systems (NARS) and the capacity of researchers, policymakers, trainers, practitioners, administrators, extension workers, students, community leaders, and others to address food policy issues through research, analysis, communications, policy formulation, institutional change, and organizational management, including strengthening effective developing-country networks. The major strategic areas of the L&CS program include • providing institutional integration of capacity strengthening activities across IFPRI’s divisions, themes, projects, and activities; 18 • providing capacity strengthening to developing-country NARS as part of the ISNAR Division’s programs; and • contributing to linkages with other CGIAR Centers and CGIAR–wide capacity strengthening activities for NARS. The program very successfully generates new knowledge in collaboration with partners, and strengthens the capacity of individuals and groups working within food and agricultural innovation systems at institutes, universities, and government agencies in order to promote sustainable options for reducing poverty and hunger. Research under the L&CS program contributes to the impact of other ISNAR Division subthemes by addressing specific challenges. For example, insights into capacity requirements to strengthen science and technology policy processes in developing countries are particularly relevant to the division’s Agricultural Science and Technology Policy subtheme. Similarly, the Institutional Change and Innovation Systems subtheme benefits from analysis of capacity needs and appropriate mechanisms to build linkages with stakeholders, including producer organizations, and the Organization and Management program gains from research on how to improve the managerial, organizational, public relations, and leadership skills of personnel in food and agricultural innovation systems. The L&CS program also collaborates with other IFPRI divisions to develop and deliver capacity strengthening research and outreach activities, identify knowledge gaps, and design strategies to reduce capacity gaps. Outreach activities undertaken with other divisions form the basis for much of the research conducted by the program. In the past two years, the program has worked with • the Markets, Trade, and Institutions Division (MTID) on the South Asia Initiative and the Strategic Development of Horticulture Value Chains in Sub-Saharan Africa seminar series; • the Development Strategy and Governance Division (DSGD) on the Strategic Analysis and Knowledge Support Systems project, the former Eastern Africa Food Policy Network, and general governance issues; • the Food Consumption and Nutrition Division (FCND) on the Regional Network on AIDS, Livelihoods, and Food Security (RENEWAL) and the Basic Support for Institutionalizing Child Survival (BASICS II) project; • the Environment and Production Technology Division (EPTD) on issues involving the Systemwide Program on Collective Action and Property Rights (CAPRi); and • the Communications Division on a variety of conferences, workshops, and international dialogues. The L&CS program also collaborates with country programs in Ethiopia and Ghana, and there are plans to do so when the Nigeria program takes off. Global public goods project Of particular importance for promoting research in partner countries is the global public goods project. It is an initiative to organize IFPRI’s socioeconomic data sets and has been extremely successful in sharing IFPRI data with a wide array of users. Since its inception in 2003, the project has met the requests of 4,161 users. As a capacity strengthening tool, the data sets facilitate easier, faster, and more cost-effective research, especially for graduate students. The impact of this project is being documented in a forthcoming working paper. The L&CS program has also published an important Discussion Paper: Capacity Development as a Research Domain. The paper outlines the complexities of capacity as a 19 concept and argues a case for considering capacity as a research domain. This is an important idea. Although governments, donors, CGIAR, and IFPRI spend a lot of resources on capacity strengthening, there are no agreed definitions and organizing principles of capacity. There are major questions on how to undertake capacity strengthening research, and how to translate the research into action. The type of research mooted in this Discussion Paper needs to be advanced further possibly in collaboration with some major academic or research institution. Global Open Food and Agriculture University GO-FAU is the most ambitious project under subtheme 15.2. It is a CGIAR-wide initiative whose objective is to support and facilitate university teaching in agriculture and related disciplines through both distance learning and traditional methods. It plans to provide training and course modules to faculty members of the collaborating universities initially within African and Asian universities, of which there will be 10 from Africa and a similar number from Asia. Individual universities will take the lead in delivering courses, supporting students, providing accreditation, and awarding degrees. For Asia, Indira Gandhi Open National University is the lead institution. For Africa, AVU was supposed to be the lead institution, but for a variety of reasons, it could not assume that role. ISNAR management is exploring the possibility of University of South Africa taking the lead. In its Fourth EPMR, the panel expressed concern whether IFPRI had a comparative advantage in managing GO-FAU. The major concern was whether the program should be managed by IFPRI or by ICRISAT which was then developing a similar program. Since then, the ISNAR Team Leader for GO-FAU has taken several measures to address these concerns. He has consulted widely with other CG Centers and has re-configured the substance and the organizational arrangements of the program. The program is now seen as system-wide in which all CG Centers are encouraged, alongside IFPRI, to participate by way of providing teaching materials, instruction modules, and teachers. ISNAR will act as a manager and coordinator of the activity with a Program Advisory Committee providing guidance. The IFPRI management has also developed a business plan, and has applied for financial support from several donors, including the Gates Foundation. The program has three components: • Masters Courses in agriculture, including M.Sc. in agricultural economics, agribusiness, and agricultural sciences • Executive Courses designed for mid-career professionals • Short courses None of the GO-FAU courses is operational at the moment as ISNAR is still looking for funding. Once started, the program will be implemented in collaboration with the School of Oriental and African Studies, U.K. The panel believes that the initial concern of EPMR concerning the comparative advantage of ISNAR/IFPRI vis-à-vis other centers in running the program has been addressed by redefinition of the role of ISNAR as one of coordinator and manager. There are, however, still other concerns which will need to be addressed. GO-FAU is a program with great potential, but also major challenges. Distance learning is a complex process, and is still in its infancy particularly in Africa. The financial sustainability of the program, both within the Universities, and the GO-FAU secretariat, is not yet