VII. CONCLUSIONS

Financial Commitments of the CGIAR in LAC

Out of the total budget of US$ 325 million in 1996, close to US$ 58 million, that is 17.8% was spent by the CGIAR in the LAC region. Seventy percent of the total budget allocated to LAC (US$ 40 million) corresponds to expenditures by CIAT (US$26.3 million), CIMMYT (US$7.7 million) and CIP (US$ 6.1 million). The remainder (US$ 18 million) was spent, in decreasing order of importance, by IPGRI (US$ 4.2 million), IFPRI (US$ 3.2 million), CIFOR (US$ 2.7 million), ISNAR (US$ 2.6 million), ILRI (US$ 2.1 million), ICRAF (US$ 1.5 million), and almost negligible amounts by others.

With respect to the three centers located in the region, only CIAT allocates most of its resources in LAC (71% of it budget). The other two centers: CIMMYT and CIP devote about one quarter of their resources each to research in the region (27% and 25% respectively). This is because of the increased importance of ecoregional work within CIAT specific to LAC, as compared to the global mandates in cereals and roots and tubers which characterize both CIMMYT and CIP.

What is the CGIAR doing in LAC

The following table depicts the types and relative importance, in terms of total resources, of the current work conducted by the CGIAR in LAC.

Type of Activities	IARCs involved	Commodities	Relative importance
"Ecoregional" (Protecting the Environment)	CIAT, CIP, CIMMYT, IPGRI, CIFOR, ICRAF.		++++
Increasing Productivity (Germplasm Enhancement)	CIMMYT, CIP, CIAT.	Wheat, maize, potatoes, rice, pastures, cassava, beans.	+++
Improving Policies	IFPRI, ISNAR, CIFOR.		++
Saving Biodiversity	CIAT, CIP, CIMMYT, IPGRI.		+
Institution Strengthening	CIAT, CIMMYT, CIP, ISNAR, IPGRI, ICRAF.		+

- Protecting the Environment: This activity is concentrated in natural resource management research for the tropical lowlands, mainly in the savannas and forest margins; in the hillsides of Central America and in the Andean highlands. Some work is also conducted in the tropical forests of the Amazon basin and Central America.

Given the relative importance of this activity, it is recommended that the Panel gain a thorough understanding of the nature and expected achievement of this research effort.

It is also noted that, except for some recent minor research initiatives by IFPRI on water rights, apparently no work is being carried out by the CGIAR in LAC on irrigation management and improving the efficiency of water use and conservation. Yet, Latin America is one of the areas of the world which posses a very large reservoir of fresh water, a resource which will become increasingly scarce in the future.

- Increasing Productivity: Most of research aimed at this goal is being handled through germplasm enhancement activities. The portfolio of commodities covered by this type of activity seems appropriate, given their relative importance both in terms of total area sown and food consumption expenditure by low income consumers. NARS have indicated the need for the CGIAR to continue working in this type of activity, both because of their relevance and also due to the public good nature inherent in genetic improvement. However, there is also a strong urge to include activities to enhance productivity in non-traditional export crops such as fruits, which are becoming increasingly important for the well-being of the rural population in LAC.

Responding to the recommendations of TAC, centers in the region have moved upstream to works more strategic research in genetic improvement, assuming that NARS are becoming stronger and thus can assume responsibilities in the more adaptive and applied research. However, this assumption only applies to a few countries, such as Brazil, Mexico, Argentina and Colombia. This is clearly not the case in Central America and the Caribbean.

NARS in the region have suggested for the future, that more efforts on the part of the CGIAR is needed in improving the productivity of forestry and fisheries, both with very important supplies from LAC at the world level.

- Improving Policies and Institution Strengthening: It is our belief that work in this activity is rather dispersed, and cannot be expected to have considerable pay-off, considering the limited resources available within the CGIAR for this type of research. The Panel could explore the convenience to link most of its activities to the core work of the rest of the system in the region, in order to achieve synergy and impact.

Deep economic and institutional structural changes of the last decade in Latin America have had a definite impact on the institutions for agricultural research and extension. At present there is a search for new paradigms and guidelines for public involvement and funding vis-a-vis the need to increase the participation of the private sector as well. The CGIAR can play an important role in helping to shape the institutional arrangements in research and extension.

Also, there is a need to define national policies with respect to building capacity in biotechnology and in natural resource management, and of a more efficient division of responsibilities between private and public, and between national, regional and international institutes.

NARS and CGIAR

Given the small amount of resources spent by the CGIAR in LAC, it is not surprising that research spending of the CGIAR represents only a small fraction of the total spending in agricultural research in the region. This is true in spite of the fact that agricultural R&D expenditures represent less than 1% of regional agricultural GDP, much less than in developed countries.

In the following table the annual budget of a selected number of national agricultural research institutes is presented, along with that of the CGIAR in the region for the most recent year available (mid 1990's). The table also includes the total number of researchers along with total number of those holding a Ph.D. It should be noted that in some of these countries there is also an important participation of universities and other institutions in agricultural research.

Institution and Country	Annual Budget US$ million)	Number of Researchers
		Total	Ph.D.
EMPRABA (Brazil)	509	2,082	645
INTA (Argentina)	133	1,200	158
INIFAP (Mexico)	51	1,384	138
ICA-CORPOICA (Colombia)	41	688	>100
INIA (Chile)	39	212	43
INIA (Uruguay)	14	123	11
INIAP (Ecuador)	7	191	4
Subtotal	794	5,880	>1,099
CGIAR in LAC	58	n.a.	n.a
CGIAR/Subtotal (%)	7.3%

n.a.: Not available at the time of this report

It would be interesting, if the Panel could raise information on the average expenditure in agricultural research per researcher in the NARS as compared to that in the three IARCs in the region. It is hypothesized that resources available to conduct research per professional is considerably higher in the IARCs so that the above figures would underestimate the relative importance of the CGIAR.

In terms of commodities, a high percentage of research resources by the above NARS are spent in cereals and animal production. But there is an increasing pressure to spend more resources in export crops. At the same time NARS are increasingly being compelled to involve themselves in natural resource management, particularly when seeking financial resources from outside the region. A trend is perceived from typically working with enhancing the productivity of main traditional commodities towards a more integrated approach considering competitiveness, equity, and sustainability.

Given the very high heterogeneity observed earlier in the availability of financial and human resources between countries and subregions, it would be recommended that the Panel discuss the suggested role and type of relationship between the CGIAR and strong and weak NARS. Stronger NARS complain that some of the CGIAR activities in the region compete with their own. On the other hand, small NARS suffer from a very weak capability to access and benefit from the work by the CGIAR.

Because of the great institutional heterogeneity and changes, strong regional initiatives such as the Regional Fora, could significantly enhance the collaboration and coordination with the CGIAR.

Regional Institutions

There are several institutional arrangements at the regional level, such as CATIE, for Central America, IICA, CARDI, plus the PROCIs which link subgroups of NIARs. The total estimated annual expenditure in the regional outfit is estimated at another US$ 25 million. It is our impression that the major role of this regional system is in increasing communications in the region among NIARs and national governments, as well as in extension activities, but that it contributes very little in terms of additional research effort.

Interphase between the CGIAR and NARS

The written sources available for this desk study did not make it possible to assess the degree and quality of the interactions between the CGIAR and NARS. This is an important issue to be tackled by the panel-How do Centers coordinate their work with NARS on say germplasm enhancement, and on the other hand, and also from a geographical/institutional perspective: is work on different aspects done by CGIAR centers effectively coordinated in a same region? What are the precise linkages between NARS and the CGIAR in the region? These are questions which have been raised by TAC members.

Another area where not enough evidence was available, and which Tac has suggested to look at, is about the areas in which the CGIAR could devolve responsabilities to NARS or even to the private sector.