8.1. Introduction
8.2. TAC's Views on Activities
8.3. Commodities
8.4. Concluding Remarks
Previous chapters have focused on the issues of primary concern for CGIAR planning during 1998-2000. Views on important external environments were followed by a discussion of the major elements of TAC's decision making. Discussion then focused on recent studies commissioned by TAC and on the findings of the NARS' regional and global fora. These considerations led to a review of TAC's findings on the major activities of the System and then to comments on future investments in sectors and commodities. This was followed by a discussion of Systemwide Approaches.
TAC's point of departure for resource allocations was the existing allocations to the centres, with changes in those allocations to be based on new information about certain key parameters. Throughout, TAC has emphasized the importance of the related goals of people-centred poverty alleviation and natural resources conservation, of alternative sources of supply for CGIAR products, and of how new science and other considerations influence the chances of future success. Finally, TAC has commented frequently on the process of planning, featuring interaction with the centres, NARS and regional fora.
This final chapter summarizes TAC's important judgements on the major findings for activities, sectors and commodities, and on the implications for resource allocations among centres.
TAC has recommended increases in nine activities, reductions in four, and that six be kept at their present level. These judgements were based on the view that present and future generations of the poor will rely heavily on resource-conserving productivity increases to achieve sustainable food security. Specifically, increases were endorsed for pre-breeding and for germplasm improvement in livestock, fisheries and forests with equality maintained for crop germplasm improvement, but with the emphasis shifted to crops of importance to countries less able to handle the task. These concerns were tempered by the findings pertaining to commodities, discussed in 8.3.
Meanwhile TAC recommended that production systems work in livestock (especially on mixed crop/livestock systems), forestry and fisheries be expanded while that in crop systems be contracted. In particular, TAC recommended phasing out production-system work that does not simultaneously contribute to resource conservation and sustainability. Work on the management of water, postharvest issues and integrated pest management was recommended to increase.
With regard to work on protecting the environment, TAC recommended that the level be maintained but that certain changes in the orientation of research on natural resources management be carried out. TAC favours more careful attention to results with generic (rather than local) applications, to work aimed at understanding the role of institutional and community organizations in fostering adoption of improved management techniques, and to work that integrates productivity increases with resource conservation. A modest increase was favoured in work on biodiversity, especially to enhance centre-based efforts to manage ex situ and in situ (in the case of forestry) conservation.
Across all centres resources would be shifted from policy analysis dealing with trade and markets to that dealing with economic and social analysis having to do with, for example, common access resources and common property resources and other generic themes bearing on natural resources management. As well, TAC recommended rebalancing resources devoted to governance and management of public systems, and organization and management of institutes, towards the research end of the spectrum.
After weighing the observations of regional fora and centre MTPs, an increase was recommended for training based on broadening the concept to include professional development. On balance, no change is being recommended in the commitment to strengthening national programmes.
Finally, recommendations on activities directly influence the relative shares of IFPRI (policy), IIMI (water), IPGRI (biodiversity) and ISNAR (institutional and policy issues in strengthening NARS).
TAC notes that, with some exceptions, allocations in 1997 are closer to its recommendations than at the time of MTM 96. Still, in TAC's view significant steps must be taken to increase work in activity 1.1. TAC further notes the potentially significant role that biotechnology can play in such work. Finally, the important task of sorting out what the real differences are between 1.2 and 2.0 is being pursued. TAC expects that reshaping those activities can create some space for the increased effort required in 1.1.
TAC's findings on commodities are reported in Chapter 6. The implications will be felt in recommendations about allocations to centres and in the proportions allocated to centres sharing the responsibility for selected crops. It is important to keep in mind that in significant measure, the shares envisioned reflect the fact that analysis is based on expected incomes, production and prices in 2010. Basing the analysis on the future takes into account the widely differing growth rates for incomes, with the implication that rapidly growing countries have less influence on poverty weighted shares than if current incomes were used.
As compared with 1997, TAC recommends that expenditures on fish, forest, and livestock products be increased relative to those on crops. This has immediate implications for the budgets of CIFOR, ICLARM, ICRAF, ILRI and lesser, but still significant implications for CIAT and ICARDA, along with some implications for ICRISAT and IPGRI.
Turning to recommendations for crop commodities, comparing poverty weighted shares with current allocations, several commodities were seen to be above their calculated poverty weighted shares, fewer are below. In large measure this distribution is a consequence of the absolute difference evident for rice and the relative importance of rice. Given qualitative considerations, largely emerging from considerations of alternative sources of supply for rice in Asia but because of movements towards more generic products as well, TAC noted no increase in the relative share of rice. This has obvious implications for the relative shares of IRRI and WARDA. After accounting for that judgement and taking into account the judgements on groundnuts and soybeans (see Chapter 6), the comparison between shares suggests that four commodities be raised, five lowered, and the rest kept at about the level currently prevailing.
Other qualitative judgements, however, led to a further rebalancing. As well as leading to new outcomes for some commodities, there was a further rebalancing among centres. For example, the balance for cassava moves towards SSA and away from the rest of the world. This results from the sense that there are relatively few alternative sources of supply in SSA but relatively the same availability as for other commodities in the rest of the world. It then follows that the allocation to IITA for cassava increases relative to that for CIAT.
As well, judgements about activities (see Chapter 5 and also the previous section) have an implicit influence on balances between commodities and other themes. Larger investment in generic NRM and IPM mean smaller direct investments in commodities. Reducing investments in production systems implies that commodity centres with relatively large investments there would experience a relative decrease which, in turn, would be translated into a relative decrease to the commodities with which they are associated. TAC has sought to ameliorate the effects that some of these influences might have had.
The resulting allocations, found in TAC's report on the Medium-Term Resource Allocation 1998-2000, encourage a sharper focus of the CGIAR's energies within the various activities in which it now engages. For example, germplasm improvement has been a featured part of the CGIAR portfolio since its inception. It remains so in these recommendations but is rebalanced so as to concentrate in areas where the CGIAR has special advantage vis-à-vis the global system. So too, with the management of natural resources, where the focus emphasizes work that facilitates conclusions of generic importance and that will support the further work of others in the simultaneous pursuit of productivity-increasing, resource-conserving technologies. These are the ideas that TAC believes will guide further rebalancing.
In its efforts on priorities and resource allocations, TAC has emphasized the System's goals. In reviewing centre plans it has looked for congruence, for clarity and for purposive commitments that match CGIAR needs. TAC believes that the recommendations that have emerged are consistent with the CGIAR's strongest concerns and expects that CGIAR efforts will become ever more relevant to poverty alleviation and the protection of natural resources, and thus be ever more congruent with the spirit of renewal as expressed at Lucerne.
