It is frequently said that, in the interest of efficiency, the CGIAR Centres should move upstream in their research while some portion of their current work should be undertaken by NARS, It should be noted that Centres are continuously "moving upstream," driven by opportunities from advances in science which ensure that yesterday's strategic research will become tomorrow's applied research. It is also true that some portion of that applied research will be taken up by NARS just as it is true that some NARS pursue strategic research and, indeed, basic research. Shifts in research activities, then, occur as a natural part of this process.
But, the more interesting question relates to NARS undertaking international public goods research that is now in the CGIAR portfolio. This strategy has been discussed for many years, and there should be little doubt that some NARS have the capacity to effectively handle some tasks now performed by the CGIAR, if additional funds (e.g., from centre budgets) could be made available for this purpose. There is, however, a side to the strategy that has been little discussed and that relates to the kinds of assurances other NARS would want before relying on a sister NARS for important public goods now being provided by the CGIAR. These assurances relate to the reliability of continuing national support, evenhandedness in delivering products, and the potential influence of changes in a nation's foreign policy. Where such considerations are of consequence, they will limit the extent to which the gains from international public goods investments can be realized through national programs. TAC notes, however, that the emerging regional organizations will provide lower risk strategies for such arrangements.
