This paper describes the process through which TAC will move from the discussions at ICW'95 to recommendations about CGIAR priorities to be presented at MTM'96. The pathway is reasonably well established; at this time (September 1995) the detailed steps are still being defined.
Earlier Steps
While priority setting is never far from TAC's mind, the specific considerations of this round of analysis were developed at TAC 66 in Lima, Peru. Discussion there showed that TAC wanted guidance from the Group on several themes, in particular on the major elements of decision-making and on the weights to be applied to several strategic considerations. In many cases it was felt that guidance may simply be a reaffirmation of past judgements; in other cases it could be, or would potentially be, a clearer expression of the Group's concerns. Beyond that, TAC felt the need for outside counsel about, e.g., the adequacy of the information available, such as that pertaining to the distribution of poverty and/or of degraded soils.
These considerations, described to the Group at MTM'95, occupied TAC in July 1995 over roughly four days of meetings which featured the participation of a number of well informed professionals. The discussions led to the five notes that were delivered to members of the Group for discussion at ICW'95. Further discussion of those papers by the Group, especially of the major questions raised in each paper, will guide much of TAC's subsequent analysis and recommendations.
Framework and Aspirations
TAC plans to recommend a four dimensional framework for priority setting to the Group at MTM'96. This emerges from assumptions about the Group's major concerns (taken to be a people-centred and efficiency driven research agenda for food security through alleviation of poverty and protection of natural resources) and about the assumptions or perceptions that shape the System's sense of the probable. The four dimensions pertain to choices among: (i) the principal undertakings of the System (increasing productivity; protecting the environment; saving biodiversity; improving policies; and strengthening NARS); (ii) the four production sectors (livestock, crops, forests and fish); (iii) the emphasis on one crop versus another (e.g., the relative importance of rice versus cassava); and (iv) the Systemwide Programmes, (e.g., the relative importance of CGIAR work on slash-and-bum systems versus the rice/wheat based production systems).
In some cases, work in assessing priorities may rest largely on quantitative considerations. As examples, much of the comparison among commodities can be quantified, along with some comparisons among sectors. For the rest, TAC will rely on a mix of quantitative and qualitative judgement, but always within a systematic framework. In doing so, TAC's informed judgement will be also guided by the counsel of advanced institutions, CGIAR Centres, and NARS. TAC has and will seek expert counsel in all of these arenas. Finally, TAC expects to have tangible arguments offering transparency where intuition and judgement have played a role.
As noted in the accompanying papers, TAC does not intend to start with a 'clean slate' approach. Instead - given the long horizons in research, the uncertainties surrounding the process and the costs of rapid shifts in emphasis - TAC will take current allocations as its point of departure and then pursue vigorously the implications of the Group's criteria in rebalancing priorities.
Future Steps
After ICW'95, TAC will synthesize the guidance received from the Group and lay out the various implications for further work. These findings will be discussed and digested by TAC at its December 1995 meeting, where a framework for the analysis of priorities will be laid out (including criteria and weights) and the further analytical work required will be identified. In the meantime, the TAC Secretariat supported by consultants will initiate the collection from Centres, from FAO and from other data sources, of necessary data for each of the major considerations. It is also important to note that regional representatives of NARS will meet with TAC, at TAC 68 in December 1995, and TAC 69 in March 1996, for discussions on their sense of CGIAR priorities.
Decisions about the major criteria and their weights in hand - along with information about such considerations as alternative potential sources of supply and about probabilities of success - recommendations on CGIAR priorities will be formulated at TAC 69 in March 1996. TAC 69 will draw conclusions about the priorities for the System's undertakings and frame initial recommendations for resource allocations to each of the Centres. These recommendations will be discussed by the Group at MTM'96. Based on the tentative allocations. Centres will then develop their new medium-term plans for consideration by TAC at TAC 72 in March 1997, and by the Group at MTM'97.
The task at hand is both notably large and critically important. Its effective completion will require open communication, a free flow of ideas, a considerable energy, and a strong sense of common purpose. TAC is confident that the job can be done.
