1. The 67th meeting of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) was held from 11 to 17 July 1995 at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. Dr. Donald Winkelmann chaired the meeting. Among the participants were TAC Members, Cosponsors of the CGIAR, CGIAR Members, the Chair of the Committee of Board Chairs, the Chair of the Centre Directors' Committee, Centre Directors, staff of the international agricultural research centres, staff of the CGIAR and TAC Secretariats, and a number of observers, consultants, and resource persons (Annex 1).
2. Dr. Winkelmann declared TAC 67 formally open and welcomed TAC Members, observers, and members of the CGIAR and TAC Secretariats.
3. The report of TAC 66 was adopted without amendments. The Chair congratulated Dr. Guido Gryseels, Officer-in-Charge of the TAC Secretariat, for producing a summary of the report so early and giving it wide distribution. Many of those who received it had expressed their enthusiasm about its quality and had extended, through the TAC Chair, their thanks to the Secretariat.
4. Dr. Gryseels noted that in its commentaries on a number of the Centres' programme and budget proposals and initiatives (CIP, ICRAF, Rice-Wheat Initiative, IFPRI-ISNAR Initiative), TAC did not give deadlines by which Centres were to respond to its comments. The Committee would deal with this under Agenda Item 7, 1996 Programme and Budget Proposals.
5. The provisional agenda for TAC 67 was adopted without amendments.
6. The Chair then gave the floor to Dr. Stein Bie, Director, Research, Extension and Training Division, Sustainable Development Department, FAO, who welcomed the members of TAC and other participants on behalf of the Director General of FAO, Mr. Jacques Diouf. He indicated that FAO attached great importance to the work of TAC, not only by virtue of its being a cosponsor of the CGIAR, but also because it regarded agricultural research as critical to its own mission. In particular, the Director-General had emphasized the need to improve the food security of the poorest countries at the household and national levels. The Organization had been making a major effort in this respect and was utilizing the research of the CGIAR and other entities. One objective was to narrow the yield gap between results obtained in field tests and on farms and, in the longer term, to increase productivity toward 2010/2020 in both fertile and marginal lands, relying upon research by the CGIAR. Dr. Bie thanked the Committee for choosing FAO as its venue and he also welcomed Dr. Winkelmann to FAO as TAC Chair. Dr. Winkelmann, in turn, expressed on behalf of TAC his gratitude to the Director-General for the gracious hospitality that had been extended to the Committee and other meeting participants.
7. The Chair called upon Mr. Alexander von der Osten, Executive Secretary of the CGIAR, to report on developments in the CGIAR System since MTM'95. Mr. von der Osten reported on the Mid-Term Meeting itself, the funding situation, and recent membership developments.
8. The MTM was held 22-26 May, 1995 in Nairobi. The meeting reviewed progress of the CGIAR's reform programme which was on track and due to be completed by the end of the year. The research agenda for 1996 was adopted and the budget approved at the TAC recommended level of US$ 299 million. Finally, the meeting heard reports from the Plant Genetic Resources Committee, the Task Force on Sustainable Agriculture, and the Task Force on Ecoregional Approaches to Research.
9. Mr. von der Osten then briefly reviewed CGIAR funding since 1994: the 1994 outcome was US$ 267 million compared to the projected US$ 215-220 million; the 1995 level which was approved at US$ 271 million was projected to end at US$ 275 million; and the 1996 target was likely to be fully funded. The specifics of the 1996 financing plan were being worked out and will be in place by ICW'95.
10. Progress was made on broadening partnerships with NARS. A working group was established comprising representatives of NARS and IARCs and the Chairman of the Oversight Committee. The Committee would make a progress report at ICW'95 and a final report at MTM'96. As a result of initiatives by the Chairman, Dr. Ismail Serageldin, two further committees would be established, one for liaison with NGOs and the other for liaison with private sector organizations. There were changes in the membership of the Finance and Oversight Committees. A decision was taken to move ahead with the creation of an evaluation function for the CGIAR based on the work of the task force for that initiative.
11. The Group had accepted the generous invitation of the Government of Indonesia to host MTM'96 and of Egypt to host MTM'97. Finally, there were impending changes in the membership of the CGIAR. Rumania had joined; Portugal, Greece and New Zealand had expressed interest in joining; and discussions were underway with 17 developing countries on possible membership.
12. In the ensuing discussion, a question was raised as to whether there was a general preference among donors to fund programmes rather than institutions. Mr. von der Osten indicated that there was not sufficient evidence to confirm this one way or the other. In response to another question, he also indicated that the CGIAR Secretariat, in addition to its efforts to bring in new donors, was making an effort to increase support from current donors.
13. The Chair then called upon Dr. Michel Petit, Chairman of the CGIAR Finance Committee, to report on that committee's recent deliberations and their implications for TAC's setting of priorities and strategies.
14. Dr. Petit's comments focused primarily on the Finance Committee's views on the matrix framework established by TAC at its meeting in Lima in March 1995. In terms of the CGIAR's overarching objective of alleviating poverty, the Finance Committee expressed its concern about the difficulty of differentiating the contribution of CGIAR research to this effort from that of other entities. While the Lucerne meeting confirmed that agricultural research was again high on the development research agenda, donors regarded the CGIAR System as only one component of the overall global effort. Multilateral organizations may continue to focus their support on the CGIAR, but other donors will be supporting other elements of the global agricultural research system. Some donors (e.g., the Commission of the European Union, United Kingdom, Australia, Canada) had clearly indicated their intention to shift their support from funding centres to funding programmes. It was, therefore, particularly important that the matrix framework permit transparency in the identification of research programmes both in terms of their objectives and costs. While the Finance Committee regarded the matrix as currently constructed as a move in the right direction, it expressed a desire to see refinements in it which would permit greater transparency as defined above. The Finance Committee specifically recommended that the matrix eventually be constructed with columns made up of programmes or aggregated sets of programmes which were themselves aggregated sets of projects. The current distinction between Centre and Systemwide Programmes and Initiatives was probably not appropriate. It reflected more a difference in the mode of implementation than in objectives, goals, and indicators of success, i.e., the key parameters defining programmes. The Finance Committee's views on these issues were elaborated in greater detail in Dr. Petit's memorandum to Dr. Winkelmann on this subject dated 1 June 1995, a copy of which was circulated to TAC. TAC's views on these issues would be welcomed by the Finance Committee.
15. In the discussion that followed, one TAC Member agreed that the columns of the matrix were more indicative of which Centre(s) were implementing an activity rather than the content of a particular program. It was anticipated that this problem would be resolved once the System's priorities and strategies have been clarified into programmes. However, another member felt it would be impossible to categorize all CGIAR activities into programmes. There were many common activities carried out by the Centres which could not be constituted into single programmes.
16. There was considerable discussion on the issue of core versus complementary funding in the context of the matrix framework. Dr. Petit argued that when a research consortium received CGIAR funding for a particular programme and then raised additional funds from other sources, questions might arise as to whether the CGIAR contribution was distinguishable from the resources contributed by other donors having specific interests complementary to the consortium's programme of research.
17. TAC Members sought clarification on whether there was a general feeling among donors to shift to programme funding and away from institutions, or whether this tendency was confined to a few specific members of the Group. In response, Dr. Petit noted that the European Union, in particular, was leaning in this direction, but had not yet sorted out the specifics of its intentions. He characterized its position as a preference rather than a policy. However, he emphasized the EU's intention to "coordinate" its support to the CGIAR, European institutions, and NARS. While similar trends were apparent among other donors, Dr. Petit did not have a numerical count.
18. CGIAR Centre representatives generally expressed the view that there was need to emphasize the importance of the Centres as institutions, and to recognize that donors were not yet certain in their own minds about the modalities of programme funding. They stressed the need for fungibility within the cells of the matrix as well as the need to maintain donor support for core programmes, which provided Centres with the capacity and stability needed to undertake Systemwide Programmes and Initiatives.
19. In bringing this discussion to a close, the Chair asked Dr. Petit to convey to the Finance Committee that TAC shared some of its anxieties about the matrix and had, in fact, been discussing these issues within the last few months and at the current meeting. TAC would convey its views to the Finance Committee in the near future, suggesting tentative solutions to the problems raised in Dr. Petit's report. In turn, TAC would welcome comments on its proposals from the development assistance community, the Centres, and the Finance Committee.
