87. TAC heard a progress report on this TAC-guided study presented by the convenors. Dr. Hans Gregersen and Dr. Ted Henzell.
88. Dr. Gregersen reported briefly on the study process and outlined a number of ideas that will provide input to TAC's consideration of this issue in closed session. The basis of his remarks was a draft report on this subject dated June 1995, a copy of which had been provided to TAC Members. The report was being prepared with the help of a number of consultants who were drafting papers on natural resource topics across specific ecoregions. In addition, Drs. Gregersen and Henzell were drafting a paper for TAC's discussion which would eventually become a TAC document. The TAC Secretariat was preparing a background paper on soil/water/nutrient and natural resources management research in CGIAR Centres. The study would be presented at ICW'95 and consist of three parts: (1) a TAC document laying out the intellectual framework, an assessment of the status of CGIAR research, and a set of recommendations on future priorities; (2) a background review paper on the biophysical and social science/policy aspects of this topic from the perspective of the CGIAR System and other elements of the global agricultural research community; and (3) a synthesis paper describing ongoing research in the CGIAR System on this subject.
89. A draft of Part I of the study laying out an integrated watershed management framework for research was circulated to the Centres and others and comments were received. There was general feeling that the framework was too limited and it was revised as an integrated natural resources management framework. It consisted of five sets of linkages: (1) social science and natural science; (2) productivity enhancing research and natural resources management research; (3) spatial or landscape linkages; (4) temporal linkages; and (5) linkage between biophysical and adoption research.
90. Dr. Henzell's presentation dealt with criteria for assessing the relative importance of proposals to strengthen NRM research and the modalities for implementing such research. The proposed criteria were that the research be needs-based in the context of CGIAR priorities, outcome-oriented, utilize existing information, build on the CGIAR's international comparative advantage, and fill existing knowledge gaps. Particular priority should be given to research on soil/water management, non-technical factors such as socioeconomic and policy constraints, and biophysical research. The criteria for judging the modalities of NRM research included degree of effectiveness of collaboration with other suppliers of such research, the cost-effectiveness of the research in terms of relative transactions costs, the participation of stakeholders in planning and implementing the research, ability to communicate the importance of the research to donors and other stakeholders, and the prospect for continued long-term funding.
91. In closing, Dr. Gregersen, while indicating that the study was not yet at the recommendation stage, envisaged that TAC would make recommendations in five areas: (1) criteria for assessing research options and modalities as specified above; (2) the linkage of NRM research with the System's soil/water/nutrient management initiative; (3) identification of other NRM research topics in the areas of water, institutions, common property and the like; (4) the adoption or adaptation of NRM research at the field level; and (5) the standards of planning, monitoring, and evaluation of NRM research addressing, in particular, the issue of use of quantitative measures.
92. The discussion following these presentations centred primarily on the scope of the study. It was observed that the framework had deliberately omitted forestry, fisheries, and the plant/animal genepool because some of these aspects were covered in other CGIAR studies. The study seemed to have more of a soil/water/nutrient management focus, treating these resources as inputs to the production system. This was seen as an appropriate focus, but it was suggested that the title be revised to reflect this narrower scope. It was also observed that there was a new wave of biological science which would come to fruition in the next four to five years which went beyond the chemistry and physics of traditional soil science and would have potential implications for NRM in the developing countries. Therefore, the notion that existing science was adequate and only needed to be extended to the field might need to be modified as these new breakthroughs occur.
93. The Chair then called upon Dr. Mark Latham, Director General of IBSRAM, and Dr. Robert Havener, Director General of CIAT, to make the next presentation in this session. This consisted of a progress report on the Soil, Water, Nutrient Management Initiative based on a consultation convened by DSE, IBSRAM, and CIAT at Feldafing, 12-15 June 1995, a copy of which was made available to TAC Members. The consultation represented a major effort of SWNM stakeholders to address earlier questions and comments of TAC, and involved representatives from 20 national programmes, seven CGIAR Centres and 29 other agricultural research and development agencies.
94. The consultation reached consensus on the need to narrow the number of research themes to those concerned with combatting nutrient depletion, managing acid soils, managing soil erosion, and soil/water/nutrient management; articulate the dynamic nature of the programme by emphasizing natural resources management with a systems perspective; harmonize the proposed set of consortia with the ecoregional approach pursued by the CGIAR; and create a minimum coordination unit to identify and analyse commonalities among prioritized research themes across ecoregions.
95. In the ensuing discussion, TAC Members suggested that in moving SWNM from the initiative to the programme stage, due attention should be given to identifying research themes addressing critical strategic issues within each consortium, designing modalities for integrating the initiative into ecoregionally based programmes, ensuring relevance to on-site problems and complementarity with other global initiatives, linking with socioeconomic and policy research at the ecoregional level, and adapting governance of the consortia to the institutional circumstances of the ecoregions where they operate.
96. Donor representatives supporting this phase of the initiative expressed satisfaction with the progress made in terms of the diversity of participating organizations, the output-oriented nature of the chosen themes, and the potential impact of the initiative. They affirmed their support for the transactions costs involved in building the programme, and suggested strengthening the integration of SWNM into ecoregional mechanisms and socioeconomic research.
97. The Chair drew this discussion to a close, thanking all participants for their respective presentations.
98. After further consideration, TAC prepared draft recommendations on priorities and strategies for natural resources management research in the CGIAR. These would be incorporated into a further draft which will be shared for comments with Centre Directors, prior to preparation of a draft report for discussion at ICW'95. A final report would be prepared after these interactions with members of the Group. In discussing this topic, TAC also carefully considered the reports of the CGIAR Task Forces on Sustainable Agriculture and on Ecoregional Research. Comments on both these studies have been incorporated into the draft paper.
99. With respect to the revised proposal submitted by CIAT and IBSRAM for a Soil, Water and Nutrient Management Initiative, TAC was favourably disposed towards the proposal, commended the leaders of this initiative for the improvements over an earlier proposal, and acknowledged their cooperation with TAC. Recommendations on funding were made under Item 9 (see below).
