157. The Chair opened this session by saying that TAC would give consideration to 1996 programme and budget proposals that were approved at TAC 66.
ICARDA
158. The Chair called upon Dr. Robert H. Booth, Assistant Director General of ICARDA, to make the first presentation. He reviewed for TAC Members the contents of a briefing document prepared by ICARDA entitled, 'Program of Work and Budget 1995 and 1996 - The Agreed Research Agenda' (undated), a copy of which was provided to TAC Members. He indicated that ICARDA was requesting that TAC reconsider its decision at TAC 66 to exclude an Iran-based project from the Centre's agreed research agenda on the grounds that it was largely technical assistance and funded unilaterally by the government of Iran. ICARDA maintained that the project involved collaborative research of international relevance. Dr. Booth discussed the budgetary implications of TAC's decision for ICARDA's 1995 and 1996 CGIAR funding levels.
159. The Chair directed the discussion of this item to clarifying the facts presented and the financial implications of any TAC decision for both the Centre's budget and overall CGIAR resources. Comments from the CGIAR Secretariat were sought and received.
160. The Chair thanked Dr. Booth for his presentation and indicated that TAC would deliberate on this matter in closed session and respond to ICARDA's request in due course.
ICLARM
161. The Chair recognized Dr. Meryl Williams, Director General of ICLARM, who provided TAC with supplementary information on ICLARM's 1996 programme and budget for purposes of requesting additional 1996 core funding, and shifting ICLARM's complementary projects to its core budget. ICLARM's original 1996 programme and budget proposal had requested an overall increase in the Centre's core budget of US$ 1 million. TAC had deferred a decision on this request pending further justification for the increase. ICLARM, subsequently, also requested that all of its complementary projects be redesignated as core and that the core funding level be raised accordingly. Dr. Williams provided ICLARM's justification for each of these programme and budget changes. These were outlined in a submission to TAC entitled, 'ICLARM's 1996 Programme and Budget', dated 11 July 1995.
162. The request for increased core funding was presented, according to TAC guidance, in terms of two options: Option 1 for US$ 1 million in support of new research in policy, fisheries resource assessment, and fish productivity; and option 2 for US$ 0.5 million to support the same set of research themes, but at reduced levels for policy and fisheries resource assessment. ICLARM's request to shift complementary projects valued at US$ 2.5 million was justified on the basis that in thematic terms these projects fell within the approved plan of core research. Dr. Williams provided an extended commentary in support of these requests for TAC's consideration.
163. In the ensuing discussion, TAC Members raised a number of questions about the substance of the proposed research activities in relation to ICLARM's mandate and System priorities, the financial implications of the request in terms of future ICLARM claims on CGIAR resources, and the international value of bilaterally controlled projects. Two Members doubted the strength of the intellectual rationale offered in support of the contention that the projects in question belonged in the core programme. One indicated that it would have been preferable for ICLARM to make the case conceptually that more core funding for aquaculture research was necessary. The views of the CGIAR Secretariat were solicited by the Chair to clarify the financial implications of any TAC decisions on these requests.
164. The Chair indicated that TAC would consider this matter in closed session and respond to ICLARM's request in due course.
IPGRI-CIFOR
165. The Chair recognized Dr. Geoffrey Hawtin, Director General of IPGRI, who presented comments on TAC 66 recommendations concerning the forest genetic resources proposals contained in IPGRI's 1996 funding request. TAC had agreed to an increase of US$ 350,000 in IPGRI's agreed research agenda to be used for additional activities on forest genetic resources, but had requested a clarification that these additional activities would not overlap with work planned by CIFOR or as part of the SGRI activities. Dr. Hawtin provided TAC with a paper jointly prepared with CIFOR which further explicated the work to be initiated with the funds in question taking account of the current programmes of the Centres. He indicated that the planned work had been developed through joint discussions of relevant staff at the two Centres and would be carried out collaboratively. The proposed programme would develop a global coordinated research programme on in situ conservation of tropical forests and agroforestry genetic resources in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The funds requested would be used specifically to expand forest genetic resources work in Latin America in collaboration with CIFOR. The Asian and African components were already covered through collaboration with CIFOR and ICRAF.
166. Dr. Hawtin's proposal received favourable comments from a number of TAC Members who noted in particular the potential for linkages with environmental NGOs and for tapping into other funding sources.
167. There being no questions on the presentation, the Chair indicated that TAC would give the matter further consideration in closed session and respond to IPGRI and CIFOR in due course.
168. Dr. Hawtin then invited TAC 67 participants to visit IPGRI on Tuesday, 18 July. The Chair thanked him for his kind invitation.
A. ICARDA
169. TAC endorsed the proposal from ICARDA for a transfer of its Iran research project to the Centre's core programme and the CGIAR agreed research agenda for a total of US$ 1.8 million. TAC accepted ICARDA's argument that its work in Iran was similar to other work earlier considered as an international public good.
B. ICLARM
170. TAC endorsed ICLARM's request for a core budget increase of US$ 1 million to support policy research, fisheries resource assessment and fish productivity research and, additionally, its request to transfer US$ 2.5 million from its complementary to its core programme. However, it considered the supporting documentation from ICLARM to be inadequate. TAC expects ICLARM to submit revised proposals in due course to the TAC Secretariat and to submit a detailed progress report on its activities at TAC 69 in March 1996.
C. IPGRI-CIFOR
171. TAC endorsed the revised proposal, jointly submitted by IPGRI and CIFOR, to support work on forest genetic resources during 1996 for US$ 350,000.
