TAC has chosen the subject of CGIAR-NARS collaborative relationships1 as one of the priority strategic issues for it to address over the next couple of years. The subject was picked not because it was felt that the CGIAR-NARS relationships have been inadequate or bad, but rather because TAC's members believe that such relationships can be strengthened to fit more closely with changing conditions, knowledge, understanding and capacities. The System Review also found the subject of CGIAR-NARS relations and the role of the CGIAR in NARS strengthening to be an important topic for future consideration. Thus, nine of their recommendations relate in part or whole, and directly or indirectly to the theme (see Annex 1). These recommendations have been considered in the present assessment.
1
The term "collaborative relationships" is used more generally than "partnerships". The latter term has a more limited meaning and, unfortunately, has come to have different meanings for different people. As an aside, the old and well worn Webster's dictionary the consultant found in FAO while working on the paper defines partnership as the "the state of being a partner", or "a legal relationship". These were not very helpful, so we looked up partner. Here the consultant found the definitions: "either of a couple who dance together", or "one of two or more persons who play together in a game against an opposing side", or as "a member of a partnership". We trust that more modern dictionaries have more appropriate definitions for the CGIAR's purposes!
The paper reports the results of a desk study based on existing documentation and the author's own assessment of the topic. As indicated in the acknowledgements, this draft of the paper has benefitted from the input of a great number of individuals from the Centers and from NARS. Further comments are encouraged.
The paper focuses on the strategic issues with which TAC is concerned in the context of the priorities and strategies for the CG System. The paper does not deal with operational issues related to formation and implementation of collaborative relationships. Those rightly are the focus of the individual CGIAR centers and their partners. Nor is the paper a general discussion of NARS, their perspectives and their institution strengthening needs. Attribution of ideas and needs to NARS would be presumptuous here. At the same time, the paper reflects the very thoughtful comments received from NARS leaders of developing countries and available documentation related to such NARS views.
The various thoughts presented to the author have been drawn upon in the discussion, with full recognition that the perceptions from the head of one or another of the institutions within the broad category of NARS in a given country do not necessarily represent the views of other organizations and individuals in that same country's overall NARS. NARS are not homogeneous sets of institutions that all think alike and work together. Indeed that is one of the challenges that face international centers in developing linkages at the broader NARS level in a country. Different institutional capacities, interests and priorities need to be considered in developing promising options for strengthening the effectiveness and efficiency of collaborative relationships.
The many excellent comments received have been taken into account; and those comments that related specifically to errors, omissions, and clarifications in the present text have hopefully been fully incorporated in the text and footnotes. However, many of the broader points made by reviewers need to be taken into account in the next phase of the activity, including the comment from several persons that a conceptual framework is needed, along with a more in-depth discussion of definitions and actual meaning of such terms as NARS, NARIs, NAROs, "comparative advantage," "international public goods," "economies of scale," etc. Also of particular note was the comment from one expert that the draft reflected
" a 'transfer of technology' model, in which knowledge, benefits, etc., emanate from basic research, flow through strategic, applied and adaptive research and finally through extension to reach (and impact on) the ultimate (passive) users (farmers, beneficiaries, etc.) This model has been severely critiqued within the CGIAR and outside, but its resilience is impressive. Recent work....argues that alongside this traditional university-based model, a new mode of producing knowledge is gaining in importance. In the new mode, knowledge is produced in the context of its application. The distinction between basic and applied research is blurred. In this mode, researchers and research organizations in developing countries are essential participants in the global research system. They are not extension mechanisms."
This perspective, which is gaining ground within the CGIAR, needs to be more fully reflected together with other innovations in any future-looking strategic paper that TAC might produce as a second phase activity.
A point for TAC to note is that none of the Center and NARS reviewers disagreed with the suggested options for future activity discussed in the paper, although many provided helpful ideas on how to improve and clarify them and how to prioritize them. All except one reviewer supported the final general recommendation, again with various points of amplification, most of which have been incorporated in the present draft. The one who dissented suggested that the three substudies under the recommendation would be too difficult to undertake, given limited resources. The alternative suggested was that the resources available "be devoted to the generation of a strategy paper that, above all, is rich with the experiences, opinions, recommendations and expectations of the developing world, for whom the IARCs exist."
The first section of the paper provides the essence of the conclusions reached in the desk study, the suggestions that derive from these conclusions and the main recommendation of the consultant. The remainder of the paper provides the details for use by TAC if it decides to do further work on the theme addressed.
