Are the CGIAR priorities appropriate to research on root and tuber crops?
Are the current Centre mandates for root and tuber crops appropriate?
Are the current strategies for inter-Centre research working?
Are there alternative mechanisms that could be used to facilitate inter-Centre collaboration?
Are there opportunities for greater interactions with Advanced Research Organizations and National Agricultural Research Systems?
General Recommendations:
Supplemental Recommendations:
This is the final report of the standing panel commissioned by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) to conduct an Inter-Centre Review of Root and Tuber Crops Research within the CGIAR. The terms of reference provided by TAC were to assist TAC in formulating a system-wide strategy for research on root and tuber crops within the CG System to meet global and regional needs, taking into account current and projected demands. The standing panel was given specific guidance for assessing priorities and on the organization of research, giving consideration to root and tuber crops as both commodities and as components of production and fanning systems. The terms of reference asked the standing panel to explore alternative approaches for carrying out this work, with special consideration to be given to major constraints on increased production and consumption of these commodities. This perspective was to include post-harvest problems, with emphasis on those topics with international research significance.
The standing panel was also asked to outline priorities and strategies for root and tuber crops research within the CGIAR, paying particular attention to system-wide aspects of research efficiency and impact potential.
The timing of the Inter-Centre Review was specifically selected to follow the External Program and Management Reviews of the three International Agricultural Research Centers with mandates to conduct research on root and tuber crops (CIP, CIAT, and IITA). The standing panel was comprised of specialists knowledgeable in the specific research activities of the three IARCs and of international activities in root and tuber crops research.
The Inter-Centre Review employed a workshop forum that was professionally facilitated and attended by representatives of five IARCs (CIP, CIAT, IITA, IPGRI, and IFPRI), research specialists in production and post harvest technology, research managers, and consultants with experience relevant to the review topics. The workshop was held on the campus of the University of Maryland in College Park, Maryland, U.S.A. May 30 - June 2, 1995, and was supplemented by substantial documentation derived from the three EPMRs, as well as reports specifically prepared for the Inter-Centre Review (see Appendix 3).
Eight issues were identified for the standing panel, based on discussions at the root and tuber crops workshop. These eight issues were:
· Global planning and organization.
· Potential inter-Centre collaborations.
· Better communication and operations.- Co-location of facilities.· Biotechnology research.
- International transfer of germplasm.
· Post-harvest and market research.
· Partnerships with research strong NARS.
· Policy research.
· Incentives for progress.
Each of these issues were explored by the standing panel, and the results of those evaluations are contained in the body of this report.
The panel summarized its findings and judgements in the form of answers to questions. These are followed by the recommendations contained in this final report.
The panel separated this question into three dimensions for its analysis:
· Root and tuber crops research as a component of total CGIAR commitments,
· Individual crops as priorities within the CGIAR mandated root and tuber crops, and
· Types of research to be undertaken (e.g., post-harvest, biotechnology).
Regarding the first dimension (root and tuber crops as a component of the CG System), the panel observed that there is considerable disagreement within the CGIAR community on the types of information needed and the appropriateness of certain methods for setting System-wide research priorities. In the panel's judgement, there is a strong need to reconcile these differences of opinion.
Regarding the relative priorities of individual crops within the mandated root and tuber group, the panel concluded that modest downward adjustments in emphasis for some root and tuber crops would permit increased research activities on cassava and potato. This judgement is based on the panel's assumption that significantly greater amounts of resources will not be available for expanded research programs. However, given the clear need to expand research activities in cassava and potato, some concomitant downsizing seems appropriate, in the panel's view.
This study evaluated extensively the need for different types of research on root and tuber crops, with a perspective for inter-Centre collaborations. The similarities and dissimilarities of the mandated root and tuber crops of the CG System are identified. This distinction permitted the identification of candidate research activities for inter-Centre collaborations across root and tuber crops. The anticipated benefits of inter-Centre collaborations would be expressed as greater program efficiencies. These suggested collaborative research areas are:
· Support for the System-wide genetic resources program, with special reference to the root and tuber crops.· Collaborative efforts on international germplasm movement strategies, with phytosanitation.
· Vegetative propagation and conservation technology. Biotechnology.
· Collaborative efforts in post-harvest technology and market research.
· Mechanization research1.
1 This point was made by the conference participants, but there is reason to conclude that research-strong NARS, working with the private sector, might assume primary responsibility for mechanization research and development.· Policy analysis.
· Studies on international trade.
· Coordinated collections of statistics and surveys.
· Training.
· Concerted, collaborative efforts to strengthen national programs.
The standing panel explored this question extensively, and concluded that readjustments to the Centre's mandates are not justified at this time. Considerable discussion was given to designating a lead Centre for cassava germplasm conservation, but persuasive arguments advanced by both CIAT and IITA showed this would serve no purpose, as the existing mandates are adequate, and are working well. For this reason, the standing panel makes no recommendation for changing the existing Centre mandates for root and tuber crops research.
The panel was not able to identify a clearly stated inter-Centre strategy for research on root and tuber crops. However, in its analysis, the panel was able to determine that certain types of root and tuber crops research are more appropriate to inter-Centre research activities than are other types. In the panel's analysis, there are three types of root and tuber crops research that need to be accommodated in a strategy for inter-Centre research. These distinctions are related to the similarities and dissimilarities of root and tuber crops, which are not always apparent.
Type 1: The dissimilarities of root and tuber crops identified in the progress report clearly established the justification for research independence for the mandated root and tuber crops in many areas. These independent research Centre research collaboration in areas of dissimilarity for the root and tuber crops would offer no benefit.
Type 2: There are, however, a considerable number of opportunities for inter-Centre research collaborations that are, or could be, based on the identified similarities of root and tuber crops. This final report provides an analysis of these similarities, with recommendations for their facilitation.
Type 3: The third identified category of research includes projects of a cross-cutting, system-wide nature, that include root and tuber crops, but also extend to other commodities as well. One example of system-wide research opportunities is Integrated Pest Management (IPM). The panel did not address this research category in its recommendations, as it clearly extends beyond the boundaries of the standing panel's terms of reference.
The standing panel gave considerable attention to alternative mechanisms that could "reengineer," "reorganize," or "reassign" research responsibilities. It was concluded that major changes to the root and tuber crops research structure of the CGIAR are not justified at this time. The standing panel's preferred strategy would be to create an Inter-Centre Consultative Committee on Root and Tuber Crops Research that would facilitate inter-Centre research activities- as a coordinating mechanism. This recommendation was formulated by the standing panel as an overarching recommendation. The standing panel prefers this "gentle hand" approach to inter-Centre collaboration, and feels that it is more appropriate to the opportunities and needs of the Centres mandated to conduct research on the root and tuber crops. This judgement is based on the example of the excellent collaboration that currently exists between IITA and CIAT for cassava research. Both Centres actively seek to bring the right people together on the right research topics in consultative approaches.
The panel clearly saw many opportunities for more collaborative research activities on root and tuber crops. These collaborations could take many forms: as inter-Centre collaborations; as networks of scientists and institutions; and as partnerships with other public and private institutions in both developed and developing countries. In fact, the standing panel views this set of opportunities as a highly appealing aspect of the proposed Inter-Centre Consultative Committee, which could provide facilitation for collaborative research projects of all kinds.
The panel makes two general recommendation for root and tuber crops research, upon which the remaining recommendations are based.
General Recommendation 1: Continue research investments in root and tuber crops research at least at current levels, with the expressed expectation that the participant IARCs will seek the most effective and efficient use of those resources.
General Recommendation 2: Form an "Inter-Centre Consultative Committee on Root and Tuber Crops Research" for system-wide planning, coordination, and operation.
The panel recommends that the proposed Consultative Committee convene a task force, including non-CG members, to prepare a comprehensive, documented text that sets out a vision for root and tuber research employing inter-Centre collaborations and institutional partnerships for root and tuber crops research.
The panel recommends that the Consultative Committee develop a system-wide strategy for root and tuber crops research.
The panel recommends that the proposed Inter-Centre Consultative Committee commission a task force to explore the possibility of rationalizing international phytosanitation regulations and institutional arrangements for shipments of root and tuber crops as vegetatively-propagated materials.
The panel recommends that the proposed Inter-Centre Consultative Committee commission a study to recommend inter-Centre collaborations in biotechnology research.
The panel recommends that the proposed Inter-Centre Consultative Committee sanction a post-harvest technology and market working group to explore with AROs, NARS, and the private sector root and tuber crops research partnerships on:
· The characterization of starch and flour (antecedent to industrial processing).
· Food processing technology.
· Market research.
The panel recommends that the proposed Inter-Centre Consultative Committee continuously explore opportunities for different types of partnerships and collaborations among IARCs, and with public and private partner institutions in both the developed and developing world.
The panel recommends that the Consultative Committee seek ways to consolidate root and tuber crops research investments through a comprehensive plan that would build the capacity of AROs as alternative suppliers of relevant knowledge.
The panel recommends that the Consultative Committee formulate policy to encourage more private sector research partnerships.
The panel recommends that the Consultative Committee work to develop strategies and resolve policies regarding technology transfer activities.
The panel recommends that the Consultative Committee remain vigilant of the environmental impacts of root and tuber crops production.
