In developing a set of strategic options for TAC's consideration, some working assumptions had to be made. These working assumptions were:
· Technology transfer constraints placed on the IARCs can and will be overcome.
· Partnerships can and will be made with the private sector.
· Technologies can and will be designed to impact consumer demand and consumption patterns.
Technology Transfer - Constraints on the deployment of new CGIAR-developed technologies must be overcome if root and tuber crops research investments are to result in intended payoffs. It is assumed, for the purposes of this analysis, that serious consideration will be given to the removal of policy constraints on IARCs that now limit technology transfer activities by IARCs. In addition to needed policy changes, it is foreseen that resources will be needed to deploy new technologies to realize their intended benefits.
It no longer seems reasonable to assume that all technologies, once developed, will become deployed without assistance from some source. In some instances, the most likely source of that assistance will be the IARCS' that developed the technology. How this expectation will be meet remains to be resolved.
The relevance of this point to TAC's priority setting processes is in the need for policy adjustments that would allow the IARCs' to conduct technology transfer activities, and indeed provide for them. Failure to address this issue raises a serious question- why initiate research in an area if there is no envisioned processes for getting the intended users to use the developed technology?
Consider a contemporary example.
In the CIP EPMR the panel recommended that the Centre refrain from technical assistance programs provided to NARS. Much of this technical assistance is directed towards creating a "critical mass" of demand for seed of newly released and named cultivars. Not reaching a "critical mass" with a new introduction may doom the selection, because when it is in limited use, it cannot be profitability maintained private seed producers. CIP attempts to assist the "jump starting" of new selections with extension-type activities, which is then criticized as mere technical assistance. Other commodities without the complications of: vegetative propagation; bulkiness of the "seed"; and high production costs per hectare do not face these constraints. Thus the question needs to be asked... Should the different needs of CGIAR mandated commodities be factored into considerations for the desired mix of research and technical assistance performed by a Center? Traditional expectation for NARS to provide technology transfer for root and tuber crops research has proven inadequate in many instances, and for many reasons. Alternative provisions seem to be needed.
Private Partnerships - The nature of the root and tuber crops research requires that IARCs establish partnerships with the private sector in critical areas. Heretofore, there seems to have been an implied prohibition against IARCs working in collaboration with the private sector. However, as pointed out below, this constraint has greatly limit opportunities for developing necessary root and tuber crops technologies, appropriate to the expectations of the CGIAR donors. Consider the following example.
The development of low cost, high nutritive value foods with a long shelf-life using root and tuber crops as an ingredient will require extensive research investments. It is unlikely that the private sector will make such investments until a market is clearly visible, and the technology is emerging. The risks of initiating such research are often too great for private enterprises to accept. Commonly, some research results are needed from the public sector to get things started. The pre-commercial research and development responsibilities thus fall to the public sector.
The opportunities for IARCs to jointly plan with the private sector, and "pass the baton" at the appropriate stages could be done through well defined partnerships. This is an area that the IARCs will need to engage in the future, if they are to be successful in some areas of technology. Support from the CGIAR System in the form of new policies will be of critical importance, by allowing, and indeed encouraging, such public-private sector partnerships to form.
Demand Patterns - It is assumed that patterns of consumer demand and consumption can be altered through the development of new technologies, in areas such as food processing. Although some would argue otherwise, there is some evidence to suggest that markets can be created by targeting specific technologies, if they meet the needs of consumers for convenience, appeal, added value, etc. This assumption is important to TAC's priority setting process. Consider the following point.
There is an expectation that, to feed the poor of the Third World into the medium term of the next century, new types of foods will be required. The technologies to produce and process these foods is yet to be developed. It seems reasonable to assume that substantial shifts will occur in the demand for ingredients for food stuffs, thus affecting patterns of crop production and consumption. The simple projection of past consumption patterns to obtain estimates of future production needs does not take this point into account.
An alternative analytical strategy would be to anticipate those crops that are likely to play a major role in any new food technology, and plan research activities accordingly. This study assumes that resource allocation strategies can be developed that will significantly affect the technological outcomes and consequent impacts. To assume otherwise contradicts the primary purpose of research priority setting for resource allocations.
These working assumptions are critically important to developing an understanding of how to interpret projections in consumer demand and consumption patterns. The October 1995 desk study by the TAC Secretariat, although inconclusive for root and tuber crop consumer demand patterns, does forecast considerable areas of increased demand in certain regions. It can be reasonably argued that these desk study projections could be seriously affected by new technologies. This is particularly true if new technologies are developed and transferred in ways to strategically impact consumer demand and consumption patterns. Such strategies would be especially effective if done in partnership with the private sector. Could carefully selected new technologies be used to "push" markets in new and desired directions, rather than waiting for markets to "pull" new technologies? Could the anticipated food deficit problems of the next century be ameliorated by strategic resource deployments? What role would the root and tuber crops play in such a strategy? Surely, it would be different from a straight line projections of past patterns. And more assuredly, the need for a balanced portfolio of crop commodities would be of prime consideration.
