General Recommendations:
Terms of Reference
Supplemental Recommendations:
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.
Given the incompleteness of quantitative data and the uncertainly of projections for root and tuber crops (see the TAC Secretariat desk study), and the lack a clear understanding on potential alternative suppliers of scientific breakthroughs (see TAC Secretariat aide memoire), this recommendation seems reasonable.
General Recommendation 2: Form an "Inter-Centre Consultative Committee on Root and Tuber Crops Research" for system-wide planning, coordination, and operation.
The Consultative Committee's activity should be carried out with regional and global perspectives, and assist the participating Centres to form new, strong research collaborations with one another, the private sector, AROs, and NARS, to achieve a critical mass in research to solve global or continental problems.
The panel's approach would be for this Committee to be made up of the Directors General of CIP, CIAT, IITA, and possibly ISNAR, IPGRI, and IFPRI (or their designated representative).
In response to this recommendation, TAC's July 1995 commentary requested some clarification. TAC also requested a draft terms of reference (TOR) for the proposed Inter-Centre Consultative Committee. This is provided the accompanying table.
DRAFT/EXAMPLE ONLY
Inter-Centre Consultative Committee on Root and Tuber Crops Research of the CGIAR System
|
Concept |
The Consultative Committee on Root and Tuber Crops Research in the CGIAR System (hereinafter The Consultative Committee) is a network of IARCS' institutional leaders who meet periodically to explore opportunities for collaboration and consensus-building on topics of mutual interest in root and tuber crops research, within the CGIAR System and beyond. |
|
Purpose |
To obtain program efficiencies in root and tuber crops research within the CGIAR System. Efficiencies will be sought through program synergies, financial leveraging, and knowledge amplification. The Consultative Committee is not a formal, funded institution, but a consortium of leaders seeking to enhance opportunities in research through joint planning and coordination. |
|
Objectives |
· To enhance communication on root and tuber crops research within and beyond the CGIAR System. |
|
Strategies |
The Consultative Committee will seek to accomplish its objectives indirectly through the facilitation of activities by others when possible, and by direct action when necessary. The anticipated strategies should be as collaborative networking among Centres, and with other partners as appropriate. Opportunities should be explored to optimize resource use through enhanced research and training coordination. Research team-building should be encouraged as a strategy. |
|
Membership |
The Directors General (DGs) of the root and tuber crops-mandated IARCs, including those with commodity research responsibilities, those with policy research interests, and those with training responsibilities. |
|
Process |
The Consultative Committee will scan the horizon for opportunities to enhance the potential for institutions and individual scientists within and beyond the CGIAR System to contribute to the knowledge pool serving root and tuber crops. The Consultative Committee should seek to bring together common interests and subjects to foster the purposes of the CGIAR. |
|
Duration |
The Consultative Committee is established for a period of five (5) years. The creation and renewal of The Consultative Committee is by the authority of the Chairman of the CGIAR. Renewal is subject to demonstrated benefits to the CGIAR System and its claimants. |
TAC additionally asked for justification for establishing a Consultative Committee. These points follow:
· No presently stated strategy.
· Expectations for the handing off of commodities.
· The apparent need for enhanced communication.
· Significant areas for research collaboration have been recognized.
There is at present no stated strategy for root and tuber crops research with in the CGIAR System. The similarities of the commodities (noted earlier) do provide some opportunities for collaboration on an inter-Centre basis. Developing a research strategy for these commodities could permit the attainment of greater research efficiencies and provide opportunities to leverage resources and amplify discoveries. This would be of great benefit to the System and its claimants. The standing panel concluded that this could be done under the aegis of the Inter-Centre Consultative Committee, and this point is included in the requested draft TOR.
The system-wide interest in the handing off of commodities or research areas to national programs could benefit from continued study by an Inter-Centre Consultative Committee. As noted above, there are a number of performance standards and complications that need to be considered and resolved if such an approach is to be successful. This consideration should be done with a system-wide perspective, and with an understanding of the research relevant similarities and dissimilarities of root and tuber crops within the CGIAR system.
Another justification for establishing an Inter-Centre Consultative Committee is for enhanced communication. An Inter-Centre Consultative Committee could facilitate joint planning of inter-Centre projects, and assist in the identification of research gaps and research overlaps that could be resolved through reprogramming.
Although the dissimilarities of root and tuber crops may appear to be significantly greater than the similarities, there are significant areas for research collaboration to be found among the Centres. The proposed Inter-Centre Consultative Committee could coordinate these research collaborations
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 believes that this approach would permit the participating Centres to provide scientifically valid information to positively assist TAC's priority setting process. The panel does not believe that this task would be onerous on the Centres, inasmuch as much of the information is readily available in documentation prepared for the Inter-Centre Review, and from the recently-completed EPMRs of CIP, CIAT, and IITA. The panel believes that this approach would give the Centres a deserved opportunity to obtain a balance on the roles of root and tuber crops research within the total efforts of the System, through a vision statement.
The panel recommends that the Consultative Committee develop a system-wide strategy for root and tuber crops research.
There is at present no comprehensive strategy for root and tuber crops research in the CGIAR System. The development of a comprehensive strategy would help to set expectations for the System, the research partners, and the donors. The comprehensive research strategy should clarify authorities and resolve research mandate questions, both within the System and externally. Finally, the development of a comprehensive research strategy should lead to a working set of procedures that would help facilitate collaborations within the global research community.
Some of the expected benefits of a comprehensive research strategy would be a clarification of how root and tuber crops research will link to eco-regional research activities, integrate with farming systems perspectives research, and become coordinated with system-wide initiatives of all kinds. The comprehensive research strategy should also facilitate the gathering of information to help document past, current and projected trends in root and tuber crops production and utilization to assist TAC in future priority setting processes.
The comprehensive research strategy for root and tuber crops could monitor global research activities that are relevant to the research being conducted by Centres and non-Centres alike. It could also plan how to evaluate the relevance and usefulness of research results emanating from both the public and private sectors. The comprehensive research strategy could also describe how best to articulate the priorities, needs, and importance of root and tuber crops research within the CGIAR System. Other strategic choices would likely include how to:
- identify opportunities for the passing off of research programs to research-strong NARS;- make adjustments to priority investments in root and tuber crops research; and
- design systems for the analysis of the outcomes and impacts of the technologies developed for these commodities.
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.
This activity could be done in partnership with FAO and IPGRI, which have experience in developing similar protocols for other commodities (e.g., banana). This approach should work to speed up the safe exchange of germplasm used for international research on root and tuber crops.
The panel recommends that the proposed Inter-Centre Consultative Committee commission a study to recommend inter-Centre collaborations in biotechnology research.
Biotechnology is recognized as an area of research that is both expensive and human resource limited. By comprehensively looking for areas of common interest and opportunity, the Consultative Committee could leverage relatively small research investments into significant projects that transcend individual commodities.
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 Hour (antecedent to industrial processing).
· Food processing technology.
· Market research.
This recommendation is intended to encourage the Consultative Committee to explore the needs for strategic research on specifically selected post-harvest and market topics, such as starch chemistry. This recommendation is not intended to suggest that IARCs undertake significant amounts of applied research and development work in this area. The notion of this recommendation is to work to identify bottlenecks to the expansion of root and tuber crops utilization not being addressed by either NARS or the private sector, and plan strategically to remove those barriers. Exploratory studies might best be done through information-sharing, coordinated by the Consultative Committee, and initiated by a lead Centre.
The panel recognizes that undertaking this initiative may require additional resources (or the reallocation of resources), which seems justified, given the importance of this topic.
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.
This recommendation is made with the panel's acknowledgment that there is no one formula suitable for the "devolution" of research responsibility. Actions to form partnerships with "research-strong NARS" must carry with them unique considerations and organizations for programmatic needs. Also, it must be recognized that, justifiably, a NARS should receive funds to meet the marginal costs of internationalizing a part, or parts, of its national research program. This will require considerable planning and multiple year budget commitments.
The standing panel had previously recommended that both sweet potato and yam be passed off to specific national programs. This recommendation is being revised here for the following reason.
The current expenditures on yam research by IITA is sufficiently small that passing off of the program to a NARS would yield little System-wide or Centre financial benefit. Moreover, the benefits of "devolving" sweet potato to a national program remains to be shown as feasible, beyond the current level of collaboration already initiated by CIP.
The performance standards for partnering with research-strong NARS (noted above) could serve as a framework for discussions and negotiating future agreements with national governments, if it can be demonstrated that there are true cost efficiencies and effective research to be obtained from changing. However, a research-efficiency-analysis goes beyond the remit of this study.
There are, the standing panel notes, significant questions regarding the efficiencies to be gained by having national research scientists assume global research responsibility for a CGIAR-mandated commodity.
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.
Opportunities exist to induce AROs to commit to research activities that are relevant to the mandated root and tuber crops, through any one of several strategies. To this point CIP has very creatively used contract research to accomplish aspects of its research agenda, at selected universities. This approach draws research faculty to a Centre's priorities for relatively small amounts of funding.
Alternative strategies might include invitations to conferences, support for sabbaticals, or training programs. The intent is to share with potential research partners opportunities for collaborations and partnerships through experiences and by example.
The panel recommends that the Consultative Committee formulate policy to encourage more private sector research partnerships.
As pointed out in an earlier section of this report, there is a significant need, and justification for, Centres with mandated root and tuber crops to work with the private sector, especially in the area of post-harvest technology. The establishment of such partnerships with the private sector will require a new set of policies regarding the development and use of intellectual property, the sharing of resources, and distribution of benefits. This must be done in ways that are not now easily accommodated.
The panel recommends that the Consultative Committee work to develop strategies and resolve policies regarding technology transfer activities.
The general expectation is for any new technology to quickly find its way into production agriculture. However, some national programs often operate with insufficient resources for adequate technology transfer programs. This can doom otherwise useful agricultural research results, for lack of application. This consideration is especially relevant to the root and tuber crops, as they share the characteristics of vegetative propagation, which complicates considerably the issues of technology transfer (e.g., a new cultivar's introduction), and for some aspects of technical assistance.
The message from donors is clearly in an interest for more, not less, technology transfer. But the mission of IARCs has been one of mostly focusing on research activities that will have an international impact, often at the expense of technology transfer. This then presents a dilemma to the IARCs working on root and tuber crops, inasmuch as the deployment of new technologies is not easily done indirectly through NARS. This problem needs new strategies, and some resolution at the policy level.
The panel recommends that the Consultative Committee remain vigilant of the environmental impacts of root and tuber crops production.
Aspects of the root and tuber crop production systems lend themselves to environmental problems. These consequences need to be monitored with a research perspective, to remain aware of the need for avoiding or mitigating problems. Contributing factors are:
· the soil-structure-damaging effects of crop harvest practices that can lead to certain consequences, such as severe soil erosion;· economic incentives that can lead to overexploited agricultural chemicals, with resulting water and soil pollution problems; and
· the physical consequences of the bulky harvest on factors such as soil compaction, mineral loss, and women-in-agriculture issues.
These environmental aggravations are oftentimes worse for root and tuber crops than for other commodities. This is not intended as an indictment of these commodities, but more as a justification for providing adequate research investments to find superior technologies, and thus avoid these environmental problems. Consider the following example:
There is today a global crisis in potato late blight management. This is a direct consequence of under investments for the past half century in breeding potato programs. Potato growers in the Northern hemisphere have come to rely on chemicals to protect the crop from potato late blight disease, and breeding programs for the past half-century, have, with very few exceptions, uniformly failed to incorporate resistance into replacement cultivars. As a consequence, virtually all commercial potato growers today find themselves fully dependent on chemical protection practices.
The sudden worldwide occurrence of the A-2 mating type of Phytophthora infestans, carrying a gene for resistance for the most important fungicide, has created a crisis that has yet to be resolved. There is no doubt that had research investments been adequate to allow the development of cultivars with resistance to potato late blight, this global crisis would have been considerably dampened, if not obliterated.
The proposed Consultative Committee would be in an excellent position to constantly scan the environmental horizon for emerging issues and technological consequences that need to be avoided or mitigated through alternative technologies.7
7 This again is another example of how the Inter-Centre Consultative Committee on Root and Tuber Crops Research could assist in program planning and research coordination.
