10.1 Introduction
10.2 ILRI's Relations with Kenya and Ethiopia
10.3 Partnerships with the NARS
10.4 Collaboration with the CGIAR Centres and Other IARCS
10.5 ILRI Collaboration with FAO
10.6 Collaborative Research with Advanced Research Institutions
10.7 Visiting Scientists
10.8 ILRI and Public Audiences
10.9 Management of ILRI's Partnerships
10.10 Summary
This chapter discusses ILRI's partnerships and other forms of relationships with external organizations. It does not focus on the Institute's External Relations Office (ERO), except in part. That Office's charge with respect to attracting core funds to ILRI and assisting with proposals for project funds is referred to in Chapter 2; its work in general public relations is discussed below.
ILRI's partnerships take a variety of forms. Most important are the Institute's relationships with its major host countries, Kenya and Ethiopia, where ILRI has its headquarters and principal office, respectively. In addition, the Institute collaborates with NARS both bilaterally and as part of networks, with other CGIAR Centres and related IARCs through bilateral arrangements and in inter-centre programmes, with FAO, and with ARIs, especially in cases where specialised skills are required that are not available at ILRI. In addition, there are numerous instances of scientist-to-scientist collaborations carried out in a more or less informal mode, and the Institute benefits from its work with visiting and seconded scientists. It relates to a variety of external publics, including donors and more broadly defined audiences.
The Institute inherited a number of partners from its parent institutions, ILRAD and ILCA. Currently, it counts over 200 institutions with which it collaborates officially. Within the last two years, over 60 of these have been formalised through Memoranda of Understanding or Agreement (MOU/MOA), instruments that spell out the modalities of the co-operation, indicating the responsibilities of each of the partners in the execution of joint projects and how the outputs will be shared. These agreements are then supplemented as individual projects are developed with documents detailing who will be involved, the resources required, and outputs expected.
ILRI recognises the value of strong partnerships as they provide an opportunity to share resources and information and to benefit from new skills and perspectives, especially in the case of NARS that offer the perspectives of the end users. It is clear that the whole can often be greater than the sum of its parts. The benefits are also recognised by donors who encourage regional collaboration and the ecoregional emphasis this makes possible.
The Panel sought to understand the nature and value of ILRI's partnerships first by means of a survey sent to 84 selected institutions; second, by visits to a number of partners in the host countries and in Niger, Nigeria, Peru, and Colombia. The comments below derive from both these sources.
The relationship between ILRI and both Kenya and Ethiopia, appears to be very cordial; the Institute enjoys the co-operation of all levels of the respective governments.
In the case of Kenya, ILRI's principal collaborator is the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI). The relationship with KARI has been long standing, and there is strong support from the top. The Director General expressed his appreciation of past collaboration and the wish to promote an expansion of joint activity in the future. At the working level, collaboration with the partners in Kenya on special projects has been very good, especially in on-farm research that involves many players, including the Ministry of agriculture. Collaborative activities also include joint supervision of graduate students and jointly organised workshops. The Panel noted high mutual respect and appreciation of partners' contributions in projects. Some staff showed concern that they had been inadequately involved in the early stages of research planning or "sidelined" during later implementation of projects, while others were strongly supportive. The collaboration with the Kenya Trypanosomosis Research Institute (KETRI) is, as yet, not at the level desired by both institutions. However, there have recently been meetings to discuss substantially increased interaction. ILRI scientists also participate as resource persons in some teaching activities at the University of Nairobi, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine. The Institute provides laboratory and library facilities to the faculty and students.
In Ethiopia, ILRI's principal partner is the Ethiopian Agricultural Research Organization (EARO). As the Ethiopian Government has recently determined to give agriculture a higher profile, EARO's reporting status has been transferred to the Office of the Prime Minister. Again, the Director General is eager to expand collaboration with ILRI and to relegate to the past any problems that have existed. Again, these have focused on a one-way approach on the part of some ILRI staff. The Panel believes, however, that there is the will on both sides to reshape the relationship, collaborate in the earliest stages of research planning, and direct future research toward issues of greater strategic relevance.
Both Kenya and Ethiopia have benefited substantially from ILRI programmes particularly in the area of training where one third of all the people trained (including those trained by ILCA and ILRAD) were from the two countries.
In two other countries visited by the Panel, Niger and Nigeria, where ILRI has out-posted staff, the Institute has established a very good relationship with the NARS and other CGIAR Centres (ICRISAT Sahelian Centre and IITA) working there. In both countries the NARS were positive about their collaboration, including development of joint projects, which they saw as an opportunity to attract funding.
ILRI's relationship with NARS, bilaterally and in networks, is covered in all its aspects in Chapter 9. With respect to research collaboration in particular, the Institute's ultimate goal is to generate or facilitate generation of technologies that can improve animal agriculture, particularly smallholder production systems. Validation and adaptation of new technologies for specific production environments is an important component of the technology development process and requires the participation of NARS and end users. In addition, assessing the impact of technological interventions will require similar participation and access. The NARS thus provide ILRI with an essential grassroots linkage. This is especially true with production systems and animal genetic resource work. To illustrate, work on animal genetic resources requires breed surveys and performance characterisation of indigenous breeds, which can only be done through or by the NARS, while related activities in molecular genetics is an area of ILRI's comparative advantage. By working closely together, there is a greater likelihood that relevant and useful technologies will be developed in a reasonable timeframe.
Formalising partnerships with national agricultural research organizations has contributed to a strengthening of the long-standing institutional linkages between ILRI and individual organizations. Most importantly, it has also set the stage for fully interactive partnership, where both parties have something to contribute and gain from collaboration Prior to this development, both ILRI and the national institutions were often postured in an unequal relationship that could only be viewed as beneficial with respect to building the capacity of NARS; otherwise, it was a disincentive for research collaboration. Some NARS scientists felt that their inputs into collaborative research were not sufficiently recognised
10.4.1 Systemwide Livestock Programme (SLP)
10.4.2 Systemwide Genetic Resources Programme (SGRP)
10.4.3 ILRI's Involvement in Ecoregional Research
Collaboration between ILRI, CGIAR centres, and other IARCS has also taken several forms, including joint research projects and training, joint appointments and staff exchange, outposting of ILRI scientists at Centre sites; and participation in ecoregional consortia and systemwide programmes. Where ILRI has a physical presence with any of the centres, it has established good working relations in research, training, and even some in some management areas, such as the sharing of salary surveys. In Kenya, ICRAF recognises the location of the headquarters of the two centres in Nairobi, as being of mutual benefit. The two centres have formal collaboration in a number of projects, and there are also informal collaborations in the areas of biometrics, GIS, and administration. The potential for collaboration with ICRAF has increased with the broadening of the ILRI mandate to address issues of natural resources management. With respect to ICIPE, there is the possibility for sharing facilities as well as collaboration in ticks and tickborne diseases as well as in tsetse and trypanosomosis.
Current collaborative arrangements are as follows:
|
Centre |
Programme |
|
CIAT, Colombia |
Forage germplasm improvement; crop production; smallholder dairy; forage genetic resources |
|
CIP, Peru |
Crop livestock systems in the highlands |
|
ICRAF, Kenya |
Evaluation of fodder trees, fodder tree genetic resources |
|
ICRISAT, India |
Mixed crop-livestock production in the semi-arid zone (in Niger), identification and mapping of QTLs for anti-nutritional factors in crop residues, joint vertisol project. |
|
IFPRI, USA |
Livestock policies and natural resource management |
|
IITA, Nigeria |
The role of livestock and integration of forage and browse legumes into cropping systems |
|
IPGRI, Italy |
Germplasm collection and characterisation |
|
ICIPE, Kenya |
Epidemiology of trypanosomosis. |
|
ICOMOD, Nepal |
Highland agriculture and watershed management |
ILRI currently has joint staff appointments with IITA, CIAT, IFPRI and CIP, while the Institute has outposted staff at the headquarters of research stations of ICRISAT, IITA, and IRRI. In the latter cases, ILRI support staff are on the payroll and under the personnel policies of the host institution.
The Institute also participates in a series of ecoregional consortia that are discussed under section 10.4.3 below.
It further participates in five systemwide programmes: the Systemwide Livestock Programme for which ILRI serves as convenor, the Property Rights and Collective Action Initiative, the Systemwide Genetic Resources Programme, the Systemwide Programme on Integrated Pest Management, and the System-wide Soil Water Nutrient Programme.
The SLP, one of several systemwide programmes within the CGIAR, is convened by ILRI. The EPMR of ILRI was not asked to review the SLP, but to comment on ILRI's involvement and functions in this programme.
The aim of SLP is to add value to the resources invested in livestock-related research across the CGIAR system and associated ecoregional consortia. This is to be achieved through the development of a coherent, integrated approach to the development of livestock feeds, the management of natural resources, and the creation of a supportive policy environment for livestock development.
There are currently nine CGIAR Centres that participate in the SLP. Its research agenda is agreed to by the inter-Centre Livestock Programme Group (LPG) and to oversee the implementation. The LPG consists of a representative of each participating Centre and is chaired by the representative of the convening Centre, ILRI.
The SLP was established in 1995 and recommended by TAC to be funded at a volume of US$ 4 million per year. In preparing for its implementation, a competitive grant system was agreed to and set up to assemble the Programme's research portfolio. This process resulted in the approval for funding of three separate proposals (by CIAT, ICRAF, ICARDA). Given that the funding of the Programme was not forthcoming at the level recommended by TAC and endorsed by the CGIAR, these proposals had to be redesigned and were funded only in 1997 at a considerably lower level than originally requested.
In late 1997, the World Bank awarded a "one-off' grant of US$ 2 million to enable further development of the SLP, and ILRI decided, in 1998, to appoint a full-time coordinator and to solicit research proposals from member Centres for approval by the LPG and submission to donors.
ILRI considers the SLP to be one of two dimensions of its responsibilities in global livestock research (the other one being the Institute's own research within its global livestock research mandate). In its strategy document, ILRI has suggested a management structure for the SLP that blurs the distinction between the two dimensions, in that it introduces into the SLP core parts of ILRI's research programme for which the LPG has no programmatic and managerial responsibilities. This conveys to participants in the SLP and to the outside observer the unfortunate impression that ILRI is attempting to impose its own agenda on the SLP. This impression was indeed confirmed to the Panel by some SLP participants and further enhanced by the fact that ILRI's decision to appoint a full-time SLP co-ordinator in 1998 (drawing on programme-restricted and thus SLP funding) was made without prior consultation at the level of the inter-Centre Livestock Programme Group.
The Panel concurs with ILRI that the SLP is a powerful and necessary mechanism to synergise livestock-related activities across the CGIAR system. Any system-wide programme, however, can only thrive if there are genuine opportunities for consensus-based procedures of decision-making.
To address concerns on ILRI's integration of the convenor role in managing systemwide programmes of the CGIAR, the Panel recommends that ILRI:i) redefine its role in the Systemwide Livestock Programme (SLP) t<r conform with the TAC-recommended function of a systemwide" programme convenor,
ii) withdraw those parts of its own research programme from the SLP over which the Inter-Centre Livestock Programme Group has no jurisdiction, thus enabling the entire portfolio of the Programme to be guided by procedures agreed in the SLP, and
iii) refrain from reporting the SLP as part of ILRI's research portfolio.
ILRI participates actively in the SGRP, which is convened by IPGRI, and is represented on the steering committee, the Inter-Centre Working Group on Genetic Resources (ICWG-GR). An ILRI representative was on the executive committee of the SGRP in 1998. Currently, both ILRI and ICARDA, both working on livestock, are represented in the steering committee by plant geneticists because of their major commitment in conservation and designation of plant genetic resources under the agreement with FAO. An animal geneticist from ILRI has recently been invited to represent animal genetic resources issues on the SGRP steering committee.
ILRI contributes to the SGRP through its projects on forage and animal genetic resources. Project 10 (Characterisation and conservation of forage genetic resources), funded by the German Federal Ministry for Economic and Development (BMZ), is pan of the SGRP activities. Through this project, ILRI has the responsibility for maintaining and managing, in accordance with the International Genebank Standards, the CGIAR forage genebank containing over 13,000 accession of forage grasses, legumes, and fodder tree species. The genebank, held in trust under the auspices of FAO, is part of the ex situ network of base collections. Maintenance and management of the genebank includes and correction of passport data, routine seed health check for seed-borne verification diseases, production and supply of forage seeds to users, and making information available to users through the System-wide Information Network for Genetic Resources (SINGER) on the Internet
The SGRP reviewed the genebank in 1996 and made several recommendations, which ILRI continues to implement. Based on the recommendations: (1) ILRI maintains unique germplasm in a large base collection; discussions with CIAT and ICARDA on the location of the base collections are already in progress; (2) germination tests are continuing with priority given to base collections, although the tests are expected to take up to five years to complete; (3) work on regeneration continues with more accessions planted in 1996 to 1998 and; (4) the project maintains close collaboration with other SGRP members, such as ICRAF, CIAT, IPGRI and ICARDA. Linkages are also maintained with NARS partners (such as the SADC regional genebank, Kenya genebank, and other collaborators), ARIs, (University of Wisconsin, Cornell University, University of Reading and CISRO), and FAO.
In 1996, the SGRP funded a meeting between the centres (ILRI, ICARDA and IPGRI) and FAO to identify areas of possible collaboration in the area of animal genetic resources. The meeting recommended that ILRI and ICARDA identify system-wide activities for which SGRP support could be sought. ILRI Projects 1 (Characterisation, conservation and use of animal genetic resources) and 2 (Development of disease resistant livestock) also contribute significantly to the SGRP and the global animal genetic resources conservation efforts. In collaboration with the NARS, ARIs and FAO, the Institute is working on the following research activities:
· identification and description of AnGR in developing countries;· development of a database on indigenous animal genetic resources covering uses, characteristics (including production and adaptive attributes), distribution, population statistics, status (increasing, decreasing and stable), etc.;
· economic valuation of AnGR; and
· training of NARS scientists in collaborating countries.
· Genetic resistance to trypanosomosis
· Genetic resistance to gastro-intestinal parasitism in small ruminants
The projects had several achievements; one that can directly be linked to the SGRP is the development of the information system. Domestic Animal Genetic Resources Information Database (DAGRID). Discussions to make the information on livestock genetic resources available to users by linking DAGRID with SINGER are already in progress.
The Institute, through its parents, has a long history of collaboration with FAO in animal genetic resources. These collaborations include research, joint training programmes for the NARS, and workshops. The Projects land 2 also maintains linkages and collaboration with the NARS and ARIs.
The Panel commends ILRI for significant progress made in implementing the recommendations of the SGRP Genebank Review and for developing and making available the animal genetic resources information as well as the forage germplasm databases and suggests that the Institute, in collaboration with the SGRP, ensure that the databases on forage germplasm and DAGRID are complementary to the global information systems maintained by FAO such as DAD-IS.
The Institute is now in a better position than ever to contribute to global efforts in research on animal genetic resources management. The establishment of global and regional institutional structures and facilities that can facilitate ILRI's participation in relevant activities has created an enabling environment. In order to enhance ILRI's contribution to the SGRP and other global efforts for the conservation of animal genetic resources, the Panel suggests that ILRI develop a policy statement with respect to the conservation of farm animal genetic resources and its role in these efforts. ILRI is thus encouraged to play a leading role within the SGRP in identifying policy and strategic research priorities in farm animal genetic resources conservation and use to be addressed by the CGIAR, priorities that would enhance work done by the NARS, development agencies, and other partners.
The term "ecoregional" was coined by TAC in reference to regionally defined agroecological zones. TAC proposed a conceptual dual-strategy to better balance international agricultural research to improve productivity in a sustainable manner, and for a "gradual transition in the organization of the global agricultural research system to meet the sustainability challenge" (The Ecological Approach to Research in the CGIAR. TAC Secretariat. 1993). TAC acknowledged the inherent appropriateness of "agroecological zones as an organising framework for research on the physical and biological aspects of the conservation and management of natural resources, including germplasm." TAC also acknowledged that the socio-economic parameters shaping research are partly differentiated also by national and regional boundaries.
These two domains led to a conceptual ecoregional approach aimed at a global research model containing "biological, physical and human dimensions of long term sustainability." This approach has three parts, which are quoted below (TAC, 1993).
· Applied and strategic research on the foundations of sustainable production systems in the ecoregion;· The improvement of productivity in the ecoregion by drawing in appropriate global research activities; and
· Strengthening of the co-operation with national partners and the development of transnational mechanisms of collaboration.
The global expansion of ILRI's mandate utilises existing ecoregional consortia for research and NARS capacity building activities, and to facilitate technology adaptation and transfer to rural households. Benchmark sites in different geographic regions are selected to be representative of the agroecosystems within them and corresponding broad recommendation domains. The Systemwide Livestock Programme, focusing on animal feed and natural resource management in crop-livestock systems, also works through ecoregional consortia.
The Institute is involved with five ecoregional consortia, which are convened by five Centres and various collaborators. These consortia are:
· African Highlands Initiative, convened by ICRAF, and focusing on integrated natural resource management.· Consortium for the Sustainable Development of the Andean Ecoregion (CONDESAN), convened by CIP, and focusing on sustainable production and natural resource management.
· Desert Margins Programme, convened by ICRISAT, and focusing on natural resource management in dry areas.
· Moist Savannah Consortium, convened by IITA, and focusing on sustainable production technologies.
· Tropileche, convened by CIAT, and focusing on improved forage utilisation, especially legumes, in smallholder systems with dual-purpose cattle lowland Latin America.
The ILRI Medium-term Plan, 1998-2000 indicates several activities that are ecoregional. In response to a TAC recommendation to increase livestock research investments "particularly in mixed farming systems", ILRI responded with a decision to expand "activity with ecoregional partners in Asia, LAC and WANA" by basing "individual scientists and multidisciplinary teams outside Africa....at least eight scientists in Asia, four in LAC and one in WANA." Research focuses on feeding constraints in crop-livestock systems, also incorporating systems and policy analyses. Research and testing is to be carried out with ecoregional partners, including "systems research across agroecological zones to facilitate transregional analysis and to broaden the recommendation domains." Regional crop-livestock research projects were assessed in section 7.3, systems analysis in section 7.4, and policy analysis in chapter 8.
The Panel found it cumbersome to ascertain the specific objectives for ecoregional research and the merit of ILRI's approach because "ecoregional" was undifferentiated from similar terms (e.g., agroecological, transregional), especially in the context of the ILRI mission. Therefore, the Panel considers it essential that the Institute differentially defines exactly what is meant by "ecoregional", and how this activity contributes "on the margin" to ongoing research that is addressing agroecological and transregional issues. Furthermore, specific objectives and outputs to be gained from research inquiry need to be mapped out The roles and knowledge contributions that are expected from outposted ILRI staff and from ecoregional partners should be clearly identified. As pointed out in Chapter 7, ILRI has valuable opportunities for intensifying transregional-cum-global research in market-oriented crop-livestock systems (section 7.3.3), which does not necessitate large staff outpostings. The Institute needs to rethink the benefits to be expected and the modus operandi for an ecoregional or transregional dimension in its programmes.
FAO works closely with ILRI scientists in the field of animal health, namely tsetse and trypanosomosis, tick and tickborne disease, quantitative epidemiology, and genetic resistance. The Programme Against African Trypanosomosis (PAAT), initiated by FAO, WHO, IAEA, and OAU involves scientists from ILRI in a research advisory role. ILRI is presently collaborating with FAO in a feasibility study in applying the new ILRI-developed skills in epidemiology and GIS-based surveillance in the Southern Rift Valley of Ethiopia and in setting up Internet-based livestock research information facilities.
Collaboration with ARIs takes two forms. In some cases, ILRI contracts with, and provides resources to, advanced institutions, in both developed and developing countries, to carry out specific aspects of research projects for which the Institute lacks expertise. ILRI
Board and Management have determined that this is the most cost-effective way to assemble the skills needed in some areas of research. The process is referred to as "outsourcing," through which ILRI invested US$ 539K. in 1998. In other cases, ILRI collaborates on mutually agreed projects that coincide with the research agendas of both institutions and for which each side brings its own resources.
ILRI currently has 13 visiting scientists on site, nine in Biosciences and four in Sustainable Production Systems. They range from senior scientists to post-doctoral fellows; most come from developed countries.
The initial point of contact is at the level of Project Co-ordinators, usually by an approach from an external scientist wanting to undertake research at ILRI. The PC then decides whether the proposed work fits with the priorities of the project and whether there are sufficient funds in the budget to provide the necessary support. The latter is handled on a case-by-case basis; it usually involves provision of housing but could include a salary component. In general, no bench fees are charged. There are a number of International schemes that specifically support visiting scientists. The PC would then seek approval from the Programme Director for the appointment of the visiting scientist. Most remain at ILRI for from one to two years, but two of those currently here have been with the Institute for eight and eighteen years, respectively.
ILRI's public awareness programme, a charge of the External Relations Office, targets, in the following order, donors; scientific and development decision-makers, including NARS; the media; and the general public.
It aims to create an awareness of the importance of the Institute's research, build a constituency for livestock research, and, ultimately, promote an increase in funding that will support it. Staff produce brochures (including a series highlighting ILRI's work as supported by specific donors), research briefs, posters, and videos, etc. Particular use is made of the Internet as a cost-effective delivery vehicle.
In view of the fact that ILRI has a multiplicity of partners of varying interests and capacities, the Panel has recommended in Chapter 5 that their co-ordination be a charge of the International Co-operation Programme. This does not suggest that IC would make the initial contact in all cases, nor be the principal manager of the relationship. It would be important, however, that there be a central point at the Institute where information would be readily available about each partner and each of the current areas of collaboration. Further, such a central point could become a point of co-ordination with respect to MOUs, MOAs, and other forms of contractual arrangements.
The main concern for national organizations is how to improve the effectiveness of research collaboration with ILRI. There is some sense that insufficient resources are allocated to collaborative projects, but also that resource and efforts invested by partners are marginal and under-valued by the Institute. There is, however, general acknowledgement of ILRI's importance and leadership in basic and strategic production systems and animal health. This acknowledgement covers the scientists, the support staff, the facilities, and the training and capacity strengthening capabilities. The Panel's survey question with respect to new areas for collaboration raised considerable interest and elicited a number of suggestions in which partners would welcome joint activities.
