During the period under review, ISNAR's activities and outputs expanded substantially compared to the preceding period, and its contributions towards the mission of strengthening NARS have, on the whole, been positive. Service has remained ISNAR's major thrust and its supportive activities in terms of publications, training, and information have reinforced this. The internal tensions generated by the divergent pulls and uncertainties of donor funding and disparate client demands, and their negative impact on the institution's focus and internal priority setting, have lessened somewhat over the period under review. The External Program and Management Review (EPMR) Panel is unanimous in its assessment that ISNAR's mission continues to be relevant today.
The Panel is of the view, however, that important directional changes are required in ISNAR. These changes are necessary both because the operating environment of ISNAR has changed significantly in recent years and because of the need to anticipate and respond to the evolving needs of NARS in a changed context. Among the major external environmental changes that deserve to be noted are the broadening of NARS to include new players, the changing role of NAROs in the new setting, the fluidity and shifts in the rules of the game concerning the generation and acquisition of new technologies, the decline in real resources available for agricultural research both globally and in specific countries, and the emergence of competition in the field in which ISNAR operates. The implications of these factors for NARS' needs are several. For some of the services that are less research based or that are repetitive, NARS may increasingly turn to other service providers who could potentially be more cost effective as well. The resource constraints on ISNAR imply that a centralized approach to service delivery in different parts of the world could become an increasingly unsustainable option, and one that might make only a limited impact. Clearly, there is a need for ISNAR to reposition itself to be relevant and effective in a changing and complex environment.
All these are reasons why ISNAR needs to carefully review and define the niche it should carve out for itself in the years to come. This is necessary both as a guide to its future planning and to improve the understanding of its role by its clients and the donor community. In the Panel's view, ISNAR should develop a distinctive competence to lead (1) in the production, acquisition, and delivery of knowledge and information about the policy, institutional environment, and management of NARS, and (2) in the provision of services based on this knowledge to improve the policies and management of the organizations, partnerships, and linkages of NARS in the poorest countries. In this way, ISNAR can create a niche for itself, provided that in the performance of these tasks, it makes greater use of strategic alliances both to leverage its influence and to facilitate local capacity building. This is a direction towards which ISNAR ought to move. It may, however, necessitate the scaling down or elimination of some activities, and even functions, presently being performed by ISNAR.
In specific terms, the implications of the niche proposed above and the external environmental changes summarized at the outset for ISNAR are several. First, ISNAR should move more towards the research-based end of the service spectrum, gradually leaving the less research-based part to competitors and other service providers. Underlying this recommendation is the recognition of the need to more fully exploit the comparative advantage of ISNAR as a provider of public goods that others cannot easily produce. It is also a response to the increasing competition by others to deliver the less research-based and more repetitive services to NARS.
Second, ISNAR should increasingly pay attention to the building and strengthening of institutional capabilities, both within and outside NARS, in countries and regions so that the functions/services being provided by it from a distance could be performed by appropriate organizations/groups in closer proximity to NARS. This would imply a shift in focus from training as the primary means of human resource development towards one of enhancing the competence of other organizations that could supply services to NARS. Institutional strengthening of this nature would entail collaborative arrangements with other partners. The eventual outcome of this effort will be the emergence of a new set of institutions located in at least a few countries/regions, including some within NARS, that will directly engage in the kind of research and services for NARS that ISNAR is providing today. The creation of such "intermediate" organizations located closer to NARS is the only way to strengthen NARS on a global basis. Long-term capacity building of this kind has to be done selectively and a good understanding of country and regional contexts will be a prerequisite for work in this area. Obviously, direct service delivery will have to be continued in countries/regions that are not ready for such initiatives. ISNAR is exploring this approach, but does not as yet have any significant experience in this area.
Third, the Panel recommends that ISNAR reformulate its strategy in light of the changes in its environment and its assessment of the emerging challenges, review the activities/functions it needs to divest in order to address the new challenges and tasks it plans to undertake, and specify the changes in the mix of skills it will attempt to put in place in support of its strategy. This strategy should provide guideposts for the future, while maintaining the needed flexibility to evolve over time in response to new external changes that are difficult to anticipate at this time.
The Panel also reviewed the management of the center and its programs in detail. On the management side, it found the basic structures, systems, and practices to be adequate for the efficient conduct of ISNAR's operations. The Panel found the program outputs to be substantial, but has pointed out gaps and areas for improvement. Specific recommendations and suggestions for action have been made for both management and programs.
