The EPMR Panel summarizes, below, its main findings and recommendations. These highlight ICRISAT's scientific performance, achievements and shortfalls during the period under review, and offer a new vision and strategic direction for ICRISAT. The Panel has also made a number of important suggestions which must be considered in conjunction with the recommendations.
Recent Evolution
Several important changes have occurred at ICRISAT during the review period. These include: (a) the development and implementation of an analytical and quantitative approach to priority setting; (b) the formulation of a transparent and structured 1994-98 Medium-Term Plan; (c) the restructuring of ICRISAT into a corporate organization with global programmes; (d) the introduction of a matrix research organization; and (e) introduction of a project-based approach to planning and executing research and related activities.
The Panel applauds ICRISAT's senior management, particularly the DG, for their commitment to the Institute's objectives, and their unstinting efforts in implementing a difficult mandate. However, each change noted above, coming one after another, has added its share of complexity to the task of managing the Institute, and ultimately has resulted in turning ICRISAT into an organization impeded by the very structural adjustments and planning mechanisms that were intended to improve the Institute's organizational cohesiveness and management efficiency.
After nearly a quarter century of dedicated service, in the Panel's view, ICRISAT is at a crossroads, facing institutional challenges and scientific opportunities that can be addressed effectively provided the Institute undergoes a fundamental transformation. In some respects, this conclusion is somewhat surprising because ICRISAT has instituted a number of major changes over the past five years, each requiring a mammoth effort from management and scientific staff and involving exhausting rounds of analysis. Some would argue that the Institute's desire for change has been overdone, and ICRISAT has almost reached a state of 'paralysis by analysis'. The Panel is of the opinion that the changes undergone were well intended; but the basic questions regarding ICRISAT's future role and institutional strategy still remain.
The Panel considers that a basic problem is that ICRISAT's mandate is broad, complex, and in a way, formidable to implement effectively and efficiently. The last External Review recommended that the Board agree on a clearly-formulated operational mandate, commensurate with its comparative advantage and the resources likely to be available. ICRISAT's response to this recommendation was that its 1994-98 MTP was intended to define the operational mandate for ICRISAT for that period. In the Panel's view, the quantitative approach to priority setting in preparing the MTP does not adequately substitute for a clearly formulated operational mandate that could underpin ICRISAT's role in global research for the SAT and guide its longer-term institutional strategy.
At the time of the last External Review, ICRISAT's programmes were made up of 280 projects. In 1995, these were reduced to 22 global projects, and will be reduced further to 12 in 1997. The research projects are based on the 92 core research themes embedded in the ICRISAT 1994-98 MTP. The 22 projects are made up of 15 commodity projects on 5 mandated crops, 4 integrated systems projects that focus on multi-commodity systems, 2 projects on markets and policy and impact assessment, and a genetic resources project. ICRISAT's relative resource allocation by activity category has remained unchanged during the review period. ICRISAT allocates 52% of its resources to increasing productivity; 19% to protecting the environment; 8% to saving biodiversity; 7% to improving policies; and 14% to strengthening NARS. Regional resource allocation is 56% to Asia and 44% to Africa.
Accomplishments
The Panel applauds the impressive scientific and technical research accomplishments of ICRISAT during the review period, and the demonstrated impact ICRISAT has had in some areas of its mandated responsibility. The Panel notes in particular the King Baudouin Award received by ICRISAT this year for its achievements with pearl millet research. Historically ICRISAT has a long list of accomplishments to its credit, and has achieved its most enduring and conspicuous successes in three principal areas: germplasm conservation and enhancement; crop improvement; and natural resources management. However, the Panel believes that ICRISAT has not communicated very well its many accomplishments to various stakeholders.
The Panel considers ICRISAT's greatest success is its role as trustee and custodian for more than 110,000 samples of germplasm for 5 mandated crops and the minor millets. The collections represent 20 percent of all the germplasm held by 11 CGIAR Centres. An important contribution has been the wide-crossing programme in groundnut in which genetic traits from a number of wild relatives have been incorporated into the genepool of the cultivated groundnut. Wide crossing in pigeonpea, chickpea, pearl millet and sorghum, for example, has been accomplished using materials identified from the genebank as having desirable traits for the cultivated forms of the crops.
Numerous sources of resistance to diseases and other pests have been found in the collections, notably leaf spot and rosette virus in groundnut, downy mildew and ergot in pearl millet, and genes have been found for short duration pigeonpea as well as cytoplasmic male sterility in pigeonpea which allows the production of hybrids in this formerly traditional crop.
The Panel concludes that ICRISAT's crop improvement efforts have been a success. Releases of ICRISAT-derived material cultivated worldwide rose from 166 in 1992 to more than 365 in 1996, an increase of about 120% in just four years. These include significant achievements such as downy mildew and ergot resistance in pearl millet, leaf spot and rosette virus resistance in groundnut, short duration and wilt resistant pigeonpea and chickpea, and sorghum cultivars with some tolerance to grain mold and Striga.
Evidence is mounting that these crops are now benefiting farmers in large areas of the SAT. In many ways, ICRISAT research has, in fact, succeeded in creating what are essentially 'new crops' and 'new ecotypes' for the improvement of the varied production systems of the SAT. For these achievements, ICRISAT and its partner NARS fully deserve the Panel's commendation.
Accomplishments can also be cited for ICRISAT's work in natural resources management research. These include the sound agroclimatic characterization work in West Africa, the demonstrated suitability of different rock phosphate sources available in the Sahel for direct application, crop and systems modelling, and the adoption of the modified broadbeds and furrows technology for management of Vertisols.
Staffing in the socioeconomics area has expanded in the review period as a result of concerns expressed in the last EPMR, and the needs identified in the 1994-98 MTP. Economists have contributed to four main areas of research: markets and policy, impact assessment, natural resources management and sustainability, and germplasm development. The first two areas constitute projects headed by economists, and both have been very productive. Data relating to world trends in pearl millet and sorghum have been assembled and analyzed and are in the process of being published in collaboration with FAO. In addition, useful work has been implemented with reference to product and input markets relating to the ICRISAT mandate crops. Major efforts have been devoted to adoption/impact studies which have demonstrated promising adoption levels of a number of improved cultivars with which ICRISAT has been associated. With reference to gender issues, some progress has been made but much more needs to be done.
ICRISAT has an extremely broad mandate and has to cope with a large number of crops and production systems in variable biophysical, socioeconomic and institutional environments. Consequently, the Institute must relate to a large array of partners, stakeholders and clients across the three regions covered by its mandate. Although quality of scientific work at ICRISAT is uneven, as might be expected in a wide-ranging research programme, it is mostly sound; and the Panel concludes that, in general, ICRISAT is well served by its research scientists and their support units, who are committed to make an impact, and it commends them for their dedication.
The Panel was also pleased to note that ICRISAT is very well regarded by the research community in the three regions, especially with regards to its germplasm collections and improvement work, some of its natural resources management work, training and partnership. However, the Panel concluded that in the case of India, there is room for ICRISAT to move away from some of the applied and adaptive work in the areas of crop improvement and production systems which can be carried out by national programmes in India.
Institutional Strategy and Research Agenda
ICRISAT's institutional strategy is defined in the Strategic Plan of 1990. The Plan was in a draft form at the time of the last External Review, and when the 1990 EPMR noted that ICRISAT's formal mandate was very comprehensive, and it recommended that ICRISAT's Board should formulate a clear operational mandate to allow the Institute to exercise restraint in research and focus on activities where it had comparative advantage. The Panel concludes that there is now a strong and urgent need for ICRISAT to rationalize its broad formal mandate by formulating an operational mandate that would clearly spell out the strategic elements and focus of work, consistent with the Institute's comparative advantage at global and regional levels. The Panel has considered this to be the ultimate transcending issue with which the Panel has had to deal and comprises the core of this EPMR's recommendations.
ICRISAT's 1994-98 MTP was formulated in the light of Systemwide issues affecting the CGIAR. ICRISAT's agreed agenda is implemented through 22 global projects, 108 sub-projects and some 1,200 activities, and targets 29 production systems in the three regions. The MTP is a compilation of 92 prioritized research themes designed to address the major biotic, abiotic, and socioeconomic constraints to sustainable growth in agricultural productivity in the SAT. Research has continued to emphasize the solution of priority constraints and the realization of new opportunities towards ICRISAT's goals of increasing efficiency, internationality, equity and environmental sustainability. These four criteria have been used to rank the 92 themes.
Priority research areas are: cereals improvement (sorghum and pearl millet); legume improvement (groundnut, pigeonpea, chickpea); genetic resources research; integrated pest management; production systems research: rainfed short-season; rainfed intermediate-season; rainfed low to intermediate-season; legumes in rotational cropping systems; socioeconomics research; evaluation and impact assessment. The Panel commends ICRISAT for developing and applying a quantitative and analytical approach to priority setting, and for creating a transparent and structured research agenda.
Governance and Management
As noted earlier, to implement the recommendations of the 1990 EPMR, ICRISAT management and Board have devoted considerable attention to institutional issues during the past five years. These efforts have focused on the introduction of project-based management, matrix organization, restructuring of corporate functions, and improvement in budgeting and reporting systems. Although the project-management system is now well institutionalized, the other three innovations are yet to take hold, as discussed below.
Based on qualifications of its individual members, ICRISAT's Board might rank among the stronger in the CGIAR System. But it faces some of the most difficult challenges in the CGIAR, calling for outstanding leadership and teamwork. The Panel found the Board's performance to be variable over the Review period; and has noted several areas of concern, such as: not being ready to face the reality of the current financial environment, and not helping management to develop a clear long-term institutional vision and funding strategy to deal with it; not providing close enough financial management oversight; being drawn into debating and making decisions on issues which should be management's prerogative and responsibility; and not adequately monitoring the implementation of some of the key recommendations of the 1990 External Review. The Panel has made several suggestions to enable the Board to take suitable corrective action.
ICRISAT is undoubtedly one of the most complex Centres to manage in the CGIAR System. This complexity is also compounded by its organizational structure, with a corporate office, 4 regional offices and a number of outstationed teams. In addition, ICRISAT has established a two dimensional matrix organization structure for managing its project-based research activities. Unfortunately, implementation of this organizational concept has been problematic, due largely to such deficiencies as: the high administrative burden; overlaps of responsibilities; excessive fragmentation of projects and activities; insufficient level of mutual support between the corporate office and regional offices; and interference of the corporate office in regional matters. In view of these deficiencies, the Panel is pleased that the Board and management intend to simplify the current organizational arrangements, with a view to improving managerial accountability and decision-making. The Panel fully endorses this move and has made some suggestions in this regard.
The Panel found the morale of ICRISAT's staff, both IRS and NRS, to be very low, and some key senior managers and scientific staff have resigned. There is an urgent need to strengthen confidence in the leadership of the Institute. The next few years will require enlightened and decisive management of ICRISAT; and the Panel has recommended that the management and Board provide adequate leadership to the Centre by nurturing an institutional culture that encourages scientific and managerial excellence, and by ensuring the effective management of financial, human and other resources of the Institute. The Panel also believes that the Institute has many strengths to draw upon - notably a dedicated cadre of research leaders, scientists and staff with a demonstrated record of programmatic achievement; and is convinced that the next few years hold considerable promise for ICRISAT, provided the changes proposed in this Report are implemented effectively.
The Future ICRISAT
Overall, the Panel's report is strategic and forward-looking. The Panel has concluded that there is a vital continuing role for ICRISAT in the SAT. However, some rethinking of strategic direction and rationalization of programme thrust are required. In recognition of the poor financial and infrastructural status of many NARS, particularly in Africa, the strength of agricultural research in India, and the likely continued shortfall in funding for ICRISAT through the CGIAR, the Panel concludes that ICRISAT should chart its future based on three groups of factors: (a) its strength and past successes, emphasizing specialization and concentrated effort in its area of comparative advantage; (b) complementary research relationships with NARS and regional research organizations; and (c) the fact that African and Asian SAT have differing research and partnership needs.
In the light of the above considerations, the Panel concluded that ICRISAT must be revitalized so as to become a 'magnet centre' to address the challenges and opportunities now faced. The Panel considered the merits of three options: Downsized Present Model; African Centre Only Model; and Strategic Partnership Model. Considering the present ICRISAT situation and future opportunities, the Panel recommends the Strategic Partnership Model which builds on current strengths and provides the best framework for reducing overall Centre problems. It also builds on the comparative advantage of a strategic research presence in Asia while at the same time addressing pressing research needs in the SAT of Africa.
The proposed model consists of the following three components:
· Strategic and global germplasm research at Patancheru serving all three continents, and complemented by applied crop improvement research in Africa.· Integrated natural resources management (INRM) research concentrated primarily in Africa, complemented by a small INRM strategic research team at Patancheru also linked to the global germplasm research.
· Research partnerships and networks implemented via ecoregional approaches, and visiting scientists to help improve the momentum and impact of the first two components.
Strategic germplasm research at Patancheru would take responsibility for global genetic enhancement of ICRISAT mandate crops by building on the Institute's most important and valuable asset - its global germplasm collections - to evaluate and 'mine' the germplasm holdings to find and make available in usable form, the genetic traits needed by NARS. The research would use new developments in science along with conventional means to advance this work.
The Panel believes the new ICRISAT should continue its work in natural resources management research in the SAT with most of its team stationed in Africa. The range of activities would extend along the full continuum of strategic/applied/adaptive research, in collaboration with NARS. ICRISAT would engage primarily in strategic research targeted to fill knowledge gaps and build linkages within the integrated natural resources research framework.
Such a research strategy would allow ICRISAT to establish a new paradigm in strategic germplasm research as well as in integrated natural resources management research, and to become a centre of excellence through superior creativity and innovation, and research partnership. It would be a unified Centre, held together by an operational mandate that emphasises a global/strategic comparative advantage in both germplasm and NRM research, and relies on a strong presence in both programme and administration in Africa and Asia. In this context, the heads of research in Africa and Asia would be functionally equivalent; and in the Panel's view, this structural differentiation of ICRISAT is not incompatible with programmatic integration and coherence of the Institute as a whole. The new ICRISAT would be more focused and would avoid activities that divert it from its main purpose; purposeful and leaner in nature; and much simpler in structure, thus permitting more direct management.
Some parts of the germplasm strategic research effort are ongoing, and could be strengthened immediately; also, many of the scientific disciplines of the staff can be fitted into the new model. For the more complex integrated natural resources management area, careful planning is needed to set priorities in strategic research and on selection of field (benchmark) locations. Similar care needs to be taken with respect to partnership and networking to ensure that the most important research areas are selected for collaboration.
The model proposed carries with it a number of challenges which will require enlightened and decisive leadership, understanding of the staff, and support of donors. In its Report, the Panel has made many suggestions but only few recommendations. However, the recommendations are far-reaching in the important areas of programme strategy, priorities, research management and partnership. Assuming that these are endorsed by the Board and the CGIAR, the next task for ICRISAT is to examine in detail the logical implications of the recommendations for future funding, organization and staffing of various activities of the Institute, both in Africa and Asia. Until such detailed examination has been completed, it is advisable that the next draft of the 1998-2000 MTP be considered as preliminary, and subject to further revision in 997 by management. Board and TAC.
In view of the CGIAR community's interest in the continued success of the Institute, the Panel has recommended a Mid-Term External Review of ICRISAT be undertaken by the CGIAR in two years (i.e., completed by end 1998) to assess the progress made by ICRISAT in transforming itself into the 'new' strategic research and partnership-oriented centre of excellence. Further, since this mode of research - of combining strategic, applied and adaptive research on germplasm, commodities and natural resources management, on more than one continent (particularly Africa and Asia) - could be of value to other CGIAR Centres, the Panel has suggested that this Strategic Partnership Model be examined further during the System Review of the CGIAR planned for 1997-98.
LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS
CHAPTER 2 - COMMODITY IMPROVEMENT RESEARCH
1. The Panel endorses the pursuit of research on methodologies, such as participatory breeding, that could provide new and powerful tools and approaches toward germplasm evaluation and enhancement, and because of the potential power of molecular biology to address some of the more pressing limitations to crop production in the SAT, the Panel recommends that the present commodity improvement programmes of ICRISAT at Patancheru should evolve into a global germplasm strategic research effort with germplasm evaluation and enhancement components that would provide intermediate products to commodity improvement programmes operated by ICRISAT in Africa and to NARS in all continents in a partnership mode.
CHAPTER 3 - GENETIC RESOURCES
2. In view of ICRISAT's large international genebank holdings of its mandate crops, its world class research facilities at Patancheru and the need for greater emphasis on strategic research in germplasm of SAT crops, the Panel recommends that ICRISAT adopt a new paradigm in strategic germplasm research using all necessary disciplines and 'new science' to exploit more scientifically, systematically and fully the genetic endowment represented in the genebank.
CHAPTER 4 - NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
3. Because the Panel strongly supports the use of watersheds by ICRISAT as a basis for understanding production constraints, and notes the existence of seven on-station watershed experiments which occupy an area of 80 ha at Patancheru; and because the long-term data accumulating from these experiments are very valuable and already have been used in development and validation of biophysical production models; and considering that very few such watershed research facilities exist in the developing world and that their presence at Patancheru is unique in the SAT, the Panel recommends that ICRISAT give high priority to the maintenance of watershed facilities and studies at Patancheru, and in particular to the maintenance and analysis of the data which have accumulated over time from these experiments.4. In the light of: (a) the need to rationalize the balance and emphasis of natural resources management (NRM) research activities between Africa and Asia; (b) the complexity of NRM research; (c) the history and present state of NRM research of ICRISAT; (d) the need to adopt an Integrated NRM (INRM) research framework in Africa; (e) the need to give priority to strategic germplasm research at Patancheru while reducing commodity improvement and NRM work in India; and (f) the Panel's proposal to focus the bulk of the INRM work in Africa, the Panel recommends that the Institute should undertake a collaborative strategic planning exercise in INRM to formulate research priorities and operational strategies, particularly in fostering effective partnerships with NARS.
CHAPTER 6 - PARTNERSHIPS
5. Given the proposed shift to greater emphasis on strategic research within ICRISAT, thereby allowing the Centre to become a 'magnet centre' for research on major global problems (e.g., strategic research in germplasm and natural resources management); the complementary talents in NARS and ARIs of both developing and developed countries with those in ICRISAT; and the need to develop partnerships to exploit the strategic/applied/adaptive research continuum, the Panel applauds ICRISAT's visiting scientist programme and recommends that ICRISAT should broaden its partnerships and deepen the strength of its efforts along the strategic/applied/adaptive research continuum by continuing to develop even further its proactive visiting scientist programme, and placing greater emphasis on professional development for NARS, ARIs and ICRISAT staff.
CHAPTER 7 - GOVERNANCE
6. Because the Board must deal with declining resources requiring careful assessment of priorities; because of major impending changes in the ICRISAT management; and because of shortcomings in Board oversight since the last EPMR (which highlighted the same problem) the Panel recommends that the Board be diligent in its basic functions of providing financial and management oversight; setting vision, strategy and policy; and constituting its membership in a manner appropriate to the task.
CHAPTER 8 - ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
7. Because the Institute has focused so much in recent past on planning mechanisms and organizational structure, at the cost of effective research management and efficient decision-making, the Panel recommends that, in the coming years, management pay due attention to the following prerequisites of good research management: effective management information systems for adequate planning, budgeting and monitoring; heightened cost-consciousness; appropriate management skills; effective teamwork; and transparent performance appraisal and accountability systems at ICRISAT.8. Because, following the retirement of the current incumbent, recruitment for the DDG position is now underway, and several other senior managers are leaving the Institute within the next few months, the Panel is very concerned that the management not be further weakened during the upcoming transition period, and that a strong team of senior managers be constituted as soon as possible; and irrespective of the pressures to fill the position of DDG, and in view of the changes the Institute will have to face in the coming years in its move towards the 'new' ICRISAT, the Panel recommends that the selection of the new DDG be deferred until the new DG has joined and can participate fully in the recruitment process, and that a strong transition team of interim DDG and DG be put in place by the Board as soon as possible.
9. Because the next few years will require enlightened and decisive management of ICRISAT, and as the Institute gears itself for the proposed revitalization, the Panel recommends that the management and Board provide adequate leadership to the Centre by nurturing an institutional culture that encourages scientific and managerial excellence, and by ensuring the effective management of financial, human and other resources of the Institute.
CHAPTER 9 - THE FUTURE ICRISAT
10. The Panel is convinced that the next few years hold considerable promise for ICRISAT, provided the changes proposed in this Report are implemented effectively; and in view of the CGIAR community's interest in the continued success of the Institute, the Panel recommends that a Mid-Term Review of ICRISAT be undertaken by the CGIAR in two years (i.e., completed by end 1998) to assess the progress made by the Institute in transforming itself into a 'new' strategic research and partnership-oriented centre of excellence.
