IITA has made remarkable changes over the past five years. The Review Panel has found the Centre noticeably stronger both scientifically and managerially than it was at the time of the 1990 External Review. We believe IITA is now well positioned to catalyze further agricultural research in sub-Saharan Africa in its mandated responsibility. The Panel summarizes, hereunder, its main findings and recommendations which confirm IITA's performance and achievements and which could help to chart the Centre's strategic role in the region's future development.
Recent Evolution
The last External Review was conducted when the Centre was just in the second year of its 1989-93 Medium-Term Plan. In many respects the Institute was still in transition - it was the Centre's first MTP after it had formulated its 1989-2000 Strategic Plan. As can be seen in this Report, the Panel considers that, taken together, the recommendations of the last External Review were far-reaching, particularly since they further encouraged IITA's continuing efforts towards a leaner operating structure, greater organizational cohesiveness and further decentralization.
We have been impressed by the dedication and energy with which the Board, management and staff of IITA have responded to the recommendations of the last External Review. Although the results of some of the changes have not yet been fully realized, the Panel notes the considerable progress achieved. The Panel considers that IITA has benefitted significantly from these changes, which have been "incrementally" introduced.
Programmes
IITA currently has three research divisions: the Crop Improvement Division (CID), the Plant Health Management Division (PHMD) and the Resource and Crop Management Division (RCMD). For some of the mandate crops handled by CID, emphasis is shifting from the Humid Forest to the Moist Savanna Zone, notably in the case of cassava, maize and yam, because the crops are in reality moving in that direction and the potential for maize production, in particular, is greater in the moist savanna. The Panel is generally supportive of this shift in focus. However, the Panel believes that the scale of CID activity in the Humid Forest Zone is less than optimal, particularly in relation to cassava in Central Africa. The situation needs to be reviewed to see how this effort may be increased. The banana/plantain work is justifiably considered to be one of the conspicuous successes of IITA, displaying a good mix of innovative science and practical achievement. The Panel confidently expects that further advances will be made on the sound basis already established. Cowpea is pre-eminently a crop of the drier savanna, but some attention has been given to meeting the requirements listed in the MTP for the more humid cultivation zones. The Panel has drawn attention to its view that soybean is, at the present time, an under-researched crop at IITA.
The structural changes which have taken place in PHMD are viewed very positively by the Panel. There is now better communication among scientists sharing a common discipline and an improved awareness of the advantages of interdivisional collaboration. At the Divisional headquarters in Cotonou, Benin, the cohesion and team spirit are very encouraging. PHMD has also retained sufficient flexibility to cope with unpredictable but urgent pest problems as they have arisen. The Division has a good balance of disciplines, except for a deficiency in phytopathology. As a centre of excellence for the development of IPM strategies for Africa, IITA is well placed, through the work in PHMD, to respond to future threats from pests and diseases to the food supply of resource-poor farmers.
It is disappointing to record that the period of review was not a happy one for the broad sweep of IITA's work now contained within the RCMD. Because of the complex nature of this activity, the demonstration of a tangible and transferable product will always be more difficult. Problems of sustainability are addressed more evidently in this Division than in CID and PHMD, but the degree to which success can be attained is more constrained by political and macro-economic factors. In the recent past, the work of RCMD has clearly suffered from problems of leadership, high turnover of key staff and ensuing demoralization. Happily, the new leadership is instilling a spirit of teamwork and is formulating revised research programmes better suited to IITA's mandate.
The International Cooperation Division (ICD) is responsible for strengthening collaborative research and training activities between IITA and NARS. The Panel recognizes that the Institute's role in this area will remain important in the future and foresees a stronger institutional role for ICD both within IITA and with its external collaborators.
Governance and Management
IITA today is a significantly different institution - in many ways a reconstituted one - in terms of governance, structure, management style and research leadership.
The BoT is composed of well-qualified Trustees who are committed to the Institute and its mission. They have developed a sound structure of committees, and the goodwill, trust and mutual respect that currently exists between the BOT and management in IITA can be expected to provide a sound basis for working out any adjustments that may be needed in the future.
The Panel is impressed with the dynamic leadership and commitment shown by the Director General (DG). His informal and straightforward manner and approachability on research-related issues make him a popular research leader both with the BoT of IITA and with the scientists. The Panel saw considerable evidence of a culture of collegiality, of consultative processes and of bottom-up flows of ideas, fostered by the DG. IITA staff who met the Panel during the review process were appreciative of these changes and the DG deserves special recognition for the progress IITA has continued to make in implementing a difficult mandate in a complex institutional environment.
Most of the scientists at IITA are content with the new divisional groupings. There is much merit in grouping similar disciplines together, provided an effective "matrix" ensures interdisciplinary collaboration and an agroecological focus. At present, such collaboration at IITA is patchy and is not assisted by the geographical separation of the heads of the three Divisions. For this reason, the informal working groups which have been established in a "bottom-up" manner are to be commended, that for Striga research being particularly noteworthy. The evolution of a system which fosters interdisciplinary research within the Centre is probably the greatest challenge in scientific management facing IITA over the next five years.
We have found IITA to be committed to the planned introduction of a project-based research management system. While we have recommended several measures for improving the recent initiatives, we have no reservations about the general thrust of the changes that have taken place or are planned in research management.
Despite the funding cuts over the past few years, IITA has further decentralized its operations and has made considerable progress in establishing stations in the Cameroon, Côte d'Ivoire and Uganda. Whereas the Centre has invested substantial effort in implementing its decentralization policy, the Panel believes that it must also strengthen its capacity in human resources management to meet the needs of its remarkably heterogeneous staff communities in different countries, particularly if it is to attract and retain quality international and national staff and realize their full potential. The Panel has made several proposals in this regard in order to improve further the Institutes' participatory culture and to ease the stress that can emanate from working and living within IITA's "artificial" campus environments.
Quality and Achievements
IITA has an extremely broad remit for much of its work and has to cope with the immense practical problems of deficient agricultural production in the region. The quality of scientific work at IITA is uneven, as might be expected in a wide-ranging research programme, but is mostly sound. Some activities, e.g. banana/plantain improvement, Striga research, and IPM strategies, are breaking new scientific ground and making a very practical contribution. The Panel concludes that, in general, IITA 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.
Historically, IITA has achieved its most conspicuous successes in two principal areas: biological control of major insect pests and genetic improvement of key crops in its mandate. These have resulted in the distribution throughout the region of planting material with better disease and pest resistance, improved yield potential with greater stability of performance over diverse environments, and better quality of products for the end user.
The Panel is pleased to note the considerable and significant research contributions made by IITA since the last external review, and the demonstrated impact that IITA has had in some areas of its mandated responsibility. We note in particular IITA's recent success in banana research for which it received the King Baudouin Award in 1994. The Panel is also pleased to note that IITA is very well regarded by the research community in Africa, especially with regard to its germplasm collections, its plant health management activities, and its leadership role in the emerging ecoregional initiatives.
Future of IITA
The Panel has concluded that IITA's relevance to agricultural development in Africa remains as valid today as it was when it was created in 1967. The Institute has a strategic, critical role in international agricultural research for its mandated crops and agroecological regions. IITA's research agenda reflects a balance between activities aiming at immediate and medium-term productivity gains, including postharvest research, and long-term sustainability of the agricultural resource base used for production. The Centre is aware that although it can play an important role in addressing issues of food security and sustainability, it is not the only actor. To be fully effective and to maximize its multiplier effect, it is critically important that IITA continues to strengthen its collaboration and strategic partnerships with NARS, and increasingly with NGOs and the emerging private sector, as well as with other IARCs and advanced research institutions. This is particularly important given IITA's primary focus on the small family farm which is so dominant in sub-Saharan Africa, and is necessary for addressing the twin issues of sustainable production and equity simultaneously.
IITA is likely to continue to operate in an environment where the general economic development prospects in the immediate and longer-term future are not very encouraging. This means that the non-agricultural sector would continue to be unable to provide gainful employment for the rapidly rising population. Thus, in the meantime, the onus will be on the agricultural sector to be one of the main contributors to economic growth, while national economies diversify and regional markets grow. In the coming years, as agriculture in the region begins to change, from the present "rough and ready" subsistence operation, towards more market-driven enterprise, IITA will face increasingly multifaceted challenges and opportunities arising from a mix of production expansion and intensification and related socioeconomic environments. The Panel considers the Centre to be well positioned to address, in collaboration with NARS and others, the future needs for improved technologies and knowledge to sustain the inevitable developmental change envisaged in agriculture and the rural space.
The CGIAR investment in IITA constitutes a unique asset for the peoples of sub-Saharan Africa. Given IITA's track record of scientific achievements and its unique position in the international agricultural research community, the Panel believes that IITA will continue to play a critical, strategic role in addressing the growing challenge of food security and sustainability as land-use expansion and intensification accelerates. IITA's "heyday" lies in the future and we believe that the Institute does not intend to be complacent as it moves forward into the next century - a century which will see Africa's population increase some fivefold before reaching a stable "plateau". Continued support for IITA's work would therefore be a wise policy for all those interested in the Institute's mandate areas and future achievements and impact.
LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Grain Legume Improvement Programme (Section 2.1.1.)
1. The Panel recommends that a rigorous review of all aspects of work on cowpea improvement at IITA be undertaken in 1998, with the participation of an external assessor(s), to determine whether the current lines of work will then have shown sufficient progress to justify their continuation.
2. The Panel recommends that IITA increase its effort on producing improved soybean germplasm for the moist savanna and mid-altitude areas of sub-Saharan Africa, either by redeployment of existing resource or by seeking additional resource.
Root and Tuber Improvement Programme (Sections 2.1.2.)
3. The Panel recommends that IITA review the scale of its activity in cassava improvement in the Humid Forest Zone, particularly with respect to Central Africa and formulate a proposal to enhance the uptake of its technology by the national programmes for cassava improvement in this region.
4. The Panel recommends that IITA maintain its work on yam improvement at the current level while seeking every opportunity to devolve more of the applied work progressively to the NARS, possibly by subcontracting.
Maize Improvement Programme (Section 2.1.4.)
5. The Panel recommends that IITA, in its continuing reorganization of the Maize Improvement Programme, seek ways of devolving more of its work on genetic improvement of maize to NARS in the region.
Biological Control Programme (Section 2.2.2.)
6. The Panel recommends that IITA secure the continuity of staffing of the Biosystematic Unit by maintaining its core funding.
Host Plant Resistance and Habitat Management Programmes (Section 2.2.3.)
7. The Panel recommends that appropriate measures be taken to ensure that the data on characterisation of the pest and patho-agroecosystems are kept in a form that is readily accessible to future generations of scientists.
8. The Panel recommends that IITA increase its strength in phytopathology at Ibadan.
Resource and Crop Management Research (Section 2.3.)
9. The Panel recommends that IITA emphasize the establishment of strategic institutional research alliances (such as consortia) to address adequately the complexity of sustainable resource management research.
10. The Panel recommends that the Resource and Crop Management Division core efforts be concentrated on the comprehensive attention to one benchmark area each for the Moist Savanna and Humid Forest Programmes.
11. The Panel recommends that the Resource and Crop Management Division apply rigorous priority setting to its research portfolio in order to concentrate efforts on research areas of highest possible impact.
12. The Panel recommends that Resource and Crop Management Division put greater emphasis on on-farm research in its programme.
Support Services (Section 2.5.)
13. The Panel recommends that IITA conclude an agreement with CIMMYT to ensure that the collection and conservation of African maize germplasm is undertaken.
14. The Panel recommends that IITA strengthen the capacity and increase the authority of the Seed Health Unit in matters relating to the movement of germplasm by the Centre.
International Cooperation (Sections 3.2. and 3.4.)
15. The Panel recommends that IITA review its policies and strategies relating to networks to ensure that these are adequately integrated with, and receive support from, the Centre's research and training programmes.
16. The Panel recommends that the International Cooperation Division undertake a review of its priorities, strategies and activities, in order to respond effectively to the emerging opportunities for increased partnership with NARS and other collaborators.
Management of the Board (Section 4.1.4.)
17. The Panel recommends that IITA Board develop and implement a more systematic and structured process for evaluating the Director General's performance and use the results for making future BoT decisions on Director General contract terms and conditions.
Research Policy and Programme Oversight (Section 4.1.6.)
18. The Panel recommends that the Programme Committee utilize more proactive and participatory methods in determining research strategies and review policies, including those for internally managed external reviews, to enable the BoT to provide effective oversight of the scope and quality of the research programmes of IITA.
Management Policy and Operations Oversight (Section 4.1.7.)
19. The Panel recommends that the Terms of Reference of the Audit Committee (AC) include oversight responsibility for management systems, personnel policies and administrative procedures. The AC should also provide guidance for undertaking internally managed external reviews in these areas as appropriate.
Structure of Scientific Leadership (Section 4.2.4.)
20. The Panel recommends that the Director General re-examine with the IITA Board, the appointment of a Deputy Director General (Research) to ensure that top research leadership can be provided in a continuous and sustained manner without distorting relationships in management structure.
Structure of International Cooperation (Section 4.2.5.)
21. The Panel recommends that the head of international cooperation should continue to be appointed at the Deputy Director General level and have additional responsibilities including information services.
Research Management (Section 4.3.)
22. The Panel recommends that IITA develop an integrated project-based planning, resource allocation and implementation system in the next few years and pilot test it in selected areas before extending its coverage to the entire research programme and to research-related activities.
23. The Panel recommends that IITA further develop its priority-setting methodology and processes for routine screening of new projects, including ex-ante impact assessment, irrespective of their funding source. It should also ensure compatibility with the formal strategic planning process of IITA.
24. The Panel recommends that IITA establish a formal and transparent system for ensuring that NARS are routinely consulted in planning the Centre's annual research programme and research-related activities.
Management of Human Resources (Section 5.1.)
25. The Panel recommends that IITA take steps to improve the uniformity, transparency and due process of the current Performance Evaluation System.
26. The Panel recommends that the IITA rescind the "11 year rule", limiting the tenure of scientists at IITA, and delete it from the personnel policies applicable to internationally recruited staff.
27. The Panel recommends that the Personnel Policies and Procedures Manual for Internationally Recruited Staff include the Institute's Salary Structure for all classes of internationally recruited posts including the pay ranges, incremental steps and criteria for the placement of staff at each level.
28. The Panel recommends that IITA prepare comprehensive and updated Personnel Policy and Procedures Manuals for nationally recruited staff at all field stations.
29. The Panel recommends that IITA appoint a professionally qualified, internationally- recruited specialist in human resource management as Head of Human Resources, reporting to the Deputy Director General (Management).
Integrated Planning and Budgeting (Section 5.2.4.)
30. The Panel recommends that IITA develop an integrated programme/project planning, budgeting and financial reporting system to support the transition to project-based research management.
Information Services (Section 5.3.1.)
31. The Panel recommends that a Publications Policy for IITA be established, and that an Advisory Committee monitor its implementation.
32. The Panel recommends that a comprehensive review of Information Services be conducted as soon as possible.
Socioeconomics (Section 7.1.)
33. The Panel recommends that IITA maintain an effective capacity in social science research and recruit to fill the positions approved in the Medium-Term Plan as soon as possible.
Impact Assessment (Section 7.2.)
34. The Panel recommends that IITA decide on the appropriate approach to impact assessment and identify specific areas/topics on which work should initially be concentrated.
Gender (Section 7.3.)
35. The Panel recommends that IITA appoint a short-term consultant for gender issues on a periodic basis to help sensitize/train/advise IITA research scientists in gender-related methodologies in order that gender concern is institutionalized.
