August 3, 1993
Dear Mr. Rajagopalan,
We are pleased to submit to you for the consideration of the CGIAR the report of the Third External Review of the International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA). The review was conducted in April-May 1993 by a Panel chaired by Dr. Jock Anderson. The Panel's report and ICARDA's interim response were discussed by TAC at its 61st meeting in June 1993. TAC's Commentary on the review report, prepared with input from the CGIAR Secretariat, follows this letter. It is followed by ICARDA's response, and the Panel's report.
The review report is a positive one overall. It judges the mandate, mission and goals of ICARDA to be relevant, the Center's strategic plan appropriate to the WANA region, its research programs of high standard and management systems generally effective. As in all reviews, the Panel identifies a number of areas where improvements can be made. The Center has expressed its general agreement with the report, and the Board plans to devote due attention to the many issues and suggestions raised by the review.
In addition to its assessment of ICARDA, the Panel devoted a chapter of the report to the CGIAR's review processes. The Panel's experience here is most valuable to TAC and the CGIAR Secretariat, particularly as the process used in this review represented a departure from the norm -the review was conducted by a relatively small Panel and had a somewhat abbreviated main phase. TAC and the CGIAR Secretariat will give careful consideration to the lessons learned and issues raised by the Panel as we refine review processes and plan future reviews.
We also wish to draw your attention to the discussion in the report concerning the devolution of faba bean research from ICARDA to the NARSs (Box 2.3 in the report). As you are aware, a central precept upon which the CGIAR was founded is that as national research capabilities strengthen, research responsibilities should be devolved from the international to national institutions. Today, in a time of declining budgets and shifting research priorities, centers and the System as a whole will be under increased pressure to consider devolution of responsibilities to NARSs. As the ICARDA experience shows, successful devolution is dependent on a host of factors and these may change over time. Centers and the System thus clearly need to pay critical attention to the factors that condition success, before such decisions are made, or we may jeopardize research activities and the long-run benefits of our investments.
The Panel's report raises a number of other issues of System-level importance. In addition to those commented on above, others deserving further consideration include:
· the role of the CGIAR in Eastern Europe and Central Asia (Box 3.1),· the role of CGIAR centers in nationally important but neglected areas of research (section 3.3.1.2),
· the evolving nature of relations among centers with overlapping mandates, particularly in a time of declining budgets (section 3.3.3.4),
· the appropriate model for an international center as an ecoregional entity (Box 2.1), and
· the development by centers of strategies to meet declining budgets (section 4.5.1.1).
Our list is not exhaustive, but is merely intended to highlight important issues identified in relation to ICARDA that should generate thought and discussion at the System's level.
In closing, we are pleased by the outcome of this review. ICARDA has an important but difficult mission to fulfil. So far, its efforts have yielded successful results, and the Center is well regarded in its region. We recommend continued support to ICARDA by the CGIAR.
Sincerely yours,
Alex McCalla
Chair, TACAlexander von der Osten
Executive Secretary, CGIAR
