Overview
Whatever the contemporary perspective taken -
· growing food deficits, and demands for self-reliance in the region,
· environmental degradation, and the pressing need for sustainable agricultural systems,
· ecoregionality, and the quest for enhanced relevance in agricultural research,
· capacity-building imperatives, and the Center's appraised contribution -
ICARDA makes a compelling case for its continued existence and the case will probably grow in strength for years to come.
It is one of those cases that, if ICARDA did not exist (as a result of earlier donor insight), it would have to be created. A new creation - a "clean slate" model - might look rather different from the current model with its major site in Syria. As it is, more comprehensive engagement by the Center into NARSs' programs may yet see significant shifts of international research resources into the various major agroecological niches of the region (Appendix 7).
As in so many things, the abiding issue is funding. ICARDA must broaden its donor support generally, but especially from some of the better-endowed (and not just oil-exporting) countries in the region, if it is to survive as the productive research establishment that it has become. The present "solid" state of both managerial and research staff is such as to make this a good time for donors to move forward with strengthened support.
Research Program
1. The research programs comprise the raison d'être for ICARDA's existence. They are staffed by capable and committed scientists who are continuing to raise the profile and impact of ICARDA in its mandated region. Through their efforts, ICARDA has made good progress in the achievement of its targets, particularly as the budget under which it is now operating is less than one-half of that anticipated in the MTP 1990-94.
2. In terms of impact, with respect to germplasm enhancement of wheat, one study to which the Panel had access has revealed an impressive benefit/cost outcome within the host country, with gross benefits amounting to some US$30 million of increased production in the 1990-91 season. Other analogous studies are in process but are not yet available. Increasing adaptation of durum wheat from the CIMMYT/ICARDA program oriented to lower rainfall areas is becoming evident. Along these lines, the current and proposed future emphasis in wheat and barley improvement on germplasm enhancement targeted for more specific adaptation is endorsed.
3. Since ICARDA has the global mandate for barley, it is disappointing that tangible evidence of impact, as measured by farmer adoption, rather than by the official release of varieties by NARSs, is deficient. However, the Panel has confidence that barley material released by the NARSs will make a strong impact in the next quinquennium.
4. Overall, the Panel found it difficult to assess with a desirable level of detail the impact of ICARDA in the WANA region generally, and strongly endorses the preparation of further well-documented studies of ICARDA's observable impacts. To achieve this, the maintenance of socioeconomic research at least at the current levels is strongly supported.
5. Achievements in the Highland Program have been disappointing until now, especially with respect to the commodity improvement programs. The Panel acknowledges the operational difficulties that have hitherto affected germplasm enhancement for the Highland Program and has concluded that, with respect to cereals, this work is now organized with better prospects of success. Given the importance of selection within the target environment, it is imperative that the planned bilateral program with Iran proceeds to implementation quickly in order to make the long-delayed internationally-oriented progress in this regard as early as possible.
6. The Panel considered ICARDA's response to the injunction from TAC and the 1988 EPR that resources should be shifted from food-legume to livestock research, and concluded that some progress had been made in this direction, although research directly on animals has not increased. A further reduction in food-legume research is not supported by the Panel, for several reasons elaborated on in the text, related not only to sustainability concerns but also to the fact that these crops provide a key source of protein for many low-income people in WANA.
7. ICARDA must yet address the problem of how to make a significant contribution to increasing livestock research within the framework of PFLP/FRMP, and within the wider framework of emerging strategies for international efforts in this field and the crystallizing ecoregional responsibilities. The Panel proposes that the Center undertake a more determined search for special-project funding to secure collaborative work with NARSs as a preferred solution. The Panel senses a philosophical aversion within the scientific leadership of ICARDA to undertaking more livestock work, as defined by the direct involvement of small ruminants. It believes that the clear formulation of a research strategy for livestock by ICARDA is overdue, as also it is for rangeland management.
8. The Panel considers the changed direction of forage legume breeding - towards presently largely unexploited yet nominally promising species - to be more appropriate than earlier work to the probable needs of the farming systems of the region. In order to rationalize this redirection to stakeholders, ICARDA should prepare a documented case for it, showing how it builds on past endeavors and opportunities.
9. The Panel has concluded that, within the commodity improvement programs in both legumes and cereals, there is good balance between applied research and more "downstream" activities. It recognizes the diverse capabilities of the NARSs and accepts that there will be a continuing requirement for research at the more applied end of the spectrum, including germplasm enhancement, for the foreseeable future.
10. The limited involvement of ICARDA in biotechnology, particularly with regard to realistic targets in DNA-marker technology, is endorsed. Efforts should continue to attain "critical mass" by special funding. Work on transgenic material is not considered advisable, at least until sound biosafety legislation is in place.
11. While recognizing that FRMP has been assigned an impossibly wide remit, the Panel is nevertheless concerned about the diffuseness of the research program. It believes that some concentration of objectives would be beneficial. In this regard, the Panel would wish to see the modest effort in socioeconomic analysis maintained and, as possible, increased, given the importance of policy and economic matters relative to technical aspects in many of the region's problems.
ICARDA's Role in the Region
12. ICARDA has an active outreach program, heavily based on Regional Coordinators, that involves a genuine dialogue with the NARSs on how ICARDA can usefully serve their needs. As a result of this and its other activities, ICARDA is highly regarded in much of the WANA region.
13. Some ICARDA outreach programs could be better focused, however, especially on ICARDA's established strengths - particularly in the Highland and West Asia Regional Programs. The Panel is concerned, for instance, that ICARDA is working in some areas and on some research issues (e.g., in the Highland Program) to which the respective national programs themselves are not strongly committed.
14. More generally, ICARDA's outreach work - much of which is funded through special projects - is diverse in nature and, while this may be the most appropriate stance for a region of this diversity, the Panel arrived at quite diverse opinions about the scope and style of the activities. Accordingly, the Panel urges ICARDA to establish explicit criteria to guide its participation in special projects.
15. The ICARDA social scientists have been active in outreach work but their collaborative activities are often made difficult because they lack counterpart practitioners in the NARS institutes. This is all the more reason, however, to demonstrate the contribution that social science can make in the NARSs, so that appropriate investments in public-sector human capital can be made in the region.
16. Training at ICARDA is well developed and plays a key role in supporting the Center's on-campus and outreach research programs. ICARDA offers a wide range of training programs to meet the evolving needs of its NARS partners. Unfortunately, recent financial cutbacks have forced cancellation of some training activities. ICARDA's information services are professionally run. The Center now has a clearly articulated publications policy with a high standard of production.
17. At a broader level of outreach activity, the Panel finds the various network approaches being implemented to be fruitful in increasing collaboration with NARS scientists and to be an effective institution-building thrust, that is well-regarded by NARS personnel. Enhanced NARS capability will be crucial to ICARDA devolving more activities and responsibilities. The Panel examined the process of ICARDA's devolution of faba bean research (in accordance with a 1986 TAC decision and 1988 EPR recommendation), and considers that the Center - and System - should draw lessons from the difficulties encountered, in order to help ensure a smoother process and the best likelihood of success in future cases. ICARDA's overall efforts in capacity-building and fostering positive relations with NARSs are vital and necessary but not in themselves sufficient steps for devolution and successful research partnerships in the future.
18. Overall, the extent of the outreach program is impressive in terms of program content and geographic spread. ICARDA has developed effective working relationships with several other IARCs. Within this network of collaboration, both with NARSs and IARCs, ICARDA is well situated to act as a leader for ecoregionally-based research programs within WANA.
Center Management
19. The 1988 EMR found serious management problems at ICARDA. In response, the CGIAR commissioned an Interim EMR to report on the Center's progress in dealing with the recommendations of the 1988 Review. The 1991 Interim Review reported on positive steps that had been taken at ICARDA to overcome the managerial weaknesses and gave a highly favorable report of the transformation it felt had occurred. The 1993 Panel recognizes that, since 1988, ICARDA has been transformed into an organization that is tightly managed with consistently applied and transparent policies and strong systems of accountability, which were previously lacking. The good intention to create rational systems has in some cases gone to running a "tight ship" so tightly, however, that there have been negative effects on staff morale and efficiency.
Governance
20. The BOT is comprised of well-qualified members who are dedicated to ICARDA and its mission. There is general agreement about the role of the Board, and relations with Management are quite positive. Looking forward, the priorities embodied in the 1994-98 MTP, coupled with increasing budgetary constraints, create new challenges for ICARDA. The roles and style of Board/Committee operations suitable in previous years may not be optimal in the future. Thus the Panel recommends that the Board re-evaluate its traditional roles and style of operations, particularly with regard to oversight of programmatic and management operations.
21. The Board has devoted considerable attention to how it conducts it business, and improvements are evident. Committees have been restructured, By-Laws revised and a Board Handbook developed. The Nominating Committee has expanded the range of competencies on the Board and the Audit Committee has assumed its role diligently. The Panel's recommendations focus on improving specific processes further, such as those involving the nomination of the BOT Chair and Vice-Chair, and those concerning the annual evaluation of the performance of the DG and oversight of the evaluation of other senior management personnel.
Leadership
22. The DG has effected major changes in the management of ICARDA. With the capable management team that is now in place, the Panel considers that the DG's focus should move more to fundraising during his remaining tenure, and to making the difficult strategic/policy decisions that will shape ICARDA's future. To do this most effectively, greater delegation and devolution of authority will be crucial. The Panel believes this can be done without compromising the financial control needed in this time of more severe funding constraints.
23. The DG is assisted by two Deputies, for Research (DDG-R) and Operations (DDG-O). The DDG-O was appointed to take charge of developing and introducing new management systems into ICARDA during the past few years. He has accomplished this and plans to leave ICARDA in 1993. The Panel commends his significant contribution to the Center. It believes that, given the systems in place and effective Directors of Finance and Administration, the Center's decision not to replace the DDG-O is a wise decision at this time.
Research Management
24. A consequence of centralized controls at ICARDA is that the DDG-R is obliged to authorize many Program-level decisions, which infringes on time he could be devoting to research leadership. The Panel believes that a greater degree of authority could be delegated to Program Leaders, without compromising necessary fiscal controls.
25. ICARDA recently completed (through a long participatory process) a MTP, which will serve as the basis for the Center's priorities for coming years. In recent years ICARDA has had less of a "Plan" to go by, as actual funding has fallen well below the projections of the 1990-94 MTP. The new MTP should complement ICARDA's planning and review processes that, in the Panel's view, could be strengthened and better linked. Project-based budgeting, currently under development at ICARDA, should be a useful component of a planning and review system and should offer a facilitating framework for greater devolution of authority.
26. In ICARDA's current research structure, four Programs, plus International Cooperation (IC) and research support activities report to the DDG-R. In 1988 IC was also led by a DDG; the current structure, which consolidates IC with Research, serves ICARDA well. ICARDA has considered numerous options for matrix organization, as recommended in 1988, and has retained its four-program structure. Cross-Program interaction, and communication in general at ICARDA, were considered problematic in 1988 and these have improved. Multi-disciplinary research now operates well, although cross-Program interaction - particularly between FRMP and the three "commodity" Programs - could be strengthened further.
27. The Panel analyzed pros and cons of different research structures for ICARDA, including the status quo. The structure it would suggest for the consideration of Management, if current funding trends continue, entails consolidation of the four research Programs into two - a Resource Management Program and a Crop Germplasm Program. The structure proposed should help achieve greater synergy of personnel efforts within and across Center activities, and economize on some of the managerial overheads in an increasingly trim research center.
Resource Management
28. While funding has declined in recent years, ICARDA continues to enjoy a sound financial position with a high degree of liquidity. "Downsizing" of program activities has not occurred. Management has "frozen" vacancies, decreased general staffing in administrative areas, exploited economies in support services and drawn on cash reserves to meet budget shortfalls. Longer term solutions may be required, including the possible adjustment of the research program to a more sustainable level under a reduced budget scenario. Given current funding prospects and program plans, the development and implementation of an explicit long-range funding strategy should be a high priority.
29. The 1988 EMR was extremely critical of ICARDA's financial planning, management and control processes, citing deficiencies in staffing, organization, accounting and reporting systems, and the absence of internal auditing. The deficiencies of the past have been corrected, and a modern and versatile computer system for accounting/administrative applications is currently being installed. This should further strengthen ICARDA's capacity for financial analysis, decision making and, as is needed, control.
30. There are 21 internationally-recruited staff in ICARDA's Management/Finance/Administration units, a pattern that is historical in basis. When vacancies occur and circumstances permit, these positions tend to be downgraded. The number of internationally-recruited staff in these units should be considered in the context of a comprehensive human resource planning and development strategy.
31. The 1988 EMR and 1991 Interim EMR strongly recommended that ICARDA recruit a professionally-trained individual to head the Personnel Unit and initiate needed changes. While this did not occur, ICARDA has made some progress in the realm of human resource management. Nonetheless, the Panel's overall assessment is that there continue to be problems at the institutional level, and appreciable efforts are still needed, particularly in areas of human resource planning and development, and strengthening these should be a priority of Management.
Recommendations
The various changes proposed for ICARDA as it moves towards the new millennium are less than revolutionary, and the Panel looks forward with confidence to a needed and appreciated Center performing productively in collaboration with its partners in meeting the challenge of the complex and difficult WANA ecoregion. The Panel's analysis led to a wide variety of constructive suggestions for modification and change and, for the most part, these have been expressed as "suggestions," in some cases even conditional suggestions that must await an era of stronger funding support. This reporting strategy of the Panel has thus yielded a rather parsimonious set of explicit recommendations, especially on the "program" side of the Review, for consideration by the Center, TAC, the CGIAR, and subsequent review panels.
Recommendation 2.1
ICARDA, as an ecoregional center for the dry sub-tropics, should be given encouragement to work in restricted research domains in irrigated agriculture for which it has expertise. However, the work should be financed with special-project funds (with a component to cover headquarters'-related overhead) and carried out by special-project-supported staff, so as not to detract from ICARDA's primary research emphases.
Recommendation 2.2
The proposed move of the wheat pathologist to Ankara will further weaken the capacity for close support work in cereal pathology at Tel Hadya. ICARDA should, as an absolute minimum, nil the position of wheat pathologist at headquarters by a post-doctoral appointee.
Recommendation 2.3
Work on transgenic material should be deferred until there is bio-safety legislation in place in the host country.
Recommendation 2.4
In view of the ongoing debate within the Center and the many different attitudes that exist among its main partners, the NARSs, ICARDA should give immediate attention to the development of a comprehensive rangelands research strategy, in which the Center's role would clearly be identified.
Recommendation 2.5
ICARDA should conduct impact studies of its major technologies so that, by the time of the next ER, clear quantified data are available.
Recommendation 3.1
Research staff in Morocco should be moved to a more effective regional location for interaction with national and regional research personnel.
Recommendation 3.2
With due regard to the importance that must be assigned to training as part of capacity-building in NARSs, the Center should ensure that all aspects that bear on the effectiveness of the program (such as preparation of training materials) are adequately covered and, in this spirit, the filling of the Head of Training vacancy should be a high priority.
Recommendation 4.1
Responsibility for developing and managing a BOT-endorsed process for nominating and electing members to the Chair and Vice-Chair should be assigned to a BOT committee.
Recommendation 4.2
The Program Committee and the full Board should assess their mechanisms for oversight and reach a fresh judgement as to whether the traditional roles remain appropriate given the new challenges of the strategy, the new Medium-Term Plan, and the increasingly constrained funding situation.
Recommendation 4.3
The BOT should introduce a more systematic and objective process for annual evaluation of the performance of the DG and for the oversight of the evaluation of other top management officials.
Recommendation 4.4
The BOT should re-assess its self-defined role and strategy in overseeing operations and management of ICARDA. At a minimum, the BOT should assign explicit responsibility for reviewing and assessing the full range of ICARDA's administrative and management systems, either as an expansion of the Audit Committee's role or as an assignment to a separate standing committee established for that purpose.
Recommendation 4.5
The BOT should oversee the development and implementation of a plan delineating delegation of authority, that strikes a new balance between Program freedom and fiscal/administrative control in an effort to devolve more authority to the Programs.
Recommendation 4.6
If the current organizational structure is retained, ICARDA's Management should examine primary responsibilities and demands on its members, in efforts to identify what the boundaries of responsibility should be for the DDG-R. The plan for delegation of authority (recommendation 4.5) should include a carefully reasoned work program for the DDG-R that enables the incumbent to focus on research leadership and oversight.
Recommendation 4.7
ICARDA Management, working closely with the Board, should develop and implement a detailed, explicit, long-range funding strategy.
Recommendation 4.8
When the Board and Management reach agreement on the basic concepts and outline of a project-based budgeting system, ICARDA should: (a) designate a single project manager to be responsible for coordinating the total system design and implementation effort; (b) assign the project manager the task of developing - collaboratively with research and financial/administrative personnel - a time-phased systems design and implementation plan, including staff orientation and training components, with appropriate milestones; and (c) establish a regular reporting schedule to the Board on progress, problems and contemplated changes in the approved system design, if any.
Recommendation 4.9
ICARDA should draw up and implement a human resource planning and development strategy. This should include a comprehensive "human resource needs plan," a skills/career development component, leadership progression/succession considerations, and a model of appraisal/rewards that is fiscally responsible and organizationally sound.
Recommendation 4.10
An external evaluation of P-level (especially P3 and P4) staff by international experts in the candidate's field of expertise should be incorporated into the promotion review process.
