WARDA can look back on a remarkably successful transformation, over the last five years, into a CGIAR international research Centre. The Review Panel has found it to be depoliticized, very well managed, with a programme that is soundly designed and holds out the prospect of a significant impact within a reasonable time horizon. It has formulated a rigorous research planning procedure that incorporates explicit criteria for review and evaluation. It has put together a new, high-quality team of scientists. It has developed exceptionally good mechanisms for working with national systems and other international programmes. It has just moved into a new research centre built on the most modern lines.
The Panel summarizes its findings and judgements in the form of answers to five questions, followed by the 12 recommendations contained in this report.
1. Is there a need for an international effort in rice research in West Africa?
The Panel's analysis shows that the case for an international research programme on rice in West Africa is overwhelming. West Africa is one of the world's major food-problem areas, and consumption of rice is growing faster than that of any other food staple. Demand is projected to increase at nearly 5% per annum through the nineties. Rice is becoming a preferred food of all social classes, including the urban poor.
To fill the gap between production and consumption, a third of the region's rice is imported, at a cost of more than half a billion US dollars a year in scarce foreign exchange. It can by no means be taken for granted that imported rice will continue indefinitely to be available at the present low international prices, especially if exporters start to remove their subsidies. Yet high costs for transport, processing and marketing mean that locally produced rice is currently unable to compete with imports in many of the region's cities. Furthermore, intensified cropping threatens to cause severe environmental damage, especially in rainfed ecosystems.
Research must address an extraordinarily difficult set of production, marketing and policy constraints. The experience of the old WARDA showed clearly that research solutions developed outside the region can rarely be applied directly in West Africa. Yet national systems are much weaker than in Asia or Latin America. According to WARDA information there are only 19 research scientists at Ph.D. level working full time on rice in the region. Only a tiny number of national systems are conducting hybridization work on rice. The need to strengthen the capacity of agricultural science in West Africa is very great.
Strategies and technologies must be developed for the uplands, where most of the resource-poor rice farmers live. The development of the lowlands, and better productivity in the irrigated Sahel ricelands, are required if these high-potential rice ecosystems are to contribute towards resolving the problems of the region.
Such research calls for a major concerted effort on the part of scientists from the region, from advanced countries, and from international centres. WARDA is well placed to help in mobilizing this effort.
2. Are there alternatives to WARDA?
The straight-forward answer, at the present time, is 'no'. Any alternative arrangement will: cause a hiatus in West African rice research possibly lasting several years, and a lack of continuity when it is resumed; lead to the disappearance of the 'WARDA model' for cooperation with NARS; generate a sense of betrayal on the part of national systems, which have cooperated with the CGIAR System in the transformation of WARDA along the lines agreed in 1986; and create an impression of irrationality in the CGIAR. Judging from comments received during its visits to countries in the region, the Panel thinks it most unlikely that the WARDA member states would agree to any new arrangement that would substitute for WARDA.
According to the Panel's calculations, even if it were agreed by all concerned to operate the present WARDA programme as part of another CGIAR Centre and not as an autonomous organization, the savings which could be achieved are minimal. Furthermore, it is doubtful if the high level of efficiency attained by the present WARDA management could be maintained.
In the light of these considerations the Panel concludes that no alternative arrangement for rice research in West Africa under the CGIAR auspices is worth considering at the present time.
3. Is WARDA governed and managed effectively?
The short answer is an unreserved 'yes'. WARDA has a system of governance that is unique in the CGIAR System, involving both a Council of Ministers and a Board of Trustees. In the judgement of the Panel it is working well. In Dr. Eugene Terry, WARDA has an outstanding Director General, who combines leadership and diplomatic skills with an effective management style. The new scientific team which has been assembled appears to the Panel to be of excellent quality. Financial and personnel systems are efficient and cost-effective.
4. Is WARDA's strategy correct?
WARDA has refined its goal statement to include the achievement of both productivity and sustainability. Its operational mandate is defined at several levels of environmental complexity. From a broad concern for agroecological zones within the region the focus is narrowed, at the Programme level, to three major rice growing environments - the continuum (which includes both upland and lowland areas), the irrigated zones of the Sahel, and the mangrove swamps where rice cultivation is practised. At the project level, WARDA focuses more narrowly on distinct ecosystems.
In programme planning and implementation WARDA emphasizes crop and resources management research to complement varietal improvement. This requires a multidisciplinary focus on cropping systems in which rice is an important component, and also involves a high level of farmer participation at all stages of technology development.
In the early stages of its new programme WARDA is devoting a substantial effort to characterization studies. These will lead to a clearer understanding of the various ecosystems in which rice is cultivated in West Africa, and thence to the refinement of research objectives and priorities.
An important aspect of WARDA's strategy has been the inclusion of NARS and collaborators from other organizations as full partners in priority setting and in the design and conduct of research. An effective partnership with NARS has been developed through the 'WARDA model' based on regional working groups and task forces. This approach will increasingly be supplemented by WARDA's 'open centre' concept of cooperation with other international programmes.
The Panel believes that WARDA's strategy is correct. The proof can only come through the achievement of concrete results. As part of its draft Medium-Term Plan for 1994-98, WARDA has prepared a set of estimates of potential impact over the longer term, and these will provide a basis for measuring success.
5. Can WARDA deliver?
The answer must contain an element of speculation. The Panel believes it is 'yes, provided WARDA's funding base is sufficient for a viable programme'. Despite the remarkable evolution of WARDA over the past five years, it has not been supported at the level of funding envisaged when the transformation process was started. In the opinion of the Panel, WARDA as a whole has been reduced close to the level of critical mass, and in some respects may already be below it. This is an extremely serious and urgent situation, and if it is not speedily resolved the Panel believes that WARDA management will not be able to hold together the excellent scientific and management team which it has assembled. Nor will it be able to attract new staff of equal quality.
The Panel agrees with the TAC recommendation on rice research in West Africa, endorsed by the CGIAR in May 1992, that "a minimum effort be maintained that has a reasonable chance of success". The Panel believes that for WARDA to be fully viable it should have at least 20 core senior staff - including ten scientists in the Continuum Programme, and three in the Sahel. This compares with 16 positions in 1993.
LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS
CHAPTER 2 - WARDA'S PROGRAMMES
Recommendation 2.1.
The Panel recommends that WARDA take further steps to obtain the cooperation of other institutions such as IFPRI in undertaking research on the effects of markets, infrastructure and government policies on the adoption of improved technology by rice farmers.
Recommendation 2.2.
The Panel recommends that donors enable WARDA to maintain at least a second core scientist position in the Sahel Programme.
Recommendation 2.3.
The Panel recommends that WARDA explore with IIMI the possibility of a joint ecoregional initiative in the irrigated areas of the Sahel.
Recommendation 2.4.
The Panel recommends that WARDA intensify its effort to mobilize complementary funding to maintain most of the present Mangrove Swamp Rice Network activities.
Recommendation 2.5.
Donors should enable WARDA to (a) restore the position of Trainer, and (b) assist NARS to assume responsibility for conducting rice production-related courses.
Recommendation 2.6.
INGER-Africa should be maintained as a unitary Network for the whole of sub-Saharan Africa, sponsored and managed jointly by WARDA and IRRI. The new INGER should be so organized as to meet the specific requirements of WARDA and West African NARS; special arrangements should also be made for the ECSA countries if they so request. The ultimate location of INGER should be in WARDA; the timing of the move should be worked out as part of an overall package that will guarantee the Network's future stability and effectiveness.
CHAPTER 3 - ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
Recommendation 3.1.
The Panel recommends that WARDA distribute its internal training effort more evenly between its international and local staff and that the managers, at all levels, be made responsible for providing appropriate training opportunities to the staff reporting to them.
Recommendation 3.2.
The Panel recommends that WARDA make systematic efforts to recruit qualified women, especially for senior positions.
CHAPTER 4 - THE FUTURE OF WARDA
Recommendation 4.1.
TAC, the CGIAR and the donor community in general should reaffirm their support for WARDA, and their determination to keep it going as a viable international centre. Sympathetic consideration should be given to the specific recommendations in this report which would lead to strengthened support for WARDA programmes.
Recommendation 4.2.
The Panel invites the WARDA Member States, through the Council of Ministers, to take urgent steps to bring their contributions to the WARDA budget up to the target level of 5% of operating funds.
Recommendation 4.3.
WARDA should systematically promote the concept of an open centre, with a view to associating a broader range of institutions with its work.
Recommendation 4.4.
WARDA should take the initiative for developing a joint research project with IITA for inland valley ecosystems in West Africa.
