CONSULTATIVE GROUP ON INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH Interim SCIENCE COUNCIL Report of the First External Review of the Systemwide Programme on Integrated Pest Management (SP-IPM) Interim SCIENCE COUNCIL SECRETARIAT FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS
	Table of Contents

August 2003

SDR/TAC: IAR/01/26 Rev. 1

March 2002

This report comprises:

(a) Extract from the Record of Proceedings of the Annual General Meeting 2002, Manila, Philippines, October 28-November 1 2002.

(b) Letter from iSC Chairman transmitting the Report of the First Review of the Systemwide Programme on Integrated Pest Management (SP-IPM).

(c) iSC Commentary on the First Review of the Systemwide Programme on Integrated Pest Management (SP-IPM).

(d) A Joint Response from IITA and the SP-IPM Steering Committee to the First Review of the Systemwide Programme on Integrated Pest Management (SP-IPM).

(f) Transmittal Letter from Panel Chair to iSC Chair.

(e) Report of the First Review of the Systemwide Programme on Integrated Pest Management (SP-IPM).

Table of Contents

CGIAR ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING, 2002 (AGM02) - DISCUSSIONS AND DECISIONS ON EXTERNAL REVIEW OF SP-IPM (EXCERPTED FROM “SUMMARY RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AND DECISIONS”, AGM02)

REVIEW OF THE CGIAR SYSTEM-WIDE PROGRAMME ON INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT (SP-IPM): A JOINT RESPONSE FROM IITA AND THE SP-IPM STEERING COMMITTEE

FOREWORD

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

CHAPTER 1 - CROP PROTECTION IN THE CONTEXT OF AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT

1.1 The Global Crop Protection Situation
1.2 The Institutional Environment
1.3 IPM in the CGIAR
1.4 Summary of the Pre-conditions for SP-IPM

CHAPTER 2 - ASSESSMENT OF THE SP-IPM ACCORDING TO TERMS OF REFERENCES (TOR) GIVEN TO THE PANEL

2.1 Assess the Relevance of the SP-IPM's Objectives, Priorities and Strategies to the Goals of the CGIAR, Including Evaluating the Mechanisms Used for Setting Priorities (TOR 1)
2.2 Assess the Effectiveness and Efficiency of the SP-IPM (TOR 2)

2.2.1 Whitefly Taskforce (Lead Centre: CIAT)
2.2.2 Pilot Sites for Parasitic Plant Management (Lead Centre: IITA)
2.2.3 Farmer Participatory Research (Lead Centre: CIAT)
2.2.4 Non-funded SP-IPM Taskforces

2.3 Building on the 1999 IAEG Study to Evaluate the Quantity and Quality of the SP-IPM's Outputs and Impact with Respect to Publications; Capacity Building; Methodologies; Technological Innovations; Research Achievements and Actual/Potential Impact To-date; and, Processes in Place for Monitoring/Enhancing Quality of Outputs/Impact (TOR 3)
2.4 Assess the Effectiveness of the SP-IPM's Governance, Decision-making, Organization, Accountability, Resource Mobilization and Allocation and Mode of Operation, Including Identification of Constraints in Implementing the Programme and Lessons Learnt (TOR 4)
2.5 Evaluate the Effectiveness of IITA's Convening Role, Including the Relation Between the SP-IPM and IITA's Own Research Agenda (TOR 5)

CHAPTER 3 - ASSESS THE NEED AND CONTINUING RELEVANCE OF THE SP-IPM AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO ITS FUTURE ROLE, ITS ORGANIZATION AND FUNDING (TOR 6)

3.1 The Need and Continuing Relevance of SP-IPM
3.2 The Future Role of SP-IPM and the Issues it Should Address

3.2.1 Upgrading Existing Taskforces
3.2.2 Linkages of SP-IPM to Other Systemwide Initiatives
3.2.3 Socio-economic and Policy Research

3.3 The CGIAR With or Without SP-IPM?

3.3.1 Without SP-IPM
3.3.2 An Optimised SP-IPM

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

APPENDICES

I. Panel Composition and Biographical Information
II. Terms of Reference for External Review of the SP-IPM
III. List of Persons Interviewed or Part of Discussion Groups
IV. CGIAR Inter-Centre Initiatives
V. SP-IPM Taskforces and level of funding (2000/2001)
VI. References
VII. Glossary of Acronyms