The Documentation, Information and Training (DIT) Group at IPGRI HQ has the main responsibility for the implementation of three Institute wide Projects, as well as external and internal services. The projects are: (1) ‘Capacity building and institutional strengthening’ which provides training databases, methods and procedures, decision making and management tools and other training materials to support and complement training and capacity building efforts in other IPGRI projects; (2) ‘Information management and knowledge sharing’ which incorporates institutional publications, library and information services, capacity building in information and communication technology and research on germplasm documentation and information; and (3) ‘Understanding and communicating the value of plant genetic resources’, which covers activities aiming at increasing awareness and understanding of plant genetic resources among both the general public and policy makers. It also covers activities to increase the capacity of the plant genetic resources community in designing and implementing effective project activities including impact assessment, which is discussed in Chapter 10.
A CCER was conducted in March 2002 to review the DIT activities, which focussed particularly on strategy development. It was preceded by a staff self-assessment exercise, which the staff considered to be a useful exercise with positive outcome.
IPGRI has four information related committees that make recommendations for management decision-making on different aspects of information management. They are the Publications committee, the information technology committee, the information oversight committee and the marketing committee.
DIT now has 18 staff members. These include a senior training officer with global responsibilities based in Nairobi, reporting to the Director of SSA and co-supervised by the Director of DIT. Funds for this position have largely become available by reducing library staff costs, which have been reduced from 2.5 to 1.5 FTEs. The library budget, excluding staff costs, has remained stable from 1997 to 2002 at about US$100 000. The number of staff responsible for various aspects of information systems management institute-wide has increased significantly from three in 1996 to the current nine at HQ and another six in the regions and INIBAP. From a high point in the mid-to-late 1980s when 15-18% of the total core budget was allocated to training, this has dropped to 4-5% in recent years. However, training has benefited substantially from additional support from restricted sources.
There have been major and rapid technology developments relating to information management. As a result, the options for applications have increased considerably and IPGRI needs to take these into account when considering its activities in all aspects of documentation, information and training.
The CCER recommended that IPGRI develop a new strategy and a five year plan for its training activities and that it focus particularly on building capacity in the Regions to provide technical assistance for institutional strengthening. Development of a strategic framework for IPGRI‘s training and capacity development is well advanced. This framework offers a sound basis for the establishment of priorities. New strategies on PGR documentation, media and communications are also being developed, in response to additional recommendations by the CCER that the Centre develop a formal knowledge management strategy.
The CCER does not specifically address the area of methodological work on data modelling or tools for database development and improvement, which are also DIT activities. However, the new PGR documentation strategy under development will allow a more structured process for priority setting in these areas of research as well. The strategy document focuses on normative issues and provides mechanisms for situation analysis, which is important when relevant technology is in a constant state of flux.
IPGRI’s training activities include short term courses, opportunities for MSc and PhD research, support for PGR curriculum development, study tours, on-the-job training, fellowships, internship schemes and the development of training materials. The production of reference manuals and training materials and the development of management and decision making tools for national programme development are major activities related to training. During the five year period 1997 - 2001, 53 short courses were organized in the Americas, 51 in APO, 12 in Europe, 37 in SSA and 13 in CWANA. The total number of trainees over this period amounted to 1,738 for the Americas, 736 for APO, 160 for Europe, 749 for SSA and 190 for CWANA. The large number of trainees in the Americas resulted from substantial external funding raised specifically for this purpose. The training courses covered the full range of characterization, evaluation and use of PGR, in vitro technologies, on-farm management, participatory approaches, molecular tools, GIS, statistical analysis, policy analysis, the use of documentation software, scientific writing and project proposal development.
IPGRI supports three long term fellowships, the Vavilov-Frankel Fellowships since 1993, the Italian-funded Research Fellowships and a recently launched Abdou-Salam Ouédraogo Fellowship, in memory of a late IPGRI scientist.
Information management includes many very different activities, ranging from managing the major information and communication processes and systems that support IPGRI’s business operations and decision making, to developing and managing scientific information systems. The Sharepoint Portal institutional document management system is an example of a mechanism in the business operations category, whereas the development of SINGER and EURISCO fall in the latter category. The Information Action Plan is a planning tool for institute-wide information management in both categories. Bioinformatics research to develop data models and strategies and tools to deal with ever growing, incomplete and incongruent datasets is also active. The use of open-source software is increasingly promoted at IPGRI, since it seems to be the only sustainable and affordable option for many users in developing countries.
Preparation and delivery of IPGRI’s publications is a major activity and output for DIT. This activity contributes to IPGRI’s staff publication output, since about half of staff contributions appear in the form of IPGRI’s own publications. Since 1997 the library has, in collaboration with CABI, distributed PGR Abstracts to some 400 subscribers in developing countries for free, an activity that absorbs most of the library’s budget. DIT is considering transition from hard copy editions to CD-ROM editions.
The CCER was impressed by the quantity and quality of the activities that take place in the DIT coordinated projects, but also noted that efforts still appeared to be fragmented and that more coordination is needed among related activities in other projects across the Institute. This Panel concurs with this view but notes that DIT has recently made a major effort to develop strategies that are likely to ensure better focus in the future. The management and information systems and databases in place and being developed are essential to support IPGRI’s increasingly complex operations.
IPGRI recognizes the implications of a digital divide within and between institutions and Regions and this is reflected in the PGR documentation strategies and communications as well as in the Board endorsed document, ‘Some key issues, opportunities and challenges facing IPGRI’. The Panel commends IPGRI for addressing this issue.
The Panel believes that IPGRI’s own publications, which are also available on the Institute’s website, have been widely recognized by its own constituency as being of a high quality. IPGRI can indeed be regarded as one of the leaders within the CGIAR system in client directed documentation and information services. Of all 6800 internet publication downloads over the period September 2001 - March 2003, only 40% were crop specific. There is obviously interest in both technical information and information of a more strategic nature.
Only about 25% of approximately 600 non-peer reviewed publications appeared as non-IPGRI publications. This demonstrates the importance of IPGRI’s publications for disseminating its own work. The quality of IPGRI publications is discussed in Chapter 10.
IPGRI has carried out two impact assessment studies on training, one on the Vavilov-Frankel and Italian-funded fellowships[13] and one on training in Ghana[14]. Both studies provide evidence of sustainable benefits to the fellows/trainees and their institutes in the form of supporting further career development, engagement of the home institutes in new areas of research and implementation of new technologies and awareness of PGR in the countries. In addition to these targeted impact case studies, IPGRI applies, as appropriate, an impact monitoring tool, the Participant Action Plan Approach, in its training activities. The Panel commends the Centre for these kinds of measures to monitor the training activities for ensuring its effectiveness in sustainable capacity strengthening.
5.1.6.1 Modus operandi
The Panel endorses DIT’s strategy to increasingly engage partners in the production and delivery of training materials to a significant extent and to function more as a focal point for information and a node of support and advice on PGR training activities including IPGRI staff and others. The Panel also supports IPGRI’s policy towards centralised information storage, particularly of institutional information, coupled to decentralized access and the adoption of common data standards, as befits a highly dispersed organization.
The Panel notes that collaboration between staff at HQ and Montpellier on issues of documentation, information and training is still suboptimal and that there is room for improvement. Strengthened collaboration and integration should allow benefits resulting from economies of scale, in particular in the areas of systems management, translation and public relations and awareness raising.
The CCER recommended that impact assessment and public awareness should be independent activities, as they potentially undercut each other. The former requires objective data gathering and information analysis, the latter has a strong element of advocacy. Impact assessment can be a valuable tool to influence and convince donors of the relevance of IPGRI’s activities. Public awareness activities, on the other hand, aim at influencing donor representatives and policy makers and also a much more widely distributed target, namely the general public. Of course this, in turn, may reasonably be hoped to have a more lasting impact on policy makers. The dual faceted nature of this work is recognized in the document ‘Some key issues, opportunities and challenges facing IPGRI’. The general public is today increasingly concerned with a range of agrobiodiversity related issues, including traditional foodstuffs and dishes, the need to increase resilience in our crop production, a reduction of pesticide use and the importance of landscape management. It is important that the impact assessment work at IPGRI should not be influenced by the public awareness campaign’s requirements. The Panel concurs with the CCER that the activities on impact assessment and public awareness raising at IPGRI should be separated.
IPGRI’s scientific work also contributes to raising public awareness in an indirect way. It produces material for IPGRI’s training programmes and is a foundation for the technical assistance provided by IPGRI on the management of plant genetic resources to groups that have a professional interest in the subject, such as universities, research institutions, extension services, NGOs, CBOs and farmer groups. These groups, in turn, may substantially influence both the general public and policy makers. Indirect means of raising awareness offer important opportunities.
5.1.6.2 Knowledge base
The Panel regards the development of a training knowledge base a priority to allow ready access by IPGRI staff and others to sources of training materials, research results, opportunities for training and guidelines for training and publishing. IPGRI is in a good position to offer this knowledge base service on training to the entire global PGR community. The Centre is therefore encouraged to open up this service to third parties through the internet, which would enhance its leadership role in this area. IPGRI may often be the only supplier of formal and informal training at the national level. Therefore internet should increasingly be used as a communication mechanism in developing new training strategies. Development of interactive course materials, that fit IPGRI’s networking and participatory approach should also be promoted and supported.
The Panel recognizes the risk that IPGRI could become data-rich and information poor. The Panel believes that IPGRI should continue to contribute to the development of strategies and tools that will allow further improvement and use of PGR databases. In particular, molecular datasets and information from on-farm management of PGR, including indigenous knowledge, should be integrated into PGR documentation databases.
5.1.6.3 Institutional issues
The senior scientist for PGR information systems management is well located in DIT at HQ, since this allows a focus on the development of long term documentation strategies and direct participation in the strategy development for institutional information systems.
The location of the training officer in Nairobi is, however, not without its drawbacks. Arrangements with the regional offices require the staff person to be available on at least a part time basis for regional activities. The advantages, which include the strengthening of the regional offices function and the exposure of the staff person to the field, may outweigh the disadvantages. Nevertheless, the strategy of posting senior staff with global responsibilities to regional offices deserves careful monitoring.
5.1.6.4 Conclusion
DIT is a pivotal group at IPGRI as the interface between the research and the Centre’s target audience, particularly in developing countries. This imposes constraints on the new technologies that can be absorbed into IPGRI’s communication and distribution systems. DIT’s recent work in developing clear strategies for its many functions allow for appropriately measured progress. The Panel considers the group well served by recent internal evaluations and is itself pleased with DIT’s performance and continued development.
This CGIAR support programme has two main components, the enhancement of the System’s work on genetic resources and the provision of advice and services to the CGIAR system in the area of genetic resources policy.
5.2.2.1 SGRP support
SGRP does not undertake research as part of its own agenda. It promotes, facilitates and coordinates, rather than executes. It does not offer funding. The operation of the SGRP is based on one annual meeting of the Steering Committee composed of Centres’ representatives. An Executive Committee (EC) (Chair plus two members) ensures continuity of work between Steering Committee meetings. The necessary technical and policy work is undertaken, on a permanent basis, by IPGRI in interaction with the EC.
As the convening Centre, IPGRI is responsible for facilitating, coordinating and representing the SGRP. IPGRI seeks to ensure that the CGIAR Centres develop a consistent approach to the policies that shape their relationships with national partners. IPGRI provides, through the SGRP, a leadership role in policy and legal matters within the CGIAR system. IPGRI also seeks to improve, through the SGRP, the scientific and technical aspects of the System’s conservation activities and oversees collaborative initiatives between Centres, such as the development and management of SINGER.
Through SGRP, IPGRI has contributed effectively to developing and sustaining CGIAR Systemwide collaboration in the area of genetic resources. It has assisted the Centres in meeting their "in trust" commitments for PGR and supported the Centres’ activities aimed at enhancing the management of the ‘in trust’ plant germplasm collections. It has helped to develop strategies and techniques for managing crop species and helped develop coherent Systemwide policies for the CGIAR in a rapidly changing environment, such as in the areas of IPR, negotiations of the ITPGRFA and conditions for the transfer of materials held by the Centres.
SGRP has also shown leadership in furthering ecosystem approaches to genetic resources management, by promoting the integration of genetic resources within natural resources management strategies. The vision provided by IPGRI in this area has helped to underscore the strategic importance of PGR conservation and use within an ecosystem approach.
In 2003 the IPGRI SGRP Secretariat succeeded in planning, coordinating and negotiating, together with an independent USDA consultant, the equitable distribution of US$14 million made available at short notice from the World Bank for upgrading CGIAR Centre ex situ collection facilities. Again, particularly because IPGRI itself was a recipient for the Musa ITC collection at KUL, the respect that the SGRP Secretariat commands as an honest broker was a vital component of the interaction.
5.2.2.2 Policy formulation
Policy formulation is one of the areas where the work of IPGRI, as convening Centre of SGRP, has been most effective and important from a Systemwide perspective. This is referred to in Chapter 3.
IPGRI’s DG has been mandated by the CGIAR Chair to represent the System in issues related to policy, such as through participation in the ITPGRFA negotiations. IPGRI has, on the basis of work made within the SGRP, ensured appropriate CGIAR representation in and reporting to important PGR fora. The existence of SGRP has legitimised, rather than simply enabled this activity. IPGRI’s policy group has played an important role in developing consensus and in pushing the implementation of agreed policies forward.
5.2.2.3 Conclusion
SGRP, under IPGRI’s guidance, is developing the "gold standard" for germplasm and information management strategies as well as policy issues related to germplasm. The Panel commends the group for its work. Furthermore the Panel suggests that SGRP consider ways in which its activities and deliberations can be opened up to a larger audience, including for example NARS policy makers and genebank curators.
The SGRP, under IPGRI’s guidance, has led and provided institutional and technical support for the development of SINGER, which is now available on internet and on CD-ROM. 90% of passport data of Centres’ ex situ collections has been incorporated. Though the impact of SINGER has not been systematically examined, there seems to be general recognition of the Systemwide importance of this effort and the high quality of available data. This database has been valuable for compiling information for the Information Technology negotiations on, for instance, germplasm flow.
SINGER receives more than 10,000 queries per month and an increasing number of requests come from outside the CGIAR system, including the private sector. SINGER has been cited by the FAO Commission on PGRFA as a model information network for a multilateral system for PGR exchange. SINGER also served as a model for the soon to be launched pan-European database of crop genetic resources collections. SINGER is viewed by Centres as an effective source of information and its development has led other Centres to harmonise their databases so as to make them compatible with SINGER. This has been a major development. It has also helped create awareness outside the CGIAR of the importance of genetic resources and related issues and the roles, responsibilities, activities and impact of the CGIAR Centres. The Panel commends SINGER for its progress and looks forward to its further extension beyond its immediate CGIAR clients.
Funding of the SGRP has been problematic and its prospects remain a particular area of concern for IPGRI, although recent ad hoc funding may have temporarily alleviated this concern. The Panel feels that the broad work of the SGRP that generates Systemwide public goods relating to genetic resources is under-funded. An evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of SINGER and its impact in different sectors should be carried out to sustain and increase external support for this activity.
Since 2000, IPGRI, as convening Centre of the SGRP, together with FAO, has led the development and launch of a campaign to raise resources that will address these concerns through a "Global Conservation Trust" (GCT). The idea of a Trust first arose from an external review of the CGIAR genebanks organized by the SGRP.
The GCT will be a mechanism for implementing some of the goals of the GPA and the ITPGRFA. Its mission would be to conserve key collections of PGR over the long term (both CGIAR collections and collections under national sovereignty) so that they remain freely available to improve crops for the benefit of all people. The Trust would do this by raising, in the first instance, an endowment of US$260 million and using the income to finance plant collections that meet certain eligibility criteria and internationally agreed standards of management. The Trust would also support efforts to reach those standards. The creation of the Fund has been "universally" supported by the FAO Commission on PGRFA (October 2002). It will not be part of the CGIAR and will probably be set up as an independent entity.
The Panel believes that IPGRI’s work for the GCT campaign has been highly appropriate and effective.
|
[13] Watts, J. and
Battaglino, C. 2003, Evaluating IPGRI’s fellowship programmes: An analysis
of the Vavilov-Frankel Fellowships and the Italian-funded Research Fellowships
1993-1998. IPGRI, Rome. [14] Bennett-Lartey, S. et al. 2002, Capacity development in the Plant Genetic Resources Centre, Ghana: An evaluation. IPGRI, Rome. |
