ECA 32/02/4-Rev.1





EUROPEAN COMMISSION ON AGRICULTURE (ECA)

Thirty-second session

Rome, 7-8 March 2002

Review of the Activities of the European System of Cooperative Research Networks in Agriculture (ESCORENA).
Progress Report on Recommendation made at the 31st Session
1

A. REVIEW OF THE ACTIVITIES OF ESCORENA –
PROGRESS REPORT 1999-2001

(1) BACKGROUND: THE ESCORENA REVIEW PROCESS

1. The European System of Cooperative Research (ESCORENA) was established by FAO and partner European research institutions in 1974. Today, with its 13 networks2, it links over 2500 researchers across Europe and, in some cases, across the globe. A broad range of food and agriculture research issues are addressed, ranging from agri-environmental problems to food safety to specific crop and animal production issues of importance to developing countries and countries in transition with temperate zones and Mediterranean climates (see box for summary description).
2. ESCORENA activities are subject to regular reviews and proposals for improvement and are made following a multi-tiered process, which starts internally through consultations within the participating networks. Next, proposals are reviewed by the European Commission on Agriculture (ECA) and its Executive Committee, and finally by the Regional Conferences for Europe, and, as needed, by the FAO Committee on Agriculture (COAG) and the Programme Committee of the Council, the FAO Council and Conference.
3. In 1989, following the recommendation of the Twenty-fifth Session of the ECA, the European Research Network’s Advisory Committee (ERNAC) was established on a four-year trial basis to periodically review on-going network activities within the System. The Twenty-seventh Session of the ECA recommended continuation of activities of ERNAC. Reports and recommendations of ERNAC were subsequently discussed at all ECA sessions.

Box 1: ESCORENA – Summary Description

Established in 1974 by FAO and European research institutions, ESCORENA is an umbrella system for cooperation between national research institutions focussed on food, agriculture and related areas. The objectives of ESCORENA are to promote voluntary exchange of information and experimental data, support joint applied research, facilitate exchange of germplasm and sharing of methodology/technologies, and accelerate transfer of technology advances to developing countries and countries in transition. ESCORENA achieved particular importance in the 1980s, prior to the fall of the Berlin Wall, as one major mechanism for West-East European cooperation in agronomic research. With the increasing role of the European Commission’s programmes and initiatives and the European Union (EU) enlargement process, the importance of ESCORENA necessarily shifts East and South, as a mechanism to disseminate European know-how to other regions.
The 13 research networks currently included in the ESCORENA system cover the Near East and, in some cases, have achieved a global reach. Seven networks have become interregional, i.e. linking institutions from both Near East and Europe, and three of these are sponsored jointly by FAO and the Centre International de Hautes Etudes Agronomiques Méditerranéennes (CIHEAM) which has members in North Africa: these are the Research Network on Nuts, Research and Development Network on Pasture and Fodder Crops and Network on Sheep and Goat Research.
ESCORENA is backstopped by FAO’s Regional Offices for Europe (REU) and for the Near East (RNE) in cooperation with relevant FAO technical units at Headquarters from the Sustainable Development Department (SD), Agriculture Department (AG) and Economic and Social Department (ES) and in collaboration with the CIHEAM for the jointly sponsored networks. Up to the 2000-2001 biennium, the ESCORENA Secretariat was operated by two SDR officers outposted to REU.
There are three categories of research issues addressed:
1. crop and animal issues of relevance to temperate zones and Mediterranean climates (buffalo, cotton, flax, nuts, olives, pasture and fodder crops, rice, sheep and goat research, soybeans,, sunflower, oat disease)
2. food safety issues: this is handled by the Research Network on Trace Elements, Natural Antioxidants and Contaminants in Foods and Diets (currently focussed on research comparing safety of conventionally and organically produced foods);
3. agri-environmental issues: Sustainable Rural Environment and Energy Network (SREN), including organic agriculture, and Recycling of Agricultural, Municipal and Industrial Residues in Agriculture (RAMIRAN).
Research results are presented in one international scientific journal (Helia) published by the networks in seven network newsletters and in proceedings of technical meetings and workshops, which are published by FAO (REU Technical Series) and cooperating international organizations. An interactive ESCORENA web page and database have been developed during 2000-01 for better diffusion of results, improved information dissemination, and reporting of the activities of the networds (http://www.fao.org/regional/europe/escorena).
The networks regularly organize technical meetings and workshops, and have experienced a peak of 70 meetings in 1996-98 with over 2500 participants from 40 European countries, 12 Near East countries and 19 countries from other geographic regions. Seed funding for network meetings and publications comes from the FAO regular programme budget (see Fig. 1) and from ad hoc contributions from collaborating FAO technical services. Regular additional support is received for three networks from CIHEAM (Nuts, Pasture, Sheep and Goats) and from specific government contributions to three respective trust funds (Olives, Nuts and SREN).

(2) RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ECA AT ITS 31ST SESSION (1999)

4. During its Thirty-first Session (Rome, 12-14 October 1999), on the basis of ERNAC’s review3 and FAO’s accompanying report on ESCORENA activities which put forward proposals for the future development of the System4, the ECA recommended that ESCORENA be maintained and reinvigorated through:
• provision of additional human and financial resources; in view of the continuous budgetary constraints being faced by FAO, Members Nations were called upon to increase their support to ESCORENA;
• establishment of a new interactive ESCORENA Website on Internet; further expansion and optimization of this system according to users’ needs was recommended, in close cooperation with all stakeholders;
• increased funding for publications, including translation to the other official languages used in the Region; individual networks were urged to seek financial support through exploration of possible participation of the private sector and other tri- or multi-partite agreements;
• possible linkage of ESCORENA to the emerging European Forum on Agricultural Research for Development (EFARD); the question of FAO’s assistance in the establishment of a Subregional Agricultural Research Forum for Central and Eastern European countries was also raised;
• particular support was expressed for the Olive, Nuts and SREN Networks; in connection to SREN, the increasing importance of renewable energy was underlined in the context of rural development and sustainable resources management;
• improved reporting on the Networks’activities to facilitate coordination, information dissemination, planning and evaluation;
• nomination of “national focal points” by participating Members to liaise with the ESCORENA Secretariat and promote ESCORENA support at national level.

(3) ESCORENA ACTIVITIES 1999-2001

5. Over the 1999-2001 period, in spite of funding constraints, one network coordinators’meeting was organized (9th meeting, in Grignon, France, 23-25 November 2000) and a fair number of activities were maintained across all thirteen networks, with a total of 53 meetings and workshops organized for nearly 3000 participants, and 37 publications and 8 newsletters regularly published, as shown in table 1 below.

Table 1:ESCORENA Activities – 1999-2001

Activities

1999

2000

2001

Meetings

     

Number of meetings

13

21

19

Number of participants

879

1326

763

Publications

     

Total number

18

11

8

of which: REU Technical series

3

3

2

Cahiers and Options Méditerranéennes

4

3

4

Newsletters

     

Total number

8

8

8

of which: published twice a year

3

3

3

6. Detailed activities per network are presented in Appendix 1. It will be noted that some networks receive FAO support for activities every year (Buffalo, Flax, Nuts, Pastures, Rice, Sheep and Goats, SREN) while others receive support in a predominantly biannual cycle (Cotton, RAMIRAN, Sunflower, Trace Elements, Cotton) and others lay dormant (Olives, Soybean). Since the networks are voluntary in nature and network coordinators are responsible for proposing and coordinating network activities with FAO, it is clear that a reduced state of activities (or none) must be viewed as largely the direct result of planning (or lack of planning), interest by network members and response to funds available through FAO. Several networks frequently organize activities without any FAO support.

7. For example, the FAO-CIHEAM Interregional Cooperative Research Network on Nuts has reorganized and simplified its structure and is trying to move away from its previous strong genetic collection, description and improvement focus to get more involved with development-oriented issues. The Sustainable Rural Environment and Energy network (SREN) has been reduced in size with a new coordinator, and, with further consolidation and integration of programmes, it is expected to be able to develop a strong programme in the future. One of its more active workgroup (on Anaerobic Technologies) has similar usefulness to developing countries as RAMIRAN or organic waste processing.
8. Other aspects of network management are also the responsibility of the network coordinators, such as improved reporting on their own network activities. This point was explicitly raised at the network coordinators meeting in Grignon, and there has been some positive response by some of the networks, although more systematic efforts are still required. Also, the linkage between participating countries and the networks has not yet been fully established as only a few of the expected national focal points (seven so far) have been nominated by their governments and they are not yet operational.
9. The FAO secretariat servicing ESCORENA has made every effort to follow the ECA recommendation to work with other networks, and in particular to link up with the emerging European Forum on Agricultural Research for Development (EFARD). It took part in some of the relevant GFAR meetings, particularly in 2000 and 2001, which focussed on enlarging the scope of activities to the East, increasing cooperation with Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), and to the South, sustaining certain networks of interest to the Mediterranean countries (dates and olives); the decision as to how to move forward is expected to be taken in the course of 2002.
10. The participation of researchers from Central Europe and other non-European countries in the network activities is observed to continue at the same level as in the recent past. Unfortunately, the FAO secretariat is not informed as to the exact provenance of participants in all meetings and workshops. There is little doubt however that the largest participation in meetings is generally from nationals of the venue: thus, holding meetings in CEE countries draws larger numbers of CEE researchers, but slightly less from western Europe. The majority of FAO support has been directed to facilitate participation of researchers from the CEE countries. It has been noted that a few joint proposals have been prepared for EU financing – a major financial source for much of research and especially for international/collaborative research. So far, and to the extent that there is information available, it would appear that success has been relatively limited, possibly with the exception of the Flax network which has received some support.
11. In response to the ECA recommendation, an interactive ESCORENA website was developed by FAO, based on the prototype web page design presented to the ECA in 1999. It is intended to become a real information tool, user-friendly and easy to service. Although some of the networks have developed information pages in the meantime, the FAO interactive website is the only system providing interactive use, automated searchable database building and enabling easy adaptation to the changing network structures and contents. In the meantime also 18 of the 23 REU Technical Series volumes published since 1996 have been made available electronically; of these 13 are ESCORENA publications. The web site link has been included in information pages of other important organizations like EFARD and CIHEAM, thus facilitating the flow of information.
12. Network publications appearing in REU Technical Series and Options Méditerranéennes are frequently proceedings, designed to record and rapidly communicate final and sometimes also intermediate research results5. In this sense they are useful to other researchers and other specialists, sometimes to extension specialists. Occasionally monographs/studies are prepared on specific topics of interest to another audience. The two above-mentioned series are the most frequently used ones, but it should be realized that networks maintain their independence: they each have their own unique professional publication outlets.

13. Eight Network publications have been produced in the REU Technical Series since 1999, with 300 to 400 copies each, distributed at no cost to participants, government representations in Rome, other Regional Offices, technical units, some libraries and upon individual request; eight volumes have been published during the same time period by CIHEAM.
14. RAMIRAN started publishing a newsletter in 2000 which is currently distributed electronically and in print. Electronic distribution has also been adopted by Euroflax, Nucis and the Buffalo newsletter, and first arrangements have been made for Helia (more than 200 pages per issue) to be electronically available in addition to print copies. While some of the newsletter (Herba, Medoryzae, Sheep and Goat Contact) are mostly information tools of the network (but always available to non-members), others have become unique information sources and discussion fora in their field, in particular the following which have achieved worldwide reach:
Helia – the only scientific (reviewed) journal dedicated to sunflower; appearing twice a year, plus special editions with over 150 scientific papers from 25 countries during the last 4 years;
Nucis Newsletter – the only publication with a unique mix of news, reviews, bibliographies and articles dedicated to temperate and Mediterranean nut crop species (1400 subscribers);
• Euroflax Newsletter – giving network news but provides the only regular collection of production and market statistics on flax and hemp (400 subscribers);
Buffalo Newsletter – while providing network news, research and production reviews, it reaches far beyond Europe and is for some researchers the only means of communication beyond their borders (1200 copies distributed).

1. Constraints:

15 In reviewing ESCORENA activities, it should be kept in mind that the financial difficulties reported to the ECA in 1999 continued unabated throughout the period under review, and ESCORENA management was, of necessity, kept at a minimum level compatible with maintaining the networks alive. In particular, in the absence of additional external funding, the established ESCORENA review and monitoring cycles could not be maintained, making it impossible, inter alia, to call for further ERNAC review exercises. As the ECA had been informed at its 31st session, only major meetings of the networks would be supported, and one network coordinators’meeting every four years would be organized while funding for informal meetings would be reduced6 . In the period under review, the fact that no external additional funding was received, except for the Olive and Nuts Networks, constituted a major constraint. Inside FAO, some funding remained available to the end of the 2000-2001 biennium, although at a slightly reduced level.
Undisplayed Graphic16. As shown in figure 1, the ESCORENA funding situation deteriorated steadily over the past seven years, from a total US$237 000 in 1995 to US$ 83 700 in 2001. The detailed funding situation, by network, is shown in Appendix 2. It will be noted that funding for any given network greatly varies on a year-to-year basis, that it is in all cases very modest (maximum US$30 000 – for the Nuts network in 1998), and that it can be as little as US$500.
17. While the ECA 31st session called for increased funding for publication, including for translation, no funding was in fact made available for either purpose. Therefore, publications had to be financed at the expense of other activities that could be supported. Publication is also extremely costly, and, for cost-savings purposes, articles tend to be published in the one FAO language in which they are provided.
18. At present, no direct financing from Member Nations has been received for ESCORENA operation with one exception (support from Spain to the Nut and Olive networks). Indirect support is given through the time and facilities of the coordinating institution, and in some cases this may be substantial (for example, in the case of the Flax, Nuts and Pastures networks) or the sunflower network through supporting a publication (annually US$15 to US$25 000 towards the cost of printing Helia).

19. It should be noted however that none of the funding provided covers the expenses of a workshop. Small meetings using a university facility generally have very contained costs, and the only substantial expense is related to travel/time of the participants. Larger meetings of 30 to 200 people may range from US$ 30 000 to above US$ 100 000. Institutions in general have limited travel budgets. Participants generally provide their own travel funds and thus not only demonstrate their interest but also the importance of the meeting to their professional work. FAO support is sometimes used for filling a gap where some of the available funding may already exist. In some countries, administrative restrictions may not permit an institution to support foreign travel or non-national participants or publish meeting results.

2. Current and Potential Usefulness of the ESCORENA Networks

20. In assessing the current and future usefulness and relevance of the ESCORENA Networks, it is useful to recall that the Networks are generally seen by its members as a useful tool for better collaboration, and that the opportunities to come together are viewed as very important for project development. Most of the work is applied research: for example, it may be concerned with varietal improvement or production method improvements, record keeping and standard setting. There is an awareness that the knowledge thus built up could be of use further afield, particularly for strengthening research systems in developing countries and countries in transition, but there is some frustration among many of the researchers regarding the lack of opportunity to transfer their knowledge more directly. While this is an area where FAO may be expected to be able to provide guidance, technology transfer cannot be operated in the absence of funding to support it, particularly to finance the required training activities and study tours.
21. In conclusion, there are a number of ESCORENA networks that should be retained as independent networks with their own identity and structure because of their uniqueness and relevance to agricultural development issues in the region (i.e. pertinent to transition economies and Mediterranean climate countries) while others could either become global networks or be abandoned altogether, such as the oat disease group which has already been discontinued. The table below provides a summary overview of the current status of the more relevant networks and working groups (WGs) and their potential usefulness in the context of addressing agricultural development problems both in the region and globally:

Table 2:
Potential usefulness of ESCORENA Networks
7

Network (WGs)

Relevance/Potential usefulness

Buffalo

Very active (including training) – highly relevant to some CEE Countries and several Mediterranean/Near East countries, for production improvement and introducing registration/recording systems needed to improve breeding; methodology and protocols are very relevant also outside the two regions

Cotton

Least active in the region – could become global

Flax and Hemp

Very active – minor crops but of increasing speciality use (industrial, textile, health food...); coordinated by a researcher from a CEE country, and has achieved global outreach

Nuts

Availability of considerable genetic resources and technical experience for the development of nut crops in the two regions; useful contributions to rural development and the global genetic undertaking

Olives

Useful experience for Mediterranean countries; organizational structure can serve as basis for more integrated development cooperation making considerable participation by other organizations possible

Pastures

Mountains and Mediterranean WGs : relevant to the two regions; relevant focus on biodiversity research, sylvo-pastoral systems etc

RAMIRAN

Organic waste management and application in agricultue of growing relevance to CEE Countries and other parts of the world; potentially useful for technology transfer out of Europe

Rice

Only existing research network on japonica rice: complementary to global initiatives under IRRI guidance; significant interest to Mediterranean and CEE producer countries

Sheep and Goats

Very significant use to Mediterranean and other regions

Soybean

Could be discontinued – of relevance to some CEE countries which are still soybean producers

SREN

(Part of SREN: Organic WG)

(Pollinator WG)

Relevant work on the integrated energy farm concept (food and energy produced on the same farm) and anaerobic technologies; potentially significant role in Europe, including the CEE, and the Near East, Asia
Potentially useful; could become an independent network with appropriate funding support; potentially global outreach
Strong relevance to biodiversity work; potentially global outreach

Sunflower

Global outreach – unique and important crop in many parts of the world; deals with cultivars and wild species as source for new selections and conservation; coordinated by a researcher from a CEE country

Trace Elements

Renewed relevance to food safety: now also including mycotoxin research; new in 2002, comparison of conventional and organic food production ; could have global outreach

In conclusion, major research areas of wide policy interest, which are addressed either by some of the networks as a whole or by their related workgroups, include:
• food safety
• biodiversity
• biotechnology
• sustainable management of natural resources, including “low input” agriculture

B. THE FUTURE OF ESCORENA -
OPTIONS TO ADDRESS CONSTRAINTS

(1) THE CHANGED ROLE OF FAO

22. With the approval of the Strategic Framework for FAO 2000-2015 by the FAO Conference in November 1999, corporate objectives were clarified, leading, inter alia, to a renewed focus on supporting field programme activities and on supporting technology transfer to underpin development efforts in developing countries and countries in transition8. As a result, FAO can only provide support to ESCORENA and service the related networks within this framework. It is recalled that a number of measures were taken in response to the changes in Europe following the upheavals in the early 1990's in Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia and the consequent emergence of transition economies leading to a gradual shift in resources.

23. Therefore, within the Programme of Work and Budget 2002-03 approved by the FAO Conference in November 2001, it is to be noted that resources under Programmes 2.1 and 2.5 allocated to REU do not include servicing ESCORENA and as a result FAO is no longer in a position to provide support to the networks as was done in the past.
24. In developing options to address this issue of ESCORENA funding and servicing, several points may be considered:
(i) the continued high relevance of many of the networks and their working groups, from a research policy and development standpoint, suggesting that they deserve continued support;
(ii) the unique scope and coverage of some of the networks, and hence, the impossibility to link them to on-going or new networks being established with EU and other donor funding;
(iii) the fact that ESCORENA has succeeded in its 26 years of existence to link together over 2500 researchers across Europe and also in other parts of the world, as far as China and Latin America, which militates in favour of not abandoning this human resources capital.

25. The adoption, by the 31st Session of the FAO Conference, of the binding International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, has drawn attention to the importance of networks, such as ESCORENA, for world food security. In particular, Article 16, entitled, “International Plant Genetic Resources Networks”, states that:
“16.1 Existing cooperation in international plant genetic resources for food and agriculture networks will be encouraged or developed on the basis of existing arrangements and consistent with the terms of this Treaty, so as to achieve as complete coverage as possible of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture.
16.2 The Contracting Parties will encourage, as appropriate, all relevant institutions, including governmental, private, non-governmental, research, breeding and other institutions, to participate in the international networks.”

(2) PROPOSED OPTIONS

26. Three options are possible to address the issue:
(a) To the extent possible, and as opportunities arise, proceed to the systematic merging of ESCORENA networks with other regional or, where appropriate, global initiatives, this is however likely to be a time-consuming process and of limited use as this option does not apply to all the networks nor covers all the areas of research presently addressed by ESCORENA; in the end, some networks may “save” their activities for the future, but many others will not, and both the work they have started and the work they plan will have to be effectively abandoned, including the elements which concern them in the newly-established inter-active website;
(b) retain under FAO sponsorships only the networks receiving sufficient external funding for effective functioning and adopt a “project approach” for the support and management of the networks and working groups so selected;
(c) maintain FAO support to ESCORENA as a system of networks focused on research issues that are a priority for countries in development and in transition, particularly in the Balkans, Caucasus and North Africa, but also beyond, wherever research results are relevant to stimulate growth and combat poverty and hunger; this would require a revision in the next FAO programming period (PWB 2004-05), while the break in FAO support under the current biennium could only be remedied by resorting to option (b) above.

27. In all cases, it will be useful to position the work of ESCORENA within the context of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, including by linking its networks, as appropriate, with the relevant provisions of the International Treaty.
28. Regarding the second option, it should be noted that, on the basis of past experience of FAO in servicing ESCORENA networks, a minimum US$40 to US$50 000 per biennium per network are needed to ensure significant catalytic support for active research collaboration through the network mechanism. External funding to a particular network or working group should be directed mainly to support the following activities:
(i) organization of workshops for information exchange;
(ii) publication of research studies and newsletters;
(iii) provision of inputs to the relevant element in the ESCORENA interactive website to ensure its proper management and continued usefulness to users;
(iv) training for researchers from outside Western Europe: mainly the CEE countries and North Africa.
29. Funds obtained would be managed within the framework of specific projects aimed at well-defined network or working group activities. They would be mutually agreed to and developed in full participation with all parties involved (the concerned network coordinator, FAO and the donor). Projects, once approved, would be operated by the FAO Regional Office (REU) and backstopped by the FAO technical officer directly concerned with the subject matter area supported by the project. Projects would be implemented through the use of consultants, that would be selected by the concerned FAO technical backstopping officer, to ensure that consultant inputs are both adequate and relevant to the nature of the network. The project counterpart would be the network coordinator, while the role of the consultant would be to monitor project activities and ensure quality and timeliness of output delivery, as well as prepare the terminal report, with recommendations for follow up, as needed.

30. Once the cycle of two-year projects is launched, project results would be regularly reported to the ECA sessions, and a parallel or back-to-back session could be organized giving donor governments the opportunity to review recommendations for project follow up and decide whether they are willing to continue financing any given network or prefer to re-orient their support in a new direction. With this project-based approach to obtain external support, maximum transparency and flexibility would be achieved, as only those networks that produce tangible results would continue to benefit from external funding.
31. External support to chosen ESCORENA networks and working groups could be raised either through individual donor contact or through the mechanism of a donor meeting to be convened at FAO Headquarters, as soon as possible after the ECA session. The ECA is invited to indicate to FAO whether it can support this course of action.
32. Regarding the third option, it is to be noted that programming FAO support to ESCORENA as a system, similarly to what was done in the past, would require that several elements be taken into consideration:
(i) ESCORENA support should be formulated as a programme entity, with a clear focus on international cooperation in agricultural research for development, support to knowledge generation and the transfer of research results to developing countries and a well-defined scope (i.e. number of networks supported), leaving out inactive networks, such as soybean; methods of work and implementation strategy should also be spelled out, including giving consideration to institutionalization of relationships, in particular extending FAO secretariat relations to directors of research institutes (in addition to existing linkages with coordinators and researchers), in order to establish a sounder institutional basis for the support provided by FAO to ESCORENA networks; this implies that ERNAC should be revisited;
(ii) continuation of FAO support to ESCORENA requires establishment, as a minimum, of an identifiable mechanism constituted by either a core secretariat composed of one new professional post (P-4) or appropriate personnel made available from the concerned institutions, and related secretarial support and limited non-staff resources, (for more detailed mandate and costing, see Appendix 3); this would however require support from Member countries for a change to budgetary provisions in the next Programme of Work and Budget;

(iii) while there is still a need for an interim solution in the current biennium to address the break in FAO support to ESCORENA, possibly through projects (option 2), it should be noted that the project approach is not incompatible with option 3: on the contrary, having a permanent Secretariat in FAO to support ESCORENA would help ensure that projects provided from various donors fall into a coherent overall programme aimed at supporting research and technology to the developing world, where it is needed.

LIST OF THE 13 NETWORKS CURRENTLY INCLUDED
IN ESCORENA SYSTEM

1. European Cooperative Research Network on Sunflower
2. European Cooperative Research Network on Soybean
3. European Cooperative Research Network on Flax and other Bast Plants
4. Interregional (REU/RNE) Cooperative Research Network on Olives
5. Interregional (REU/RNE) Cooperative Research Network on Rice
6. Interregional (REU/RNE) Cooperative Research Network on Buffalo
7. Interregional (REU/RNE) Cooperative Research Network on Cotton
8. FAO/CIHEAM Interregional (REU/RNE) Cooperative Research Network on Pastures and Fodder Crops
9. FAO/CIHEAM Interregional (REU/RNE) Research Network on Sheep and Goats
10. FAO/CIHEAM Interregional (REU/RNE) Cooperative Research Network on Nuts
11. Recycling of Agricultural, Municipal and Industrial Residues in Agriculture Network (RAMIRAN)
12. Sustainable Rural Environment and Energy Network (SREN)
13. Network on Trace Elements, Natural Antioxidants and Contaminants in Foods and Diets


APPENDIX 1: REVIEW OF ESCORENA ACTIVITIES –
BY NETWORK (1999-2001)

1999

Number of meetings

Number of Participants ***

Number of Publications

Newsletter

Source of Network Support**

Network
(WGs)

   

RTS*

COM*

OTHERS

TOTAL

   

Buffalo (4)

1

25

   

3

3

1 (2x/yr)

FAO (REU, RNE, AGA, SDR), ICAR, EAAP, IMA*

Cotton (10)

0

         

--

FAO (REU,RNE,SDR )

Flax (6)

2

196

       

1 (2x/yr)

FAO (REU, SDR)

Nuts (8)

2

241

1

1

3

5

1 (1x/yr)

FAO (REU, RNE, AGP, SDR), CIHEAM, INIA*

Olives

0

           

FAO (REU, RNE, AGP, SDR)

Pastures (3)

3

100

1

1

1

3

1 (1x/yr)

FAO (REU, RNE, AGP, SDR), CIHEAM

RAMIRAN

0

         

1 (1x/yr)

FAO (REU, AGA, SDR)

Rice

1

17

 

1

 

1

1 (1x/yr)

FAO (REU, RNE, AGP, SDR), CIHEAM

Sheep & Goat (3)

3

103

 

1

4

5

1 (1x/yr)

FAO (REU, RNE, AGA, SDR), CIHEAM, EAAP

Soybean

0

           

FAO (REU, SDR)

SREN

3

100

   

2

2

 

FAO (REU,SDR), TF*

Sunflower (7)

1

97

   

2

2

1 (2x/yr)

FAO (REU,AGP, SDR)

Trace elements

0

           

FAO (REU, SDR)

WG Oat Diseases

0

     

1

1

 

FAO (REU, SDR)

Total

13

879

2

4

13

19

8

 

* RTS - REU Technical Series http://www.fao.org/regional/europe/Public-e.htm

* COM - Cahiers Options Méditerranéennes

* IMA - Italian Ministry of Agriculture

* INIA - Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnologia Agraria y Alimentaria

* TF - Multi-donor Trust Fund

** Only more or less regular supporters are listed, no ad-hoc or national Government supporters

*** Participant numbers are estimated for Buffalo, Pastures and SREN meetings

2000

Number of meetings

Number of Participants ***

Number of Publications

 

Newsletter

Source of Network Support**

Network (WGs)

   

RTS*

COM*+OM

OTHERS

TOTAL

   

Buffalo (4)

1

30

       

1 (2x/yr)

FAO (REU, RNE, AGA, SDR), ICAR, EAAP, IMA*

Cotton (10)

1

90

   

1

1

--

FAO (REU,RNE,SDR)

Flax (6)

4

100

       

1 (2x/yr)

FAO (REU, SDR)

Nuts (8)

1

350

       

1 (1x/yr)

FAO (REU, RNE, AGP, SDR), CIHEAM, INIA*

Olives

0

0

         

FAO (REU, RNE, AGP,SDR)

Pastures (3)

3

196

2

1

 

3

1 (1x/yr)

FAO (REU, RNE, AGP, SDR), CIHEAM

RAMIRAN (5)

1

99

   

1

1

1 (1x/yr)

FAO (REU, AGA,SDR)

Rice (5)

1

25

       

1 (1x/yr)

FAO (REU, RNE, AGP, SDR), CIHEAM

Sheep & Goat (3)

5

271

 

2

5

7

1 (1x/yr)

FAO (REU, RNE, AGA, SDR), CIHEAM, EAAP

Soybean

0

0

         

FAO (REU,SDR)

SREN (5)

3

125

         

FAO (REU,SDR), TF*

Sunflower (7)

0

0

       

1 (2x/yr)

FAO (REU, AGP, SDR)

Trace elements (2)

0

0

         

FAO (REU,SDR)

Working Group Oat Diseases

1

40

         

FAO (REU,SDR)

S

21

1326

2

3

7

12

8

 

* RTS - REU Technical Series http://www.fao.org/regional/europe/Public-e.htm

   

* OM - Options Méditerranéennes

           

* COM - Cahiers Options Méditerranéennes

           

* IMA - Italian Ministry of Agriculture

           

* INIA - Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnologia Agraria y Alimentaria

     

* TF - Multi-donor Trust Fund

           

** Only more or less regular supporters are listed, no ad-hoc or national Government supporters

 

*** participant numbers are estimated for Oat disease and Flax meetings

     

2001

Number of meetings

Number
of Part-
icipants ***

Number of Publications

News
letter

Source of Network Support**

Network (WGs)

   

RTS*

COM*

Others

TOTAL

   

Buffalo (4)

1

15

   

1

1

1 (2x/yr)

FAO (REU, RNE, AGA, SDR), ICAR, EAAP, IMA*

Cotton (10)

1

30

   

1

1

--

FAO (REU,RNE,SDR)

Flax (6)

6

150

       

1 (2x/yr)

FAO (REU,SDR)

Nuts (8)

2

149

 

1

 

1

1 (1x/yr)

FAO (REU, RNE, AGP, SDR), CIHEAM, INIA*

Olives

0

0

         

FAO (REU, RNE, AGP,SDR)

Pastures (3)

2

77

1

1

 

2

1 (1x/yr)

FAO (REU, RNE, AGP, SDR), CIHEAM

RAMIRAN (5)

0

0

   

1

1

1 (1x/yr)

FAO (REU, AGA,SDR)

Rice (5)

1

65

 

1

 

1

1 (1x/yr)

FAO (REU, RNE, AGP, SDR), CIHEAM

Sheep & Goat (3)

3

200

 

1

2

3

1 (1x/yr)

FAO (REU, RNE, AGA, SDR), CIHEAM, EAAP

Soybean

0

0

         

FAO (REU,SDR)

SREN (5)

1

25

         

FAO (REU,SDR), TF*

Sunflower (7)

1

40

       

1 (2x/yr)

FAO (REU,AGP, SDR)

Trace elements (2)

1

12

         

FAO (REU,SDR)

Working Group Oat Diseases

0

0

         

FAO (REU,SDR)

Σ

19

763

1

4

5

10

8

 
                 

* RTS - REU Technical Series http://www.fao.org/regional/europe/Public-e.htm

 

* COM - Cahiers Options Méditerranéennes

         

* IMA - Italian Ministry of Agriculture

           

* INIA - Instituto Nacional de Investigación y Tecnologia Agraria y Alimentaria

 

* TF - Multi-donor Trust Fund

           

** Only more or less regular supporters are listed, no ad-hoc or national Government supporters

*** participant numbers are estimated for Sheep and Goat, Buffalo, SREN, Cotton, Rice und and Flax meetings


APPENDIX 2
ESCORENA EXPENDITURES, BY NETWORK – 1997-2001

(figures are in US dollars)

NETWORK

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

    Buffalo

8 000

2 500

5 000

500

5 500

    Cotton

4 000

7 900

500

5 000

4 500

    Flax

7 000

11 000

4 000

8 000

8 000

    Nuts99

26 500

29 800

3 000

13 700

15 100

    Olive

13 900

500

 

    Pastures10

18 000

11 000

6 500

13 300

12 500

    Ramiran

500

14 500

5 000

10 000

500

    Rice

7 000

9 500

5 000

6 600

8 500

    Sheep and Goats119

12 500

12 000

3 000

13 500

3 000

    Soybean

2 000

500

500

   

    SREN

31 500

43 700

33 500

3 000

500

    Sunflower

4 000

18 000

6 000

4 000

8 000

    Trace Elements

10 500

500

1 000

1 500

3 000

    Oats Diseases WG

500

500

6 000

500

 

    Web page

 

6 000

19 000

 

15 000

    TOTAL

145 900

167 900

98 000

79 600

84 100

Expenditures by sources

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Regular Programme

96 852

128 121

82 000

71 100

68 955

TFs and Project

49 048

39 779

16 000

8 500

15 145

Total

145 900

167 900

98 000

79 600

84 100

Expenditures by sources

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Through FAO

145 900

167 900

98 000

79 600

84 100

Through CIHEAM (estimate)

60 000

60 000

60 000

60 000

60 000

Total

205 900

227 900

158 000

139 600

144 100

Summary of Trust Fund Income and Expenditures
(1997-2001 - in US dollars)
Trust Funds:
UTF/SPA/003/SPA 932200 - Nuts and Olives Networks
GCP/INT/393/MUL 9224.00 – Sustainable Rural Environment and Energy Network, SREN

Contributions received

Trust Fund

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

SREN

15 784

13 555

6 570

0

0

Nuts/Olives

20 000

10 000

19 850

20 000

0

Interest earned

Trust Fund

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

SREN

4 454

4 262

2 772

3 644

2 235

Nuts/Olives

3 627

3 447

2 719

3 866

2 799

Charges for support cost by FAO

Trust Fund

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

SREN

0

0

0

0

0

Nuts/Olives

2 849

1 469

0

0

2 720

Expenditures for Network activities from TF sources

Networks

1997

1998*

1999

2000

2001

SREN

24 284

4 008

16 000

0

0

Nuts

11 340

12 771

0

8 500

15 145

Olives

13424

0

0

0

0

Expenditures for Network activities from Regular Programme Budget sources

RPB

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

SREN

7 216

16 700

17 500

3 000

500

Nuts

15 151

17 000

3 000

5 200

0

Olives

500

500

0

0

0

* In addition to regular Trust Fund support the SREN WG 2 received US$ 23000 from other FAO project funds, which have been included in the table of all network expenditures.


APPENDIX 3


PROPOSED MECHANISM FOR CONTINUED ESCORENA SUPPORT FROM FAO

I. Summary description of functions
The proposed mechanism to enable FAO to continue its support to ESCORENA is based on either a core secretariat or personnel made available to FAO, or a combination of both. In all cases, it would have the following functions:
a) an evaluation/assessment of the networks in order to identify the viable ones;
b) development of project proposals in support of the networks that are retained;
c) establishment of ESCORENA’s relationships with concerned research institutions on a formal institutional basis through letters of agreement (LoA) or memoranda of understanding (MOUs)as appropriate;
d) planning and making proposals for future activities at ESCORENA overall level or at network level, as appropriate, on the basis of results achieved and in coordination with network coordinators and concerned partners, including the CIHEAM and the relevant FAO technical services.
e) monitoring of projects in support of networks, as they become operational, and reporting results to the ECA;

Functions (a) and (b) are a priority and need to be carried out in the first year. The other functions are of a continuing nature.
It is to be noted that function (e) assumes that a project approach is adopted to support network activities; otherwise, network activities require support from other means.
Such functions require a P-4 level professional officer with long experience in research management, in particular knowledge in establishing and running of research networks.
II. Financial requirements per annum for executing the above:
(i) Yearly unlapsed standard cost for a P-4 = US$ 114 204
(ii) Support staff (30% of G-4 secretary + related overtime = US$ 15 594
(iii) Non-staff resources 12 = US$ 39 000
TOTAL PER ANNUM = US$ 168 798

N.B. The above figure does not include non-staff resources ranging between US$ 20 000 to US$ 25 000 per year per network needed to ensure significant catalytic support for active research collaboration through the network mechanism (para. 28 refers).

1 This Document was sent for clearace to the concerned Technical Departments in FAO, the Regional Office for Near East, the ERNAC members and CIHEAM

2 The list giving full names of the 13 networks appears on page 13 of this document.

3 Report prepared in 1998 by the four members of ERNAC (M. Arnoux, A. Bozzini, J.Chataigner and B. Muller-Haye), Document ECA: 31/99(4)

4 The European System of Cooperative Research Newtorks in Agriculture (ESCORENA): Current Situation and Options for its Future, Document ECA:31/99(5)

5 Recent REU Technical Series publications include:
56.** Inventory of Hazelnut Research, Germplasm and References -2000
57. Methods and Tools of Extension in Mountain Farms - 1999
58.** Research Methodologies in Organic Farming - 1999
59. Role of Grazing in the Management of Agro-pastoral Mountain Areas - 1999
60.** Central and Eastern European Workshop on Needs and Potentials for Farm and Farming Systems Data - 1999
61.** Central and Eastern European Sustainable Agriculture Network, First Meeting, Proceedings - 1999
62.** Biodiversity and Feeding Value of Mountain Grasslands in Europe - 2000
63.** Research Methodologies in Organic Farming - On-farm Participatory Research - 2000
64. Inventory of Chestnut Research, Germplasm and References, received for approval - 2001
65. Lowland grasslands proceedings, final editing - 2001
** available on the Internet: http://www.fao.org/regional/europe/public-e.htm

6 id. para. 26

7 The list giving complete names of the 13 networks appears on page 13 of this document.

8 Within corporate strategy C, there is a call for “promoting applied research to underpin the adoption of improved techniques..”, “encouraging linkages among research and development experts and user organizations for problem solving and opportunity identification” and “enhancing the sustainable production and processing of crop, livestock, fishery, wood and non-wood forest products” (C2)

9

10

CIHEAM/IAMZ supported Networks.

11

12

Including report publication, consultancies as required for evaluation and monitoring, and related travel that cover functions mentioned in Section I.