Table of Contents

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS BASED ON REGIONAL CONFERENCE REPORTS AND UPDATE OF QUESTIONNAIRE TO MEMBER NATIONS

NOTE ON METHODOLOGY

REGIONAL ANALYSES BASED ON THE UPDATED QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES

PATTERN OF RESPONSES FROM OECD AND NON-OECD GROUP OF COUNTRIES

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS BASED ON REGIONAL CONFERENCE REPORTS AND UPDATE OF QUESTIONNAIRE TO MEMBER NATIONS

NOTE ON METHODOLOGY

1. To introduce regional perspectives in the Strategic Framework, three major sources of information were drawn upon: (a) the reports of the most recently held round of Regional Conferences, (b) an update¹ of the questionnaire sent out to all Members as a first step in consulting FAO's main stakeholders (June 1998); and (c) FAO Regional and Sub-regional Office's submissions regarding their own role in FAO's corporate strategies over the medium to long term.

2. Thus, to highlight the strategic elements specific to each region, not only were FAO Regional and Sub-regional Offices submissions used, but also account was taken of the statements and requests of Member Nations in their regions, as expressed in the FAO Regional Conference debates, and in consultation with major regional partners. With respect to North America only the information appearing in the questionnaire to Members was used. The analysis of the questionnaire responses was focussed on regions and income level rather than approached globally, as was done so far (see table 1, "Goals-Related Areas of Work for FAO - Regional Distribution" and table 2, "Goals-Related Areas of Work for FAO - Global, non-OECD and OECD").

3. The continued relevance of the questionnaire for the present analysis is based on the linkages existing between "goals-related areas of work"- as defined in the questionnaire - and the corporate strategic objectives which were eventually identified through the Strategic Framework process. It will be recalled that Members indicated through the questionnaire their agreement with the substance of the three "global goals" and gave a generally high degree of priority to the five "areas", or major categories of work, related to the global goals. Varying views, mostly positive, were expressed on the importance attached to FAO's role as a supplier of services in each area. Subsequently, these "areas of work" formed the basis for the proposed five major corporate strategies and related strategic objectives.

4. As may be seen in the attached tables, responses are more differentiated on a regional basis than when taken globally and, as is to be expected, the role of FAO in support of sectoral development, as expressed in the strategic objectives or "areas of work", appears to be largely a function of the level of development of the responding Member. To help focus on the differences in response between the regions and between the OECD and non-OECD groups of countries, only two categories of ratings are shown in the tables: for level of priority, the percentage of governments which rated the "area of work" as A (highest priority) or B (high priority to be addressed to the extent resources permit); and for the importance attached to the role of FAO, the percentage which rated it as C (minor) or D (little or no role for FAO). The reason for adopting this approach is that it would visually highlight differences, as only one set of numbers (instead of four) is given for each region or group of countries. It should also help reveal the existence of a pattern of responses showing a high level of priority given to a particular area while FAO's role is rated as "minor or little" in that area - which would clearly be a matter for concern.

REGIONAL ANALYSES BASED ON THE UPDATED
QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES

Africa

5. In view of the comprehensiveness of the identified regional priorities, it is probably not surprising to find that the questionnaire returns amply confirm them, showing a generally high level of priority attached to all "areas of work" (over 90 percent of responses gave a rating of "highest"or "high"). Likewise, FAO's role is strongly supported in all these areas with only a very small minority of the governments rating FAO's role in some areas as "minor or little" (from one to three countries, 3 to 9 percent respectively in table 1).

Asia and the Pacific

6. The Members' responses to the Strategic Framework questionnaire generally reflect a broad range of development priorities identified for the region, showing a generally high level of priority attached to all "areas of work" (90 percent or more of responses). Likewise, FAO's role is strongly supported in all these areas with only a very small minority of governments in the region rating FAO's role in some areas as "minor or little" (four to five countries, 15 to 20 percent respectively in table 1).

Latin America and the Caribbean

7. The responses to the questionnaire for this region generally reflect the development priorities identified for the region, showing a generally high level of priority attached to all "areas of work" (93 percent or more of responses). Likewise, FAO's role is strongly supported in all these areas, although a few governments, slightly more than in the other two regions reviewed above, rate FAO's role as "minor or little" in the areas entitled "regular assessment of trends - for your country" and "adoption of national policies to meet accepted standards" (six countries, 21 percent in table 1).

Near East

8. The Members' responses to the Strategic Framework questionnaire showed a consistently high level of priority attached to all "areas of work" (100 percent of responses). Likewise, FAO's role is strongly supported in all areas but three, although the governments rating FAO's role as "little or minor" are very few (see table 1: only 3 countries rated FAO's role as "little or minor" for "regular assessment of trends - for your country"; two for "improved management of natural resources" and two for "policies supporting more equitable access by all to natural resources").

Europe and North America

9. In the Europe and North America regions, the Members' responses to the Strategic Framework questionnaire showed an unquestioned high level of priority in three areas: "food security", "provision of a global set of data" and "regular assessment of trends - globally". For the other areas, support was generally lower than in other regions, reflecting the particular concerns and priorities identified in this highly developed region. Likewise, FAO's role is strongly supported in all these three areas while it is rated as "little or minor" in several others, particularly for "regular assessment of trends - for your country".

10. To acquire a perception of North American views in the region, use was made of the individual country returns and of an analysis of OECD countries taken as a group. Individual returns for North America Members showed a very similar pattern of response to that presented by the OECD group of countries taken as a whole. Thus, rather than present percentages based on a sample of only two countries, an analysis of the OECD group of countries was used.

PATTERN OF RESPONSES FROM OECD AND NON-OECD
GROUP OF COUNTRIES

11. As shown in table 2, OECD member countries assign a very high level of priority to four areas: "food security", "provision of a global set of data", "regular assessment of trends - globally", and "improved management of natural resources". The areas receiving the lowest frequency of support are "regular assessment of trends - for your country (70%)", "facilitating the adoption of sustainable packages" (82%) and "sectoral policy advice and assistance" (84%). This is in contrast to the pattern of responses from non-OECD countries which tend to assign a very high level of priority to these same areas (97% and up).

12. Likewise, the role of FAO is viewed as "minor or little" more often than in non-OECD countries, particularly so with respect to the areas denominated "regular assessment of trends - for your country" (88 percent or 25 countries); "facilitating the adoption of sustainable packages" (56 percent or 16 countries) and "policies supporting more equitable access by all to natural resources" (42 percent or 12 countries). Such results would appear to be consistent with a higher level of income and development than in the rest of the world.

Table 1: Goals-related Areas of Work for FAO - Regional Distribution (percentage of responses)

Table 2: Goals-related Areas of Work for FAO - Global, non-OECD and OECD (percentage of responses)

1   125 countries have now responded as of 5 March 1999, 11 more since the last update on 2 November 1998. The rate of response has been generally very high, the highest being Latin America and Caribbean (85 percent), the lowest the Near East region (52 percent) while the rest stood at 67 percent or better.