ICRISAT Today
The Panel believes that there still are substantial opportunities for developing improved varieties of ICRISAT-mandate crops and compatible agricultural systems that can contribute to improving the living conditions of poor people in the SAT by increasing the effectiveness of crop and livestock production. Other research efforts are required to ensure that the products of crop improvement and farming systems research also achieve desired impact socially, economically and environmentally. Given growing problems of natural resource degradation in the SAT, there is a need for international research and national capacity enhancement in natural resource management, socioeconomics and impact quantification and assessment. International research and national capacity enhancement can contribute to the development of improved systems for managing agricultural and natural resources of the SAT in countries where national agricultural research systems are weak, such as many countries in sub-Saharan Africa, but less so in countries in South Asia that have stronger agricultural research systems.
Scientific and technical advances are occurring with the potential to substantially contribute to the alleviation of poverty, hunger and malnutrition. These advances provide additional compelling justification for a continued and stronger international role for ICRISAT in the SAT for those circumstances where it has a comparative advantage in research over other organizations.
ICRISAT has gone through some drastic changes during the review period partly in response to the 4th EPMR and partly due to unexpected changes in leadership. In response to a recent new vision and strategy, ICRISAT's research now is organized into six global research themes. In Africa, there are three regional teams - West and Central, Southern, and Eastern, each with a Regional Representative. The Panel is of the opinion that the restructuring and the thematic reformatting of research activities have been well-intended. However, because ICRISAT has not completed its strategic planning exercise, the Institute has not yet fully identified its regional and global priorities in response to the geographically differentiated needs, challenges and opportunities for IPG research across the SAT. Resolution of these issues is central to defining an effective balance in the type and size of research efforts in Asia compared with Africa.
In response to the 4th EPMR, ICRISAT adopted a new strategic approach in germplasm research using all necessary disciplines to exploit more scientifically, systematically and fully the genetic endowment represented in the genebank. At Patancheru, GT1 (Harnessing Biotechnology for the Poor) has established a strong biotechnology programme, which has facilitated molecular evaluation of accessions and the definition of core collections by the Genetic Resources Unit.
The Panel applauds the demonstrated impact of ICRISAT's gene products in Asia and Africa during the review period. The quality of ICRISATs research on genetic resources and plant breeding is judged as being very high. The Panel also judges the quality of ICRISAT's cultivars as being very high. In recent years, several scientists working in the pearl millet, groundnut, sorghum, pigeonpea and chickpea teams have received major personal scientific awards. International public goods were generated by the biotechnology programme that have substantial value for use by public and private sector scientists and consumers. ICRISAT has developed large and informative genetic resources and genomics databases for the mandate crops. Some 94% of the total collection (100,000 accessions) has been characterized over the last 25 years. The genomic databases are unique and valuable.
The Panels analysis of ICRISAT's published output suggests that, on average, the ICRISAT scientific community is reasonably productive in that an adequate amount of its published work has been deemed of acceptable standard by the global scientific community. Cause for concern is the fact that, while some themes and scientists have exemplary publication records, other themes and scientists have publication records that have marginal quality.
A fundamental issue affecting ICRISAT's relationships in India is the perceived degree of overlap in their programmes. The ICAR system is primarily responsible for agricultural research activities in India. Information available to the Panel suggests that relations at the scientific and administrative levels between ICRISAT and ICAR have dramatically improved since the last EPMR.
The Panel feels ICRISAT has pursued the development of appropriate partnerships with the NARS and other stakeholders.
ICRISAT has properly recognized the need for an effective vision and strategy and claims to be guided by the seven new planks of the CGIAR derived from its vision of a food secure world for all. The ICRISAT mission statement elaborates on the vision in that it promises to pursue the vision while insuring the protection of the environment and in partnership with many stakeholders. The promise of the mission statement is to conduct 'Science with a human face'. The Centre's mission focuses on the SAT's poor and aims to improve their livelihood.
ICRISAT's strategy is to accomplish its mission through problem-based, impact -driven regional and local projects that are subsumed in six Global Research Themes (GTs).
ICRISAT's mandated domain of operation is the tropical region with a short growing season, recurrent droughts, vulnerable soils, and limited run-off. This is, no doubt, one of the most challenging environments for the pursuit of this mission. The Panel considers it unwise to make promises that are quantitative and can or will not be met, but the absence of any concrete milestones in the Vision and Mission statements that will guide ICRISAT in the coming years, will make it more difficult to measure accomplishments of the Centre as part of strategic planning.
The Panel also notes that, although the Strategy may serve as a broad statement of principle, it lacks specificity. Particularly, it lacks the context of the major challenges that shape ICRISAT's agenda. Though the Vision statement acknowledges the differences between SA and SSA, it makes little effort to analyse these regions in order to differentiate the major challenges and resulting strategies.
The Panel believes that the comparative advantages of ICRISAT in research are in the following areas. 1) Developing, maintaining, and enhancing the use of germplasm collections of its mandate crop species. 2) Breeding enhanced germplasm and, in the short term improved varieties in some cases, and developing improved breeding methods for its mandate crop species. 3) Developing improved rainfed, cropping and integrated cropping and livestock systems for the SAT in sub-Saharan Africa that include its mandate crop species and consideration of larger-scale aspects of NRM, such as enhanced watershed and agro-ecosystem management. 4) Analysis of institutions, policy, commercialization of seed systems, and the marketing of ICRISAT mandate crops. 5) Generating data and analysis of the evolution of rural communities in the SAT.
In other areas of research, ICRISAT needs to carefully assess its comparative advantage and should focus on strategic research possibly facilitated by strong partnerships with ARl's. ICRISAT will have difficulty in conducting and sustaining research of high quality in areas where it does not have a clear comparative advantage.
The six global research themes of ICRISAT are: GT1 Harnessing biotechnology for the poor; GT2 Crop improvement, management and utilization for food security and health; GT3 Water, soil and agro-biodiversity management for ecosystem health; GT4 Sustainable seed supply systems for productivity; GT5 Enhancing crop-livestock productivity and systems diversification; and GT6 SAT futures and development pathways. In addition, a Systemwide Programme on the Desert Margins (DMP) is managed independently.
The Panel commends ICRISAT and GT1 for its efforts to bring to bear "new science and tools" for conservation and improvement of its mandate crops, and for its ground-breaking achievements in the development of transformation systems and transgenic products in its mandate crops. The Panel assessment is that ICRISAT should continue to undertake strategic research on genomics and transgenic product development for SAT crops; and together with the CGIAR Centres and relevant partners, address the pressing issues on intellectual property, biosafety and public acceptance of transgenic crops.
The Panel commends ICRISAT and GT2 for its impressive achievements in plant breeding. In 1998, ICRISAT received the King Baudouin Award for the crop improvement research of GT2 with pigeonpea. In 2002, ICRISAT gained another King Baudouin Award for its crop improvement research on chickpea. For GT2, the Panel assessment is that ICRISAT should rapidly rebuild its plant breeding programmes in Africa, and re-engineer its genetic resources and enhancement programme in Patancheru. India, by combining staff from both GT1 and GT2, to further enhance the evolution of the two-pronged breeding strategy for Asia and Africa.
The Panel believes that ICRISAT should phase out GT3 research in Asia where it no longer has a comparative advantage, by devolving this research to NARS. These resources should be redeployed in Africa where they should be engaged in addressing some of the major challenges in land, water and agro-biodiversity research facing the SAT of that continent.
The Panel believes that GT4 should be involved in more strategic research, including analyses of anticipated problems confronting the marketing of the transgenic products ICRISAT is planning to produce.
GT5 lacks critical mass and the Panel believes that it should be restructured by transferring assessment of feed quality to GT2, ceasing activities in Asia, and integrating the remaining activities into GT3.
The Panel believes that more social science resources should be re-allocated from GT6 to the other themes operating in Africa under the leadership of non social scientists, and that the work programme should be more sharply focused on strategic assessments and activities that best inform macro and longer-run priority setting in ICRISAT.
The Panel believes that the current Board understands its role to be one of oversight, not management as occurred in the past. The Panel considers that the current Vision and Strategy is of limited help in guiding donors or staff, and that the Board should have demanded a more elaborate and concrete Vision and Strategic Plan as a basic framework for its oversight role. Overall, the Panel considers that the Board has, in the past few years, become effective in working with management and staff.
Arrival of the current DG marked a new era in leadership at the senior management level. New vision and programme structures were defined while attention was directed to reconciling political tensions within and outside the Institute. At the same time, leadership was provided to further develop the upstream biotechnology and genetic enhancement programme. The Panel believes this achievement deserves special recognition. The recent arrival of a DDG-Research improves the prospect of scientific leadership in the Centre.
The new programme structure involving GT leaders and regional representatives has laid a foundation for a corporate leadership that is stronger, wiser and confident. This transformation must involve further delegation of authority to the scientific leadership and staff, and the strengthening of ICRISAT's presence in Africa. From a research perspective, overall, leadership at the Centre seems to have built a credible and coherent system. However, a disproportionate fraction of the power appears based in SA where finances are centrally planned and managed.
ICRISAT's unrestricted resources have seen a significant drop during the review period, and are expected to decrease further during the 2003-2005 period. This is in line with the trend in the CGIAR System where unrestricted resources decreased from 51% in 1999 to 37% in 2002, and the trend is expected to continue. Serious concerns are being registered by CBC/CDC/Centres and iSC regarding the negative impact of less than optimal level of unrestricted funding on science quality and programme effectiveness. The Panel is of the view that the management and Board should assess the operational and programmatic implications of managing the Institute in a future with less than 30% unrestricted funding.
The Panel commends ICRISAT for upgrading its communications infrastructure for connectivity, networking, knowledge exchange, library access, learning and capacity building. However the Panel seriously questions ICRISAT's comparative advantage in operating a distance learning initiative of the type and scope embodied in the Virtual University for the SAT.
ICRISAT in the Future
The Panel takes note of the rapidly changing research environment in Asia. It is also conscious of the fact that hundreds of millions of the world's poor are still living in the Asian SAT. However, this is now a region of major economic and technological advances, with the major SAT country India, having the World's second largest agricultural research community. The Panel believes that a traditional IARC, such as ICRISAT, can only make limited additional contributions to the generation of knowledge in the Asian SAT. National governments or regional bodies are able to and should be encouraged to take over this role. The Panel therefore sees a continuing role for ICRISAT in the Asian SAT only in strategic plant genetic resources and enhancement (PGRE) for the mandate crops.
At the same time it is very clear that it is in the African SAT that the Centre still has wide scope for generating IPGs, and maintains clear comparative advantage in many areas of research. ICRISAT must find a way of accomplishing the same successes in Africa as it has achieved in Asia. For that to happen it needs to better define its longer-term role in SSA and must build on the fact that SSA is the region where it can have major impacts on development through the delivery of IPGs during the next decade.
The Panel considers the efforts so far to transfer of the NRM programme of ICRISAT to Africa as recommended by the 4th EPMR as unfinished business. The Panel also believes that even a significant part of the conventional plant breeding capability should be re-deployed to Africa. However, since a world class PGRE programme in Hyderabad would require more staff than currently exist in ICRISAT, the transfer of conventional breeders to Africa would necessitate replacement by highly competent regionally or nationally recruited or seconded Asian scientists.
In the Panel's view, the most desirable future option for ICRISAT is a win-win situation in which the African programmes of ICRISAT would be significantly strengthened while at the same time strategic PGRE research with a global perspective, serving ICRISAT in Africa and the NARS in Asia is maintained. The Panel believes that ICRISAT should rapidly restructure its programmes and transfer its Headquarters, and all programmes except its strategic plant genetic resources enhancement programme, to sub-Saharan Africa.
Finally, the Panel believes that this is a defining moment for ICRISAT. It must seize the enabling opportunity that now exists for the Institute to transform into a premier Centre of scientific excellence for the 21st century in the service of the people of the SAT regions in Africa and Asia. The CGIAR must offer its full support to ICRISAT to ensure that the Institute is transformed promptly to ensure that it continues to offer a high return to investment for many decades to come.
LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS
CHAPTER 5 - THE GLOBAL THEMES
1. The Panel recommends that ICRISAT continue to undertake strategic research on genomics and transgenic product development for SAT crops; and together with the other CGIAR Centres and relevant partners, address the pressing issues on intellectual property, biosafety and public acceptance of transgenic crops.
2. The Panel recommends that ICRISAT should maximize the synergy possible when GT1 (Harnessing Biotechnology for the Poor) and GT2 (Crop Improvement, Management and Utilization for Food Security and Health) plus their partners work closely together to generate International Public Goods for the SAT. ICRISAT should rapidly re-engineer and rebuild its crop improvement programmes and further enhance the evolution of the two-pronged breeding strategy for Asia and Africa.
3. The Panel recommends that ICRISAT phases out GT3 (Water, Soil and Agrobio-diversity Management) research in Asia where it no longer has a comparative advantage, by devolving this research to NARS. These resources should be redeployed in Africa where they should be engaged in addressing some of the major challenges in land, water and agro-biodiversity research facing the SAT of that continent.
4. The Panel recommends that ICRISAT prioritize and consolidate its activities in Integrated Pest Management (IPM) and Integrated Disease Management (IDM). Potential projects should be chosen with priority being given to projects that address constraints that are important in Africa and are potentially solvable through IPM or IDM approaches.
5. The Panel recommends that ICRISAT rationalize the role, scope and objectives in terms of its comparative advantage in conducting research generating IPGs in GT4 (Seed systems). This includes addressing the anticipated problems related to marketing transgenic materials it will produce. The purposes and goals of GT4 will be best served if its activities are strongly anchored into appropriate global themes where interdisciplinarity can be enhanced and resources more efficiently and effectively utilized.
6. The Panel recommends that GT5 (Enhancing crop-livestock productivity and systems diversification) should transfer assessment of feed quality to GT2 (Crop Improvement, management and utilization) and cease its other activities in Asia. The level of staffing should be increased, and strategic research in sub-Saharan Africa expanded, particularly in landscape level research on new systems. To ensure coherence in ICRISAT's programmes this theme should be merged with GT3 (Water, soil and agro-biodiversity management).
7. The Panel recommends more vigorous implementation of the recommendations of the CCER of Socioeconomics and Policy Research Programme at ICRISAT, 1996-2001. More social science resources should be re-allocated from GT6 (SAT Futures and Development Pathways) to the other themes under the leadership of non social scientists and the work programme should be more sharply focused on strategic assessments and activities that best inform macro and longer-run priority setting in ICRISAT.
CHAPTER 6 - PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT AND SUPPORT
8. The Panel recommends that ICRISAT should rationalize the role, scope and objectives of the Institute in the distance learning for farmers initiative called the Virtual University for the SAT and provide management with clear guidance on where the limits of ICRISAT's interest lie consistent with its comparative advantage in IPG research. Further, the term University should be replaced with a more appropriate term such as "Virtual Learning Centre for the SAT".
CHAPTER 7 - ICRISAT IN THE FUTURE
9. The Panel recommends that ICRISAT should rapidly restructure its programmes and transfer its Headquarters, and all programmes except its strategic plant genetic resources and enhancement programme, to sub-Saharan Africa.
