The CGIAR was established in 1971 to support productivity-oriented research to raise food output, in response to specific food needs in the developing regions. During the 1970s and the 1980s, the technology-generation research in the CGIAR was directed principally towards increasing crop productivity and food output. The purpose of the accompanying social science research effort was to complement the biophysical effort to help increase food security through improved production technologies.
Through the 1980s, the international development community began to broaden its views about development, encompassing human and environmental dimensions. Aided by notions of human and civil rights, as well as of freedom and empowerment, development goals were explicitly articulated to go well beyond economic growth and diversification objectives to include poverty alleviation, equity, and quality of life concerns, including environmental sustainability. Consequently, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, there was a fundamental rethink in the CGIAR as to what constituted the central elements of its mission and goals, what research priorities and strategies could contribute efficiently to their achievement for the poor in the developing regions.
The international concerns for the poor and the environment led the CGIAR to accept that it was now addressing poverty alleviation through pro-poor research, and that the social and cultural dimensions and inclusiveness were just as relevant in achieving its goals as the more traditional biophysical, economic, policy and institutional aspects. Consequently, as the 1990s unfolded, the research agenda in the CGIAR, although still focused on increasing productivity and output, began to pay greater attention to the social and sociocultural variables and their interactions with the biophysical, economic, policy and institutional factors. Particularly, attention was focused on participatory approaches to research, and to the use and management of the resources needed for the sustained and efficient production of biological products. Attention was given also to the processes of asset management and capital formation in the context of sustainable rural livelihoods.
1.1.1 Early Years, up to 1990
During the 1970's and 1980's, the CGIAR research agenda was dominated by commodity and production related activities, with success or impact at the farm level seen largely through the adoption of modern varieties of crops. Economists in the social science units at the Centres also contributed, as they do now, to priority setting activities, and social science activities in some Centres included post-production issues such as post-harvest management, food processing, and marketing but with the aim of mainly servicing the commodity improvement programmes. This was in the context of CGIAR's interest in Farming Systems Research (FSR), taking the researcher closer to the ultimate clients and their production, livelihoods and community environments. FSR activities soon led to more sophisticated village-based socioeconomic studies, OFR and research on common property resources management, particularly as off-station and regional research programmes expanded. In its 1987 Review of CGIAR priorities, TAC identified sustainability and NRM as priority issues. The goal statement read as follows: "Through international agricultural research and related activities, to contribute to increasing sustainable food production in developing countries in such a way that the nutritional level and general economic well-being of low income people are improved".
Initially, this altered interest was seen in the context of sustainable production of CGIAR commodities. However, at the MTM in Canberra in 1989, CGIAR members declared their intention to continue emphasizing the CGIAR mandate for research on sustainable agricultural production, but to expand emphasis to include research on the optimum management of forests, fisheries and water. Based on TAC's analysis on the possible expansion of the CGIAR System, the Group at ICW 1990 agreed to include water, agroforestry, forestry and fisheries into its mandate, inviting IIMI, ICRAF, ICLARM and CIFOR to join the CGIAR System.
1.1.2 Recent Years, the 1990s
In 1990, TAC concluded and the CGIAR accepted that effective research in NRM must address both the technical and the human sides of the problem at both the farm and community levels. To accommodate the expansion of the CGIAR, in 1992, the goal statement was replaced with a mission statement which read as follows: "Through international research and related activities, and in partnership with national research systems, to contribute to sustainable improvements in the productivity of agriculture, forestry and fisheries in developing countries in ways that enhance nutrition and well-being especially of low-income people." The mission statement was backed up by nine closely related goals. The first five goals referred to the management of natural resources and the integration of improved commodities into sustainable production systems. The next three goals related to socioeconomics and policy environments. The last goal related to all the other goals by focusing on the development of human resources and on institution building at national or regional level.
In expanding the CGIAR mission, the old concept of food self-sufficiency was "replaced" with the concept of achieving food self-reliance, making income generating non-food commodities and reliance on markets and trade more important to satisfy the basic food and nutritional needs of low-income people. The emphasis on sustainability placed a greater emphasis on the natural resource base, ecoregions and partnerships, leading to ecoregional and other Systemwide strategies to help strengthen natural resource management research and partnerships with NARS and others. Also, issues related to equity, particularly gender equity, and common property resources, received increased emphasis.
In the mid-1990s, the CGIAR formally incorporated poverty alleviation and sustainable food security into its mission and goals. This was a deep and fundamental change in outlook and vision, and its implications on the nature, ethos and research culture of the CGIAR System soon began to make a mark. There was an increasing recognition of the importance of the "context", both physical and sociocultural, and of the variability and diversity of sociological contexts, in addressing rural poverty through improved agricultural productivity. In addition to incorporating a poverty focus into its mission, the CGIAR introduced a project-based research management system to become output driven and improve the impact of its research.
The 1997 TAC review of CGIAR priorities and strategies led to refocusing of CGIAR's overarching goal which read: "The activities carried out by the CGIAR are undertaken in order to fulfill both its mission: to contribute, through its research, to promoting sustainable agriculture for food security in developing countries and its goals: to alleviate poverty and protect natural resources so as to achieve sustainable food security." Poverty weighted adjustments to priorities and resource allocation were recommended by TAC.
1.1.3 New CGIAR Vision and Strategy, and the CGIAR Reform Process
In 2000, the CGIAR adopted a new vision and strategy recommended by TAC. The vision was defined as "A food secure world for all". The overall goal was defined as "To reduce poverty, hunger and malnutrition by sustainably increasing the productivity of resources in agriculture, forestry and fisheries". The mission was defined as "To achieve sustainable food security and reduce poverty in developing countries through scientific research and research-related activities in the fields of agriculture, livestock, forestry, fisheries, policy and natural resources management".
To implement the new vision, an integrated strategy of seven nested planks was endorsed by the CGIAR. The new CGIAR vision and strategy calls for, inter alia, an increased emphasis on pro-poor relevant research, on regional and bottom up orientation, on bringing new science to bear on the often difficult-to-address causes of poverty and food insecurity, on the reorienting of the CGIAR towards undertaking critical Challenge Programmes. With these fundamental changes, the CGIAR is entering a new phase in its development. The new phase requires a much stronger concern for higher standards of scientific relevance and quality, for keeping pace with state of the art in world research, and for being relevant, selective and targeted.
Poverty and food security issues are generally conditioned by the national and regional political and investment environment and cannot be addressed directly through IPG research. The CGIAR therefore must reconcile the divide or gap that exists across the three elements of its research strategy - the IPG nature, the poverty focus and the impact orientation - if it is to remain an effective player in the international agricultural research system. To achieve such reconciliation, the CGIAR must get the context of its research right; it must generate the most critical IPG; and it must have impact on income poverty and NRM. In the new CGIAR strategy, it is the regional approach to research that has the potential to facilitate the needed reconciliation and partnership linkages across the research-to-development continuum.
More recently, with the introduction of Challenge Programmes as part of the CGIAR reform process, the organization of research in the CGIAR is going through a further transition. For the purpose of defining programme structure, accounting and governance, the System's totality of research and research related activities are organized and implemented, accounted for and governed as a continuum of three basic types or categories of programmatic arrangements, namely: (i) Centre Core Programmes; (ii) Systemwide Programmes; and (iii) Challenge Programmes.
Systemwide Programmes cover sets of activities conducted by the Centre among themselves and with various national and partner institutions with specific objectives in mind. However for the most part they are organized and recognized as such to provide scientific coherence to the totality of System activities on a specific theme or problem area and to promote efficiency and effectiveness in their planning, implementation and delivery. They are usually activities no individual Centre can pursue on its own with equal success and those activities which clearly are best conducted in partnership with others.
Challenge Programmes are organizational instruments designed not only to provide coherence and direction to System activities on a specific theme or problem area but to promote efficiency and effectiveness in their conduct as well. They are likewise intended to provide the System's impact on its stated goals of poverty alleviation, promoting food security and enhancing the sustainability of natural resources by drawing in new, additional partners particularly those involved in development and utilization of the System's research outputs, as well as those institutions leading global efforts in conventions and initiatives with similar and/or related goals. However, the introduction of Challenge Programmes is adding to the difficulties in the CGIAR System because so far it has led to further decrease in unrestricted funding, a trend which has continued since the early 1990's. Restricted funding is now generally more than 50%, and is seriously beginning to hurt the quality of science in the CGIAR System.
In 1972 the semi-arid tropics (SAT) was home for many millions of poor people who mainly depended on agriculture and often were hungry and malnourished. In response to this situation, the CGIAR established ICRISAT to serve as an international research centre for genetic improvement of a set of cereal and grain legume crops that had been neglected by scientific institutions and were of particular importance to the food security and livelihoods of people in the SAT. In addition, ICRISAT was to develop improved rainfed farming systems for the SAT. At that time, relatively little research was being conducted on these crops in this zone, and many national programmes in the SAT were weak and lacked trained scientific staff and resources. Major constraints were present due to frequent droughts, heat, soil conditions that were unfavourable for plant growth, and numerous plant pests and diseases. Not surprisingly, little progress had been made in developing crop varieties and cropping systems that were more effective than traditional systems.
By 2003, ICRISAT had contributed to the substantial progress that had occurred in the development and adoption of improved varieties of the mandate crops and compatible rainfed cropping systems for them, especially in South Asia. Significant but less progress had been made in sub-Saharan Africa, especially with respect to the development and adoption of new varieties. In SAT areas of the Americas ICRISAT has had relatively little activity.
As of 2003, a large number of people in the SAT are still poor, hungry and malnourished (refer to Ryan and Spencer, 2001 for sources to the following statistics). In sub-Saharan Africa, 180 million people were estimated to be hungry in 1995/97 with the number projected to increase to 184 million by 2015. In South Asia, 284 million people were estimated to be hungry in 1995/97, but the number was estimated to decrease substantially to 165 million by 2015. Child malnutrition is an insidious manifestation of food insecurity. The proportion and number of malnourished children were estimated to be greater in the SAT than in any other agroecological zone. In sub-Saharan Africa, 31 million children were estimated to be malnourished in 1995 with the number expected to increase by 2020 to 43 - 55 million. In South Asia an estimated 86 million children were malnourished in 1995, but with a projected decrease by 2020 to 61 - 71 million. It should be clear, therefore, that much remains to be done to improve human living conditions in the sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia regions of the SAT.
As of 2003, grains of sorghum and pearl millet are major staple foods of most poor people in the SAT in sub-Saharan Africa, and they are important foods of many poor people in the SAT of South Asia. The majority of the cultivated area of sorghum is in Africa (23 M ha) with 10 M ha in South Asia. Average productivity in the SAT is only 1 ton/ha compared to 3-5 ton/ha that can be achieved on experiment stations in the SAT. Substantial pearl millet is grown in West Africa (12 M ha), mainly in the very dry and infertile Sahelian and Sudan zones, and in India (10 M ha). In southern and eastern Africa 2.5 M ha are grown in 16 countries. Average productivity in the SAT is only 0.7 ton/ha compared with 2 to 3 ton/ha that can be obtained on experiment stations in the SAT. Groundnut is a major oilseed and supplier of protein for people and livestock and is grown on 9.5 M ha in sub-Saharan Africa, 8.3 M ha in India and 5 M ha in China. Average productivity is only 0.9 ton/ha in Africa and India compared with 2 to 3 ton/ha that can be achieved on experiment stations in the SAT. Chickpea is an important source of protein for poor people and is grown on 8 M ha in South Asia with major production in India. In sub-Saharan Africa, chickpea is grown in Ethiopia (2% of world production) and to a smaller extent in Malawi and Tanzania. Average productivity is only 0.8 ton/ha compared with 2.5 to 3.5 ton/ha that can be obtained on experiment stations in the SAT. Pigeonpea is grown on 3.8 M ha in India and 0.4 M ha in sub-Saharan Africa. It is the classic 'orphan crop' in that, other than ICRISAT, few institutions have conducted significant research on pigeonpea. Yet, it is an important source of protein for poor people in the SAT and its importance is growing, especially in India and East Africa.
Research has indicated that important benefits to the efficiency and stability of crop production can occur when combining cereals and grain legumes in cropping systems. In addition, residues from sorghum, pearl millet and grain legume crops provide critical feed for livestock, especially during the dry season, and manure enhances the fertility of the soil. These linkages result in important synergies when crop production and livestock enterprises are combined in mixed farming systems. Currently, livestock are a major component of agricultural systems in large areas of the SAT, and their importance is projected to increase substantially, since as poverty declines, increases occur in the demand for livestock products. Clearly, there still are substantial opportunities for developing improved varieties of the ICRISAT-mandate crops and compatible agricultural systems that can contribute to improving the living conditions of poor people in the SAT by increasing the stability and efficiency of crop and livestock production. International research and national capacity enhancement can contribute to the development of these improved agricultural systems for 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 SAT Asia that have stronger agricultural research systems. Mutual benefits can come to partners involved in a cooperative effort involving many countries and an International Centre.
In addition to crop sciences research, 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. In this regard, and 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. Scientific and technical advances in agricultural, ecological and social sciences, including biotechnology, mathematical modeling and participatory methods of research and development, have 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 as discussed in section 4.2.
At the first meeting of TAC in mid-1971, a team was commissioned to examine the suggestion put forward earlier, when IITA and CIAT were being established, to address research needs of humid tropical Africa and Latin America, that an international institute for improvement of agriculture in the semi-arid tropics be established. It recommended the "establishment of, along the pattern and principle of IRRI, of ICRISAT to be located in India, which would serve as (a) a world research Centre for improvement of sorghum, millet, pigeonpea, and chickpea; and (b) a Centre to promote the development and demonstration of improved cropping patterns and systems of farming which optimize the use of human and natural resources in low rainfall, unirrigated, and semi-arid tropics. The team also recommended that "if major attention is to be given by the Institute to additional crops such as groundnut, additional resources would be required". Groundnut was added to the list of crops in 1976.
ICRISAT began formally on 5 July 1972 with the adoption of its constitution and the establishment of its Governing Board. ICRISAT defined its formal mandate, as stated in its 1973-74 Annual Report, as follows. ICRISAT is to:
Serve as a world Centre for the improvement of grain yield and quality of sorghum, pearl millet, chickpea and pigeonpea. Groundnut will be added as a fifth crop next year.
Develop improved farming systems which will help to increase and stabilize agriculture production through better use of natural and human resources in the seasonally-dry semi-arid tropics.
Identify socioeconomic and other constraints to agricultural development in the semi-arid tropics and to evaluate alternative means of alleviating them through technological and institutional changes.
Assist national and regional research programmes through cooperation and support and contributing further by sponsoring conferences, operating international training programmes, and assisting extension activities.
In 1982, the Institute celebrated its 10th anniversary with no further change in its formal mandate beyond the addition of the ground nut crop. By that time ICRISAT had research teams or scientists located in Mexico, Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, Nigeria, Sudan, Kenya, Malawi, Zimbabwe, and Syria. In 1986, the ICRISAT Sahelian Centre (ISC) was established at Niamey, Niger, to serve as a regional centre for research and training.
Some two years before its 20th anniversary, ICRISAT developed its first Strategic Plan which was approved by its Board in 1990. Finger millet was added to the mandate crops because of its importance in eastern and southern Africa. According to the Plan, ICRISAT's strategy for combining research with technology exchange was based on the concept of centres, teams and networks. ICRISAT Centre in India serves as the global Centre where most of the strategic and upstream applied research and most of the advanced training is being done. ICRISAT Sahelian Centre serves as a regional centre where some strategic research and most of the applied research relevant to the West African semi-arid tropics and training are conducted.
In 1993, ICRISAT restructured itself into a corporate organization with four regional entities: Asia, Southern Eastern Africa (SEA); West and Central Africa (WCA); and Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). The former ICRISAT Centre comprised the Corporate Office and the ICRISAT Asia centre (IAC). The ISC at Niamey served as the regional headquarters for WCA, together with the teams at Kano, and at Bamako. The facilities at Matopos (Zimbabwe) served as regional headquarters for SEA, together with teams at Lilongwe (Malawi), Nairobi and Addis Ababa. No special facilities for LAC region were established. For each region, a Regional Executive Director (RED) was appointed for the management and support of research focused on the main production system of that region.
To facilitate the definition, development, management and conduct of global research and related projects, a multi-dimensional matrix management system was developed and introduced in 1994. The axes of the matrix were designed to emphasize shared responsibilities, goals and outcomes through development and delivery of a global research project portfolio with disciplinary input and regional foci. In contrast with the earlier hierarchical set up, the objective of the matrix approach was to devolve the responsibility for the management of research and resources to project teams and leaders, along with increased accountability.
At the time of the 1990 EPMR, ICRISAT's programme comprised 280 projects. In 1995, these were reduced to 22 global projects, and further reduced to 12 in 1997. The reduction in the number of projects was guided by the need for more focus and integration of related projects. The research projects were based on the 92 core research themes embedded in the ICRISAT 1994-98 MTP. The 22 projects were composed of 15 commodity projects on 5 mandated crops, 4 integrated systems projects that focused on multi-commodity systems, 2 projects on markets and policy and impact assessment, and a genetic resource project. At that time, ICRISAT allocated 52% of its resources to increasing productivity; 19% to protecting the environment; 8% to saving biodiversity; 7% to improving polices; and 14% to strengthening NARS. Regional resource allocation was 56% to Asia and 44% to Africa.
In 1998, ICRISAT restructured its research and research-related activities into four programmes: Genetic Resources and Enhancement (coordinated from Patancheru); Natural Resources Management (from Bamako); Socioeconomics and Policy (from Matopos); and Information Resource Management (from Patancheru), with a portfolio of 10 projects. In 2000, ICRISAT began the formulation of a new vision and strategy to 2010 that was recast for implementation in 2002. The Institute's new vision was defined as: "Improved well-being of the poor of the semi-arid tropics through agricultural research for impact" Its mission was defined as: "to help the poor of the semi-arid tropics through science with a human face and partnership-based research, and to increase crop productivity and food security, to reduce poverty, and to protect the environment in SAT farming systems."
Figure 1.1 New ICRISAT O&M Structure (Effective 1 February 2003)
The current research programme structure (Figure 1.1) comprises six global research themes: GT1 - Harnessing Biotechnology for the Poor comprising five regional projects and with the Global Theme Leader (GTL) based at Patancheru; GT2 - Crop Improvement, Management and Utilization for Food Security and Health (formerly Crop Management and Utilization for Food Security and Health) comprising five regional projects and with GTL based in Patancheru; GT3 - Water, Soil and Agro-biodiversity Management for Ecosystem Resilience comprising four regional projects with GTL based in Matopos; GT4 - Sustainable Seed Supply Systems for Productivity comprising four regional projects with GTL based in Nairobi; GT5 - Enhancing Crop-Livestock Productivity and Systems Diversification comprising three regional projects with GTL based in Niamey; and GT6 - SAT Futures and Development Pathways comprising six regional projects with GTL based at Patancheru. In Africa, there are three regional teams - West and Central, Southern and Eastern.
Resource allocation across five CGIAR outputs in 2002 was: 10.8% Germplasm Collection; 31.2% Germplasm Improvement; 29.4% Sustainable production systems; 15.6% Policy; 13.0% Enhancing NARS. Regional resource allocation was 51.1% to Asia and 48.9% to Africa.
The 4th EPMR covered the period from 1991 to 1996. The EPMR contained 10 explicit recommendations and 67 more or less strong suggestions. Some powerful suggestions were not highlighted but could be detected by careful reading of the report. Some of the recommendations and suggestions in the report, if adequately addressed, would have required significant changes in the types and extents of financial commitments from the donor community. However, the downward spiral in core-funding of ICRISAT, already obvious in 1997, has not changed since. The action taken by the Centre should be seen in that light. As usual, the Institute responded to the recommendations and suggestions and either agreed to accept them or took issue with them. For the benefit of the EPR, a document was prepared by ICRISAT laying out the actions taken by the Centre.
The response to the first 2 recommendations related to Genetic Resources research is worthy of praise. Also the recommendations related to partnership have been actively addressed but in the area of NRM could still be improved (CCER-NRM). One of the other major research recommendations, to transfer the NRM programme to Africa, can be considered as unfinished business (CCER-NRM). Overall, the EPR Panel thus considers the actions taken in the research domain over the past 6 years in response to the 4th EPMR to be of mixed quality. In part, this may have been directly related to disagreements that existed within and between management and the board (see chapter 6) which seem to have been sorted out at the time of this review. There is little doubt that the resulting turbulence has delayed the ability of the Centre to deal with these issues, but the ever existing or looming budget crises and the staff adjustments needed to deal with them will have played a role as well.
ICRISAT's action in response to the recommendations of the 1997 External Review is tabulated in Appendix V, together with this Panel's comments. The Panel has provided its assessment of ICRISAT's actions in the appropriate sections of this report.
){kind=link}