6.1.1. Host Government
6.1.2. National Agricultural Research Systems
6.1.3. Global and Regional Organizations outside the CGIAR
6.1.4. Advanced Research Institutions
6.1.5. CGIAR Centres
6.1.6. Networking
6.1.7. Donor Relations
6.1.8. Institutional Support within CIAT
CIAT enjoys outstandingly good relations with its host, the Government of Colombia. Discussions with CIAT management revealed no major issues pending between the two sides. The Panel Chairman (Main Phase) had an opportunity in Bogota to discuss the relationship with the Vice-Minister for Agriculture (the Ministry being the Centre's formal host in Colombia), with the Acting General Manager of ICA (which for many years was the country's principal research body but now has mainly regulatory functions), and with the Executive Director of CORPOICA (which has taken over the research responsibilities from ICA). These discussions confirmed that CIAT and Colombia have a warm relationship, and close practical cooperation. There do not appear to be major points of tension.
A remarkable proof of this is the fact that in 1994, the Government became a generous donor to CIAT and thus a member of the CGIAR despite budgetary difficulties of its own. Its 1994 special contribution was 1,000 million pesos (equivalent to about US$ 1.2 million). For 1995, an increase to 1,300 million pesos is planned (probably about US$ 1.5 million, depending on exchange rates at the time). The pledge to CIAT takes the form of restricted core funding for ongoing projects. Joint mechanisms have been set up to handle project selection.
For future years, the Colombian authorities expect to be actively involved in the formulation of the projects which their contribution will finance. This is in line with the new host country agreement referred to in Chapter 8.1. Maintenance of the current excellent relationship will require CIAT's sensitivity to the fact that CORPOICA is a very different, and potentially much stronger, partner than was ICA. For its part, CORPOICA will need to be sensitive to CIAT's regional and global mandates, and aware of the complex decision-making processes of a CGIAR Centre. A fruitful domain for joint planning and research could be problems of common interest to Colombia and other countries in the region.
Four levels of contacts can be identified between CIAT and NARS: The Director General formally interacts with NARS Directors, reviewing historical relationships and laying the basis for future collaboration. The Deputy Director General for Research, the CIAT Office for Institutional Relations and Development Support and the Programme Leaders interact with national research managers and scientists to evaluate and plan collaborative activities. CIAT outposted staff, often based on a local research station, work collaboratively with NARS scientists. Finally, interaction occurs through networks, conferences and training courses as well as the flow of genetic material and collaborative observation on its local performance.
In the course of country visits, Panel members listened to some of the Centre's NARS partners, and in a few cases with partners in universities and in the NGO and private sectors. In general, in Africa, Latin and Central America, and Asia, the Panel found partners with a favourable impression, both of the value of CIAT to them and of their relationship with CIAT. Panel members heard particularly strong expressions of support for the Bean networks in Africa.
Within this broad collegiality there were criticisms. The funding crisis at CIAT has required rapid action from time to time, especially in the programmes most heavily cut. This has sometimes been taken without adequate consultation. The Panel's attention was drawn to the loss of technical support from CIAT after devolution of the coordination of the PROFIJEROL network to the central American NARS in 1993 and the withdrawal of a Bean Programme staff member from Brazil. Similarly, the decision to close down research on irrigated rice and suspend support for the INGER, CRIN and RIEPT networks evoked a critical reaction from several LAC countries.
Subsequently, as described in section 2.4., CIAT has handled the continuation of irrigated rice research by the creation of a private sector based consortium, and has made a commitment to support it. Through this innovative initiative the Centre has regained its credibility among the major rice producing countries of the region.
Developments at global and regional levels are bringing CIAT into contact with an ever-widening range of organizations, and are leading to intensified cooperation with long-standing partners, especially in the field of NRM. The trend is towards shared endeavours among many partners in tackling the complex problems of sustainability. Typically, a major exercise such as the global initiative on Alternatives to Slash-and-Burn involves IARCs, non-CG centres, bilateral aid programmes, United Nations agencies, NARS and NGOs. Cooperation with different types of organization is no longer conducted in a series of watertight compartments.
CIAT has been extending its cooperation, both directly and in broad-based initiatives, with IICA, CATIE and other regional organizations. Globally it is developing new links with non-CG centres such as IBSRAM (in the SWNM initiative) and with United Nations programmes (notably UNEP on GIS and indicators of sustainability).
While the Panel has incomplete information on how CIAT is viewed by its partners, it believes that the Centre has a reasonably good record of cooperation. Some difficult relationships were encountered in the ASB (Latin America) exercise (a reference is made in Chapter 3.3). No other specific problems came to the Panel's attention.
The trend towards greater cooperation among organizations is clearly a good thing, and in earlier chapters the Panel has made some suggestions on the development of further links. Nevertheless, there are limitations on how far such a trend can go. Every joint endeavour has transaction costs, and the time spent by scientists on liaison and consultation reduces the time they can devote to their own research. At some stage, the Centre will have to consider trade-offs, and may find it advisable to put a brake on involvement in additional multipartner exercises.
In earlier chapters covering the work of individual programmes and units, cooperation with advanced research institutions has been frequently mentioned. Altogether, more than one hundred institutions interact in one way or another with CIAT. In the Panel's judgment, both the CIAT strategy and its culture strongly encourage the development of such relationships. In areas of new technology (virology, biotechnology, GIS) the Centre appears to have struck a reasonable balance between building up in-house capacity and relying on advanced institutions.
Recent CGIAR policy has encouraged the development of ecoregional and systemwide initiatives. This has dramatically increased the level of interaction between centres. The formation of consortia, with other IARCs and with NARS, to plan and implement these initiatives has been a major preoccupation for CIAT over the last three years.
The Centre is currently involved in fifteen consortia or alliances, of which ten have been proposed or formed since the beginning of 1994. CIAT is playing a convening or leading role in eight of these fifteen institutional groupings (Annex VI refers). With CIAT also managing a funding crisis this very rapid pace of change penalized the consultation process, both on downsizing and on the formation and allocation of responsibilities in consortia. For example some difficulties have emerged in the implementation of the ASB programme in Rondonia and Acre. CIAT perhaps needs to be more assertive, in its capacity of ecoregional convenor for LAC, in arbitrating complaints within that consortium.
CIAT seems to the Panel to be torn between giving priority to its internal health and positioning itself strongly in this new dimension of the CGIAR. Evaluation is difficult until the dust dies down and currently the appropriate balance is difficult for management to assess. However, it is clear that the internal integrity of the Centre is the sine qua non for success at the System as well as the Centre level. The Panel is convinced that once the dust settles there will be plenty of systemwide opportunities remaining and believes a strong role can be played by CIAT's discipline-based Units over a range of themes. For the moment the Centre should come first.
In visiting IITA, Panel members were pleased with the collegial relationship with CIAT staff they observed. The Panel believe, however, that greater synergy could be realised from this long standing collaboration, in particular by a closer focus on the needs of Africa in priority setting by the CIAT Cassava Programme. IITA is clearly in a strong position to help articulate these priorities.
The country visit to Uganda provided the inter-centre highlight of the Panel's travels. The NARS of Uganda is in negotiation with several IARCs, including CIAT, to bring their regional staff to join national staff in reviving Namulonge research station, a well-known name in the history of research in east Africa. The Panel was encouraged by the potential of this development.
All CIAT programmes have been active in the development of networks. A network usually starts with external funding, and with CIAT coordinating the activities. It is expected from the outset that, over time and in an orderly manner, the NARS will take over the coordination and management functions, with CIAT continuing to provide technical and logistical support. CIAT also works through networks other organizations established, notably those sponsored by IICA.
CIAT has developed a participatory planning-by-objectives approach involving the network steering committee, NARS scientists and extension staff, and in some cases NGOs. A sense of the collective 'ownership' of the network has been deliberately fostered. Collaborative research is encouraged, to make best use of scientist capabilities and of the different environments in which they operate. Project funding is normally available through the network in amounts ranging from US$ 1,000 to US$ 4,000 per project per year, and is the glue that holds the network together. The networks provide training and information, serve as a channel for the distribution and testing of germplasm (most of it at present coming from CIAT), and arrange collaborative and multilocational experiments.
The networks have been specially useful in organizing farmer participation in both on- and off-farm trials, particularly for germplasm selection and seed multiplication. They have also been a vehicle for CIAT research on the role of farm communities and local markets in the adoption of new cultivars.
The pace of devolution from a CIAT-driven to a NARS-driven network has in some cases been unduly hastened by recent funding problems. The sudden withdrawal of CIAT scientists supporting a network can threaten its survival. The Panel draws the attention of donors to the need for a phased reduction if support has to be cut back, and the attention of CIAT to the importance of giving weight to network support in the allocation of core funds, however tight.
The chapters dealing with the respective research programmes have mentioned the principal networks. In Annex VI, CIAT-sponsored networks, and those in which CIAT is currently a participant, are listed by programme.
In a climate of financial stringency, the concept of 'donor relations' becomes a euphemism for fund-raising. Here CIAT's record in the last few years is overshadowed by one central fact: supplementary funding spectacularly failed to meet the gap that opened up in the early 90s as resources were shifted from commodity programmes to natural resources management research, and total core funding fell away at the same time. In hindsight, the Centre (like other IARCs), made a serious overestimate of what donors were ready to do for NRM, and an equally serious underestimate of the financial constraints building up in the traditional supporters of CIAT and the CGIAR as a whole.
Even if CGIAR core-funding remains stable in the next few years, CIAT will undoubtedly be making extended efforts to garner supplementary resources. The Panel supports the view of the Board that non-core funding should only be sought, or accepted, for activities in line with the Centre's strategy. This is essential for credibility, and to avoid the charge of opportunism.
The Panel also believes that CIAT will need to manage its donor contacts more systematically as it increases its fund-raising efforts. There is currently no shortage of project ideas, but donors are not going to be grateful to CIAT if they receive uncoordinated approaches from different staff members at the same time. CIAT's recently developed procedures for setting priorities among project proposals can assist the overall management of resource mobilization. The Project Development Office (PDO) is a good source of information on donor priorities and procedures, and could be given a bigger role to play in coordinating initial contacts and organizing follow-up.
Its institutional relations role brings the IRDS office important tasks in facilitating country operations, liaising on Programme activity and providing institutional strengthening in support of this through its training, information and documentation thrusts. The office has been severely affected by the budget reductions, and its staff have shown great devotion in coping with a large workload despite many problems.
The office also has a role in supporting the convening and organization of systemwide and ecoregional initiatives which involve a range of institutions. Coordinators of these activities, as well as Programme and Project Leaders, can benefit from its support and counsel. The Panel believe it is important that they discuss their intentions with IRDS and keep it well informed of their in country activities. Within the new organizational scheme advanced in the next chapter, the Panel hopes that the office can play a high-profile policy role in the management of the Centre's external relations with NARS (including the new actors at national level), with donors and with the CGIAR.
6.2.1. Training at CIAT
6.2.2. Information and Publication Services
6.2.1.1. Evolution and Achievements
6.2.1.2. Future Strategy
6.2.1.3. Assessment
CIAT entered the 1990s with a three-part training strategy:
· To shift from group training in general agriculture and focus on specialized training of groups and individuals in disciplinary science.· To give early leadership to the expansion of training capacity in research at national and regional levels.
· As this training capacity expands, to reduce involvement by CIAT, but continue to develop training materials.
The Centre has adhered to this strategy through 1994. However, the changes in organization in 1991, and the funding reductions since then, have altered the face of the training establishment in CIAT.
The Training and Communications Support Programme was subsumed into Institutional Relations and Development Support in 1992 (first named a programme, but now titled as support), under an Associate Director. Training support lost two-thirds of its resources between 1991 and 1993. Of the nine professionals in the Training Associates cadre, who were very successfully supporting CIAT training in 1990, only one remains in 1994. The positions of staff in the training-of-trainers projects and in the training materials section were transferred to a self-financing scheme based on contracting out their services while staying within CIAT's mandate boundaries. By contrast resources devoted to training by CIAT's research programmes and units have been maintained at a level commensurate with the number of trainees coming to CIAT.
Table 6.1 gives details of professionals from NARS and from developed countries trained at CIAT for the years 1990, 1992 and 1994 by type of training. (IC = Introductory, SC = Specialized, MS = Masters, Ph.D = Doctoral). Falling funds accelerated CIAT's planned withdrawal from introductory level group training by 1992 while the shortage of funds has inhibited the expansion in specialized training.
The yearly average of NARS trainees at CIAT fell from 213 for the period 1987-91, to 97 in 1992 and 71 in 1993. 1994 shows a significant recovery to 178. Part of the reduction was due to winding down introductory courses, part the switch to heavier dependence on outside funding sources for CIAT trainees. The trends in the table suggest a growing demand for specialized group training in the Research Units - perhaps a sign of the times. Training towards higher degrees, always funded from outside sources, has increased over the period, and Ph.D training has doubled. But over 50% are from developed countries, almost always funded by their home country.
Table 6.1: Types of Training at CIAT by Programmes and Units 1990, 1992 and 1994
|
PROGRAMME/UNIT |
YEAR |
GROUPS |
INDIVIDUAL |
TOTAL |
|||
|
IC |
SC |
SC |
MS |
Ph.D |
|||
|
Programmes |
1990 |
9 |
99 |
62 |
6 |
6 |
182 |
|
1992 |
6 |
- |
28 |
9 |
8 |
51 |
|
|
1994 |
- |
19 |
35 |
8 |
9 |
71 |
|
|
Units |
1990 |
- |
- |
19 |
- |
1 |
20 |
|
1992 |
- |
21 |
15 |
9 |
1 |
46 |
|
|
1994 |
- |
56 |
32 |
11 |
8 |
107 |
|
|
TOTAL |
1990 |
9 |
99 |
81 |
6 |
7 |
202 |
|
1992 |
6 |
21 |
43 |
18 |
9 |
97 |
|
|
1994 |
- |
75 |
67 |
19 |
17 |
178 |
|
In-country, and to some extent, introductory, research and production courses at CIAT, have been devolved by developing national and subregional training capacities. The strategy has been to identify potential training institutions, train their trainers, supply them with state of the art training materials, and assist them in preparing and submitting projects for 3-5 years funding.
The main project, funded by IDB, started in July 1991 and identified two subregional teams; in Central America, Mexico and the Caribbean for bean training with 21 trainers; and, in the Southern Cone, for cassava with 20 trainers. It also identified institutions for rice training in the Dominican Republic (21 trainers), Colombia (20 trainers), Ecuador (10 trainers) and Venezuela (16 trainers). The teams achieved recognition in their constituencies and each prepared a post-training action plan for funding.
At this time, the Central American bean team and the Venezuelan rice team have started training. The Ecuador team have been adopted by FENNARROZ, the national federation of ricegrowers, the Colombian team is awaiting the reorganization of ICA, and funding is being sought for the Southern Cone team, supported by CIAT.
Additionally, teams were trained in the planning, monitoring and evaluation of agricultural research management with the help of ISNAR (18 trainers from 11 countries), and also in the management of technology transfer in Colombia (24 trainers). This last initiative, based on participatory research methods, will cascade through the 1,000 municipal units for technical advice to farmers in Colombia, and is now being repeated in several other countries.
The devolution programme has left CIAT with a skilled trainers training unit,
including the development of written and video materials. CIAT believes this
capacity could be used by regional institutions and other international centres.
Two objectives will remain the focus of future training strategy in CIAT:
· The training of NARS scientists working in high priority research projects on both an individual and group basis· Building subregional capacity for training technology intermediaries in commodity production and in participatory relations with farmers.
This second objective continues to emphasise devolution through the training
of trainers, the provision of training materials, and assistance in the search
for funding to mobilise the skills created. In the training of scientists, a
new thrust will be in natural resource management research. This will be organized
interinstitutionally and steps towards a consortium of IICA, CIAT and CATIE,
with IDB funding, are well advanced.
In the context of a Board and Management decision to try to maintain CIAT's human research capability in place, the erosion of training support and funds has inevitably had an impact on the volume of training supplied by CIAT. Against this background the strategy to develop subregional and national training capacity has been effectively implemented. An external evaluation on behalf of IDB, the donor, while acknowledging the duration of the project was too short, said:
"CIAT and the Bank should be proud to have jointly fostered a stellar example of a learning strategy undergirding the technology adaptation and diffusion process."
The Panel believes that CIAT has, after a series of adjustments, successfully accommodated its training strategy to its evolving circumstances. It would like to emphasize that the subject matter focus of training should be demand-driven, albeit of course within the CIAT range of specializations. The consortia being pursued with regional partners should be organized to articulate regional needs. Within the consortia arrangements the training needs of small countries, particularly those with large numbers of poor farmers, should be protected. The interface of researchers with small farmer communities is essential to technology design for their circumstances, but remains weak in most countries. Training of trainers in community dynamics and participatory methods remains important.
The Panel commends the increase in graduate students at the Ph.D level over the last five years. It believes this offers valuable leverage to increase CIAT's research output as well as providing important experience to the next generation of researchers.
The Panel encourages CIAT to continue increasing numbers of developing country Ph.D students and urges the Centre to seek finance where this is a bottleneck.
6.2.2.1. Evolution and Achievements - Information and Documentation Unit
6.2.2.2. Future Strategy
6.2.2.3. Assessment and Recommendations - Information and Documentation Unit
6.2.2.4. Publications Function
In the period 1989 to 1994, the Information and Documentation Unit has made a major investment in emerging technologies. An automation plan, developed late 1989, has evolved a fully electronic library with desktop access for CIAT staff to internal and external databases. It has electronic networking across institutions, including other IARCs and partners in special projects, and supports E-mail and the transfer of data files. Other measures have increased public awareness and use of publications, databases and other resources in the CIAT library.
The increased automation is reflected in the large increase in database searches from 272 in 1987 to 3,002 in 1992 and in the fact that cataloguing and indexing productivity improved by 35%. The last EPMR (1989) indicated that only 4% of search requests came from Africa and Asia compared to 40% from within Colombia. By 1992, the Africa and Asia figure had risen to 9%, an improving balance with the reducing proportion of searches being made from within Colombia (19%).
The improvement in productivity is impressive when seen against the decline in human and financial resources. The Unit absorbed a 50% reduction in personnel (15 full-time) over 1992 and 1993. The operating budget of the unit has declined by 4% per year in real terms since 1989, against an annual inflationary increase averaging 18% in the cost of journals.
The production of abstract journals on cassava, beans and forages, with a 20-year
history in CIAT, ended in 1992. Other cost-cutting measures included a reduction
by 875 titles in the number of journals purchased, with little possibility for
subscribing to new journals and databases required for the resource management
programmes. The Unit has come to rely more on secondary alert services such
as Current Contents to identify and obtain specific articles of interest. While
cost-effective for CIAT scientists, this has eroded CIAT's traditional services
to clients in the region.
The Unit will continue to automate. CIAT has recently obtained full interactive access to the Internet and the Unit will take the lead in publicizing and providing access to services available to CIAT staff, particularly in the information intensive areas not well served in-house. Continued efforts will be made in electronic publishing. The Unit's specialists have started to liaise with each programme and each SRG to ensure that the its services and products are based on internal demand. The Unit will also provide leadership in linking with the other IARCs in the Systemwide information initiative and in bringing access to CIAT's information and databases to external clients, including CIAT outposted staff.
The Unit has proposed that information and documentation be a line item in
all special project budgets to cover the costs of information resources needed.
The Unit has revolutionized CIAT's organization and dissemination of scientific information over the last five years, despite shrinking resources. The task continues. The connection with Internet, together with the CGIAR-wide information initiative brings new challenges.
Changes proposed in Chapter 9.3.2 on the organization of information systems
at CIAT, and in Chapter 7.6 on organization and structure, are likely to involve
a consequential change in the administrative placement of this Unit if all the
Centre's information-oriented services are to be brought together, reporting
to the proposed new Associate Director for Research Support and Information
Services.
Since the last EPMR Review, a public awareness component has become a more substantial portion of the Publications Unit's activities. This change was a result of funding cuts and a response to the need of donors for more information about CIAT. Some staff now question whether the balance has shifted too far away from the traditional role of scientific communications.
The Panel believe that both the scientific communications function and that of public awareness are important to CIAT's future and the fulfilment of its mission, and recognizes that the proportion of effort needed to accomplish both goals may fluctuate from time to time. While this distribution of efforts should be motivated, the Panel believes that the Unit is currently making every effort to achieve appropriate goals in both areas.
