In the past five years a number of remarkable changes have taken place, both with regard to IPGRI and in the environment in which IPGRI operates. Since the last review, IPGRI has separated from FAO and become an independent institute of the CGIAR, in size and budget at par with the other institutes. The sometimes strained administrative relations which IBPGR had while in the FAO milieu have been transformed to that of close cooperation and partnership. IPGRI has gained recognition in the international PGR community as the primary global centre concerned with the conservation of genetic diversity of crops and lately forest species. These developments were stimulated by a number of international developments that placed PGR firmly on the international agenda, viz. UNCED (1992) and the Convention on Biodiversity, Agenda 21, the GATT/TRIPS negotiations, and, finally, the FAO Leipzig Conference on plant genetic resources. There now is a Global Plan of Action, agreed upon in Leipzig by a large number of countries, charting the way for the future. Much needs to be done to translate the words of the Leipzig Declaration into deeds.
The stage is set and IPGRI is a lead actor. The opportunity for IPGRI in the CGIAR is unique: as an Institute which carries out its work by servicing research and development needs by a wide array of institutional relationships, it can address both technical and policy-based issues to assist in global genetic resources management. The Panel concludes that this policy role, while somewhat new to IPGRI, is highly relevant and endorses the Institute's plan for addressing policy research and analysis. IPGRI's technical role is well understood; it has expanded during the past three years, with new initiatives in forest ecosystems and in situ conservation of crop plants and their wild relatives which include human and social dimensions. Further, the Institute has accepted its role as a leader of the System-wide Genetic Resources Programme. Thus, IPGRI is beginning to play a pivotal role in elevating the importance of biological resources conservation and management in the CGIAR. The Panel is very supportive of these new initiatives, but raises a cautionary note concerning the Institute's ability to absorb any and all initiatives within the confines of a realistic budgetary growth.
This Panel has addressed the question, "What is IPGRI's real role in global genetic resource management?" and has addressed this question under the theme "protecting global genetic resources." It concluded that IPGRI's fundamental goal must be to assure that all of the important plant genetic resources are protected and available for future use. It is clear that IPGRI cannot, by itself, accomplish this globally, nor should it. Strategic taxonomic limits must be defined, but it cannot ignore the broad view of genetic resources in view of the commonly held dogma of applied molecular biology that 'any biological entity is a gene resource for any other biological entity.' How can and does IPGRI address its role in protecting genetic resources?
In Chapter 1 we introduced a framework for genetic resources management by which IPGRI's agenda may be addressed. The elements of the framework - Surveying, Monitoring, Designing Strategies for Conserving, Implementing Conservation, and Using Conserved Genetic Resources - are all dependent upon an extensive knowledge base and methodologies. IPGRI provides, through its information services, a wide array of materials to guide these steps. Its traditional role has stopped short of utilization in the sense of applied plant breeding, although that role has changed with the introduction of the INIBAP program which does not conduct plant breeding, but facilitates it through various activities. IPGRI is directly involved with its partners in adapting methodologies for the framework.
Applying the framework locally, or nationally, requires organizational and institutional capacities that may be lacking and, in these instances, IPGRI provides assistance to national programmes, either directly by its staff, or more frequently through intercountry networks of specialists that increase efficiency and develop closer collaboration among neighbours. IPGRI can work to facilitate conservation in those many countries that have vital plant genetic resources imperiled by lack of institutional infrastructure, action plans, trained genetic resource managers, finances or facilities. IPGRI clearly cannot work with all countries who have these problems; in fact, its work may be ineffectual in some countries if there are no long-term local commitments. The Panel has evaluated IPGRI's impact and is generally very satisfied that it is knowledgeable and capable of supporting the comprehensive framework. At the same time, the Panel believes that IPGRI has not sufficiently developed and prioritized its own agenda, regionally or nationally, to be confident that appropriate conservation is being accomplished in the correct priority.
The legacy of IPGRI will be secure conservation of genetic resources by whatever means is appropriate throughout developing countries. Is it possible under the present structure of IPGRI? We think so, but more direct involvement and follow-up may be needed. For example, if national genebanks are not to be developed or are not functional, IPGRI could work toward alternate arrangements for secure conservation through genebanks jointly operated by several countries (revisiting the regional genebank concept) or by "black box" storage of materials in secure genebanks operated by CGIAR centres or strong national programmes. Thus, accomplishing effective conservation depends on finesse in human and governmental relations. That is an appropriate role for IPGRI in the Panel's view.
Where does IPGRI stand now and where is it going? A few of the achievements since the last review are summarized below, using the framework discussed above.
Surveying - IPGRI has only recently become more active in ecogeographic surveying and inventory analysis of PGR. Important impetus was provided by the Forestry programme, while the new in situ programme has widened the scope of surveys to include, apart from botanical and environmental information, data from farmers and their knowledge systems. The Global Plan of Action may stimulate more countries to strengthen their genetic conservation programmes. IPGRI needs to promote such developments as well as prepare for it. Systematic PGR surveys will be needed for countries to inventory their genetic diversity. Hence from the present tendency to view field projects in crops as case studies, increasingly IPGRI should direct its survey and collection activities to fit into overall conservation programmes and their priorities.
Monitoring - Monitoring requires observation of genetic resources over time or space and is especially critical for detection of genetic erosion where an in situ conservation strategy has been adopted. IPGRI has work in progress on monitoring, but few results have been obtained by any researchers on this point. IPGRI could make substantial contributions to understanding the genetic erosion problem by mobilizing research on this topic in its various network activities.
Designing conservation strategies - Good conservation strategies should be based on understanding the nature of genetic diversity and its distribution. It is in this area that IPGRI can claim considerable achievements. Contributions have been made to design of sampling methods for genetic diversity, though much more needs to be done on different crops in different environments. Especially important is that the methodology is being applied successfully by NARS. IPGRI has initiated ethnobotanical surveys whereby data being collected from farmers can be used in designing conservation strategies. This is a little-used approach that IPGRI can develop for wide use.
The IPGRI collaborative research programme on methods of seed and in vitro conservation has played a central role, and it is in this area that IPGRI really has made a major impact. Different methods of storage have been investigated and methodologies for use in genetic conservation developed. These include ordinary storage of seeds, ultra-drying, tissue culture, slow-growth media, and cryopreservation. Research is in progress into the physiology of recalcitrant seeds. IPGRI coordinates this research in a global cooperation, using effectively the concept of networking.
Plant species, including crops, require a wide range of techniques for conservation, such as by seed, roots, or tubers, IPGRI's recent involvement in forest genetic resources has introduced completely new problems for ex situ conservation.
Implementation of conservation strategies - IPGRI holds collections of only one type, bananas and plantains, hence is not directly involved in actual conservation activities. However, throughout its existence IPGRI/IBPGR have supported over 500 collecting missions for over 200,000 samples of many crops. Attention is now given to ecogeographic surveys in combination with genetic diversity studies, the use of GIS, and incorporating of farmers' knowledge into the design of conservation strategies.
Using conserved genetic resources - Leaving aside ethical considerations, genetic diversity is conserved primarily because of actual or perceived potential benefits. There is a continuum between genetic diversity in collection and its inclusion in or application for some useful product. As a first requirement, accessions have to be described and documented in databases that are easily accessible to users. Descriptor lists have been produced for many crops. The role of IPGRI in documentation management has been somewhat more modest, but is getting increasing attention. Inter-Centre cooperation has led to the SINGER initiative linking IARC genebank documentation systems and providing access through Internet. IPGRI has contributed to the emergence of the core collection concept which permits breeders to sample large germplasm collections efficiently in their search for specific traits. Exchange of germplasm requires seed or plant materials to be free of quarantine diseases, while seed health affects storage behaviour. The FAO/IPGRI Guidelines for Safe Movement of Germplasm are an important contribution and are evidence that genebanks have a shared responsibility to minimize the risk of disease transfer in seed exchange. Whether or not genebanks (and IPGRI) should get involved in actual population improvement has not been resolved. However, in two specific cases IPGRI has become involved in facilitating breeding and other aspects of crop production: with bananas and plantain (INIBAP) and coconuts (COGENT).
IPGRI has also supported and now has an active programme involving the participation of farmers in the evaluation, improvement and conservation of crop plants. Such participatory activities may well be the key to long-term on-farm conservation. This is an important new approach where IPGRI with its nine-country project will develop very important information in the next few years.
The above analyses illustrates that IPGRI's programmes of "utilization" work address a wide range of approaches. The Panel is supportive of this degree of activity, and would support pre-breeding as a function of a conservation unit, but is hesitant to encourage direct engagement in breeding programmes dedicated to cultivar development, because typically conservation efforts are downgraded and the security of collections is jeopardized.
The mode of operation of IPGRI stresses the importance of its five regional programmes to focus IPGRI's activities closer to national programmes. Regional staff also play an important role in formulating and executing research and development activities. This requires close interaction between HQ and regional staff. Organizational structures are in place, but the main strength of IPGRI is its dedicated staff and the good working atmosphere. Another major feature of IPGRI is the use of networking in linking scientists and institutions on specific issues.
Cooperation of IPGRI with the other centres in the CGIAR has been strengthened with the establishment of the System-wide Genetic Resources Programme. However, much remains to be done.
A major strength of the IPGRI programme is the quality of the supporting services provided in documentation, information, public awareness, and training. In all of these areas IPGRI has small, but extremely efficient, units. IPGRI publications are a major source of information for genebanks. Over 830 scientists and technicians were trained in a diversity of subjects related to PGR in the period 1991-96.
IPGRI is well placed to move into the future on a solid base of past achievements and a vital and enthusiastic organization. There is increasing concern about the management and conservation of natural resources land, water, forests and germplasm. This offers opportunities at a time when most agricultural research is faced with declining financial support. It requires that IPGRI take a forward-looking approach.
In the CGIAR centres, effective management and conservation of natural resources and ecoregional and agro-ecosystem approaches have complemented or even compete with earlier objectives of maximized productivity. The Panel sees IPGRI, in concert with genebank programmes of the various IARCs, evolving in a truly integrated system-wide genetic resources programme. As such it should become the core of global genetic resources conservation, representing collectively the largest holding of PGR and the most active users of such collections in plant breeding. In the view of this Panel, SRGP will therefore develop into a major programme area of the CGIAR.
The world community must eventually realize the advantages of international cooperation in genetic resources conservation. The notion of genetic resources as a "common good" will, inevitably, be revitalized by the realities of mutual interdependence between countries in their needs for genetic diversity. The Panel commends the CGIAR and the IARCs for upholding this principle by placing their collections in trust under a FAO agreement. The proposals embodied in the Multilateral System for Exchange (MUSE) are fully consistent with these policies. The challenge of the CGIAR system is to become actively involved in the global discussion on intellectual property rights (IPR) with regard to access to and ownership of genetic diversity and the effect of IPR on global food production. At present IPR seems to be biased towards the interests of the inventor. The CGIAR should attempt to refocus that debate towards societal good and, as holder in trust for the world community of the largest collection of PGR, and as the largest user of PGR in plant breeding, it must accept that responsibility. The Panel considers IPGRI as the most appropriate institute within the CGIAR to assume a leading role in this area and urges it to incorporate this wider view in its long-term strategies, including a full recognition of farmers' rights.
Through ICRAF, CIFOR, and IPGRI's involvement in forest genetic resources, the CGIAR's goals for genetic resources conservation are becoming part of the broader context of overall biodiversity conservation. ICARDA, ILRI and ICLARM have added livestock and fisheries to the mandate of the CGIAR. This requires new alliances and active involvement with policy-related developments arising from the CBD and the GATT/TRIPS negotiations.
The GPA provides challenges and opportunities for the CGIAR and IPGRI that must be addressed.
The Panel has looked at IPGRI in its present setting, primarily concerned with PGR for food and agriculture with a start made in forestry. In that context it considered its programme relevant, comprehensive and of high quality. It foresees pressures to become involved in ever-wider issues of genetic conservation on the basis of its success so far. The CGIAR and its donor community have to decide what role IPGRI should play in an expanding concern about biodiversity and provide the means to do so without losing their present effectiveness in a well-defined, but narrower, domain. The Panel already sees signs of assigning tasks to IPGRI without providing the necessary resources to carry them out.
In spite of increased global awareness, large UN conferences, and inspired declarations, biodiversity is still being lost at an unprecedented rate. Relatively speaking, the agricultural community has taken timely action in conservation of PGR for food and agriculture. A global structure is in place, consisting of the CGIAR, national genebanks, and regional programmes coordinated and supported by IPGRI. Basic technology is ready or under development.
