Documentof The World Bank For Official Use Only ReportNo: 35448-GLB PROJECTDOCUMENT ONA PROPOSEDGRANT FROMTHE GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTFACILITY TRUST FUND INTHEAMOUNT OFUS$3.00MILLION TO THE WORLD FISHCENTER (OTHERWISE KNOWNAS ICLARM, THE INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR LIVINGAQUATIC RESOURCEMANAGEMENT) INTERNATIONALCENTER FOR AGRICULTURAL RESEARCHINTHE DRYAREAS AFRICAN CENTRE FOR TECHNOLOGY STUDIES AND INTER-AMERICANINSTITUTEFOR COOPERATION ONAGRICULTURE FOR AN INTERNATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT (IAASTD) PROJECT March 6,2006 Environmentally& Socially SustainableDevelopmentSectorUnit Europeand CentralAsia Region Environmentally& Socially SustainableDevelopmentNetwork This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosedwithout World Bankauthorization. CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS All TransactionsinUSDollars FISCALYEAR July 1 - June30 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ASARECA Association for Strengthening Agricultural ResearchinEast and CentralAfrica ACTS African Centre for Technology Studies CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research CSD Commission on Sustainable Development CTA Center for Rural and Technical Cooperation FA0 Food and Agriculture Organization o fthe UnitedNations GBA Global Biodiversity Assessment GEF Global Environment Facility GFAR Global Forum for Agricultural Research IA Implementing Agency for the Global Environment Facility IAASTD International Assessment o f Agricultural Science and Technology for Development IAC InterAcademy Council ICARDA International Center for Agricultural Research inthe Dry Areas I C L A R M International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management ICRW International Center for Research on Women ICSU International Council for Science IFAD InternationalFundfor AgriculturalDevelopment I F O A M International Federationo f Organic Agriculture Movements IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute IICA Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture IPCC International Panel o n Climate Change IUCN World ConservationUnion KARI Kyrgyz Agricultural Research Institute K S T Knowledge, science and technology MA Millennium EcosystemAssessment MEA MultilateralEnvironment Agreement MDGs Millennium Development Goals MOU Memorandum o f Understanding N G O Non-governmental organization OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development OP GEFOperationalProgram Ramsar Ramsar Convention on Wetlands RII Recipient ImplementingInstitution SOFI State o f Food Insecurity TWAS ThirdWorld Academy o f Sciences UNCBD UnitedNations Convention on Biological Diversity UNCCD UnitedNations Convention to Combat Desertification UNDP UnitedNations Development Program UNEP UnitedNations Environment Program UNESCO UnitedNations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNFCCC Framework Convention on Climate Change WFC World FishCenter (otherwise known as ICLARM) WHO World Health Organization WSSD World Summit on Sustainable Development Vice President, ECA: ShigeoKatsu Vice President, ESSD: IanJohnson SectorManager: JuergenVoegele Task Team Leader: Robert Watson GLOBAL INTERNATIONAL ASSESSMENTOFAGRICULTURAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY FORDEVELOPMENT (IAASTD) Contents Page A. STRATEGIC CONTEXT AND RATIONALE ......................................... 1 1. Global Significance of the Agricultural Sector................................................................... 1 2. Rationale for Bank and GEF involvement.......................................................................... 2 3. Higher level objectives to which the project contributes.................................................... 4 B. PROJECTDESCRIPTION ......................................................................... 5 1. Lendinginstrument............................................................................................................. 5 2. Project development objective andkey indicators (see Annex 3) ...................................... 5 3. Project components ............................................................................................................. 7 5. Lessons learned andreflected inthe project design............................................................ 8 6. Alternatives considered andreasons for rejection.............................................................. 9 C. IMPLEMENTATION ................................................................................ 11 1. Partnership arrangements .................................................................................................. 11 2. Institutional and implementation arrangements (See Annex 6) ........................................ 11 3. Monitoring and evaluation o f outcomes/results (see Annex 3) ........................................ 12 4. Sustainability & Replicability ........................................................................................... 13 5. Critical risks andpossible controversial aspects............................................................... 14 6. Loadcredit conditions and covenants............................................................................... 15 D. APPRAISAL SUMMARY ......................................................................... 16 1. Economic and financial analyses (see Annex 9)............................................................... 16 2. Technical........................................................................................................................... 16 3. Fiduciary........................................................................................................................... 16 FOROFFICIAL USE ONLY This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not be otherwise disclosed without World Bank authorization. 4. Social................................................................................................................................. 17 5. Environment...................................................................................................................... 18 6. Safeguard policies............................................................................................................. 18 7. Policy Exceptions andReadiness...................................................................................... 19 Annex 1: Country and Sector or Program Background................................................ 20 Annex 2: Major RelatedProjects Financedby the Bank and/or other Agencies .........22 Annex 3: Results Framework and Monitoring(Log Frame) ........................................ 25 Annex 4: Detailed Description o f Project..................................................................... 39 Annex 6: ImplementationArrangements ...................................................................... 53 Annex 7: Financial Management and DisbursementArrangements ........................... 55 Annex 8: Procurement Arrangements .......................................................................... 59 Annex 9: Economic andFinancial Analysis................................................................. 60 Annex 10: Safeguard Policy Issues ................................................................................ 73 Annex 11: Project Preparation and Supervision............................................................. 74 Annex 12: Documents inthe Project File....................................................................... 75 Annex 13: Report o f the FirstPlenary Meeting o f the IAASTD.Nairobi. Kenya.......76 Annex 14: Decisions made at IAASTD BureauMeeting in Montpellier ...................... 84 Annex 15: Relevance o f IAASTD to GEF OPERATIONAL PROGRAMS (OPs) AND TO Workplans o fthe Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) .....90 Annex 16: Principles andProcedures Governing the InternationalAssessment o f Agricultural Science and Technology for Development .............................. 93 Annex 17: IAASTD Project Work Plan: 2006-2008 .................................................... 101 GLOBAL INTERNATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCEAND TECHNOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT (IAASTD)PROJECT PROJECT DOCUMENT Date: March 6,2006 Team Leader: Robert Watson Vice President: IanJohnson Sectors: General agriculture, (100%); Sector ManagedDirector: J.Voegele/K.Cleaver Themes: Biodiversity; Land Management ; Project ID: PO90963 Climate Change and Multi-focal Focal Area: Multifocal LendingInstrument: Grant Total Project Cost (US$m.): 10.510 Cofinancing: 7.510 Total Bank/GEF Financing 3.000 (US$m.): Source Local Foreign Total GLOBALENVIRONMENTFACILITY 3.000 3.OOO OTHER COFINANCIERS 7.510 7.510 Total: 10.510 10.510 I I I Grantees: The World FishCenter (otherwise known as ICLARM), the African Center for Technology Studies, the International Center for Agricultural Research inthe Dry Areas, and the Inter- American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture ProjectImplementationPeriod:April 15,2006 to June 30,2008 Start: April 15,2006 Does the project depart from the CAS incontent or other oYes X N o significant respects? Ref. PAD A.3 Doesthe project require any exceptions from Bank policies? Ref. PADD.7 oYes X No Have these been approved by Bank management? oYes oNo I s approval for any policy exception sought from the Board? oYes X N o Does the project include any critical risks rated "substantial" or "high"? oYes Ref. PAD C.5 X N o Does the project meet the Regional criteria for readiness for implementation? Ref.PAD XYes D.7 oNo A. STRATEGIC CONTEXTAND RATIONALE 1. Global Significance ofthe Agricultural Sector Today, access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food i s the primary problem for nearly 800 million chronically undernourished people, the vast majority o f whom live in rural areas in developing countries. In addition, the GDP o f many developing countries, especially in Africa, i s highly dependent on the agricultural sector. As the global population increases to 8-10 billion and as food preferences in the developing world change with rapid urbanization and increased per capita income, the demand for food i s projected to double within the next 25-50 years,' primarily in developing countries. The majority o f the world's people depend on agriculture, directly or indirectly, for their livelihoods. Hence, the global community confronts the enormous task o f ensuring nutritional security and enhancing rural livelihoods while reversing environmental degradation, redressing social and gender inequity, and ensuring human health and well-being (Annex 1). Agricultural intensification has the capacity to enormously improve and increase productivity, however, it can also result in severe environmental consequences. Some breeding techniques and adoption o f high-yielding varieties can lead to erosion o f genetic resources; changes inland cover can result in soil erosion, and consequently the loss of essential nutrients and decreased water-holding capacity; pesticidesmay killnaturalpredators and beneficial insects; fertilizer and pesticide applications can contaminate surface and ground water; and intensification can result inincreased greenhouse gas emissions, such as methane andnitrous oxide, into the atmosphere, with significant implications for the earth's climate. Inagricultural ecosystems, trace elements and organic matter may be lost, leading to an inexorable decline in soil quality unless environmentally sound agricultural practices are mainstreamedinto the productive landscape. Lost, eroded and/or contaminated resources may complicate meeting the projected increase in demand for agricultural products in some countries during the coming decades, but in many developing countries, sub-optimal inputs remain a primary production constraint and hence nutrient overloading i s not a problem. Inthese countries, fertilizer responsive crop varieties and improved methodologies are needed to effectively prevent soil miningand nutrient depletion. There are however, some other critical environmental and social factors facing the developing world that may directly impede efforts to meet the projected demand for agricultural products. These include less water available for crops due to an increase in use by other sectors; less arable land due to urbanization and unsustainable agricultural practices; less labor due to HIV/AIDS and rural to urban migration; increased levels o f acid deposition and tropospheric ozone; and a changing climate with warmer temperatures, increasing variability of precipitation and more extreme events. To ensure the sustainability of the natural resource foundation and biodiversity on which agricultural production (crop, livestock, fishery, forest, fiber and biomass) and hence, rural livelihoods and nutritional security depend, will require that decision makers better understand the economic, environmental, ethical and social considerations surrounding agricultural knowledge, science and technology (AKST) and related policies. For example, some key intermediary/intervening factors in agricultural production systems - markets, social norms and customs (gender and ethnicity) - often determine resource ownership and control, and consequently nutritional security. IUNFAO. Foodfor All. Rome, 1996. 1 The overall challenge i s a better understanding by those who make decisions on agricultural, environmental and macroeconomic policy, at both the national and international levels, inboth developed and developing countries, o f agricultural practices that are sustainable, economically viable and environmentally positive. This better understanding can result in policies and institutional arrangements that facilitate, rather than obstruct, the implementation o f sustainable agriculture practices and advances in science and technology that contribute to more sustainable practices, and improvethe overall performanceof the agricultural sector. 2. Rationale for Bank and GEFinvolvement Recognizing the significant role o f agriculture in the economies o f developing countries, the World Bank held a number o f meetings between 2001 and mid-2002, with the leaders in the private sector and incivil society to discuss some o f the prominent issues inagricultural science and technology. Participants shared their views on how to advance the role o f agricultural science and technology in meeting future challenges to nutritional security and agricultural productivity in an environmentally and socially sustainable manner. Some suggested that a comprehensive, multidisciplinary assessmento f issues critical to policy formulation would have great value for decision makers confronting conflicting views on a number o f issues concerning agricultural science and technology, practices, policies and institutional effectiveness. Recognizing how important such an international assessment could be to achieving the Millennium Development Goals o f eradicating extreme hunger and poverty and ensuring environmental sustainability, inAugust 2002, FA0 and the World Bank announced at the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) inJohannesburg a global consultative process on a proposed international assessment o f the role o f agricultural knowledge science and technology in reducing hunger, improving rural livelihoods and stimulating environmentally sustainable economic growth over the coming decades. Participating in the IAASTD is fully compatible with the overall mission o f the World Bank, i.e., fighting poverty and hunger, the role o f the World Bank as an Implementing Agency (IA)in the GEF, as the major contributor to the CGIAR, and as a major lender for agricultural S&T (Annex 2). Iti s also fully consistent with the World Bank Rural Development strategy and with the World Bank Environment strategy. As the IA, the Bank brings a unique strength to the Project by virtue o f the trust it developed among stakeholders during the consultative process and by its convening power and ability to engage policymakers and key decision makers in developing countries. The Bank also brings its role as an invaluable resource for promoting investment opportunities in agricultural science and technology and mobilizing private sector, bilateral, multilateral, and other government and non-government sector resources inefforts that are consistent with GEF objectives and national sustainable development strategies. This Project will enhance the capacity o f the World Bank to assist its member countries to better conserve and sustainably use their biological diversity, reduce their emissions o f greenhouse gases, manage their land, ecosystems and shared water bodies more sustainably. The GEF intervention will provide the knowledge base for implementing the agricultural dimension o f MDG7 on ensuring environmental sustainability, especially for target number 1to integrate the principles o f environmental sustainability into country policies and programmes and reverse the loss o f environmental resources. The IAASTD will also provide invaluable informationwith respect to the hunger and poverty MDGs and the the agricultural element o f the thematic cluster o f issues for the multi-year programme o f work o f the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) for 2008/2009. In addition, the findings o f the IAASTD will 2 provide invaluable information for 12 GEF OperationalPrograms (see Table 1below). The GEF intervention will also support the implementation of agricultural KST relevant aspects o f the Multilateral Environmental Agreements such as the UnitedNations Convention on Biodiversity (CBD), United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (CCD) and United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and will help mainstream environmental considerations inagriculture. Table 1. Relevanceof IAASTD to GEF OperationalPrograms. For all relevant Operational Programs: 1 Arid and Semi-arid Zone - H o w can we reconcile immediate subsistence needs ofpastoralists and Ecosystems long-term environmental sustainability? What is the potential o f science and technology to improve crop traits, e.g., drought, salinity, and temperature tolerance, and to reduce the adverse impact o f livestock inthese environments? What can we learnfrom indigenous approaches to overcoming biophysical constraints (e.g., water quantity and quality, soil quality) to production? 2 - Coastal, Marine, and Freshwater What are the implications o f market access onnatural resources and Ecosystems endowments, such as fisheries? 3 - Forest Ecosystems What are the relemnt trends andimplications for sustainable management o f forest, tree, and "wild lands" contributions to food security? What effect do property rights o f forest resources have on sustainability? H o w do we identify forest conservationpriorities intransboundary river basins, using UNEP's satellite-based study o f the planet's remaining closed forcsts? What is the relationship between forest biological diversity and ecosystem functioning intransboundary river basins inthe development and application o f techniques to restore forest ecosystem at the river basin level? 4 Mountain Ecosystems - What role do externalities play insustainable mountain ecosystem management? What is the role o f mountain ecosystems incarbon sequestration, erosion control, watershed renewal and in situ biodiversity 6 - Promoting the Adoption o f conservation? What are the economic and environmental, including species Renewable Energy by Removing biodiversity, concerns surrounding biomass production? Barriers and Reducing Implementation What is the potential for reducing external and energy-intensive inputs costs 8 - Waterbody-based associated with agriculture? H o w canwe diagnose assimilation levels inlarge marine ecosystems (LMEs)? What methodologies can be usedto effectively forecast Total Admissible Catch inLMEs? What policies would effectively address correcting the existing system o f fish catch control, includingthe use 3 o f satellite monitoring and compulsion methods? What institutional measuresprovide transparency inmanagement systems for fish quotas? Are there methodologiesfor integratedecologic-economic assessment o f LMEs? Do the existing concepts o f owner rights o fbiological water resources facilitate sustainable production? What subsidypolicies for fisheries contribute to sustainable 9 - Integrated Land and Water Multiple production? H o w can information and space technologies be used to facilitate more Focal Area for International Waters sustainable management o f integratedland andwater resources? What methods and technologies can be used torestore lands in watersheds degradedby different types o f human activities? Can crop water productivity be improved through utilizing a systems approach at different spatial scales, i.e., plants, fields, farms, agro- ecological systems (rain-fed and irrigated), and river basim, especially inhighwater stress areas? What technologies and policies are most effective at conserving water duringriceproduction? 12 - IntegratedEcosystemManagement What are the social and economic impacts o f integrated ecosystem management? 13 - Conservation and Sustainable Use What is the importance o f intellectual property rights to conservation and the of BiologicalDiversity Important to sustainable use o fbiodiversity that is important to agriculture? Agriculture 14 Persistent Organic Pollutants - How canwe preventthe contamination o f our naturalresources by POPSand ensure that contaminated products do not enter the foodchain? How canwe encourage suchpractices, as Integrated Pest Management, inareas where extensionservices are limited? 15 Sustainable LandManagement - What kinds o fpartnershipsamong stakeholders will effectively contribute to sustainable land management? What are the amounts and kinds of soil amendments that will be needed inthe future? Is a continuation o fpast practices sufficient? Will more attention to the root-soil interface be necessary or beneficial? Adaptation to Climate Change What are the sensitivities of agricultural practices and ago-ecosystems to climate variation and climate change? H o w can ago-ecosystems contribute to mitigating climate change? H o w applicable are the scientific approaches and technical solutions o f today to the projections o ffuture changes? 3. Higher level objectives to which the project contributes The agricultural practices, technologies, policies and institutional arrangements responsible for increasing agricultural productivity over the last decades are considered to have caused major environmental degradation (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA), 2005). Intensification has led to soil erosion, contributed to climate change, and contaminated surface and ground waters with phosphorus, nitrogen and pesticides. With improved practices, technologies, policies and institutional arrangements inplace, the condition o f natural resources and ecosystems canbe conserved while meeting the projected increased demand for agricultural products over the next decades.* However, decision makers - in the production field and the international a r e n a 4 0 not have readily available access to knowledge that would allow them to make informed decisions. Some of this information resides with local producers who have used long-established, adapted practices that have resulted in sustainable production systems in some areas (e.g., arid, semi- arid, mountainous) for years. In some cases, knowledge resides in institutional systems that often lack sufficient cultural grounding to be acceptable, or available to user communities. * Agricultural products include crops, forest products, livestock, fisheries, biomass and non-food products 4 Decision makers need access to institutional and local knowledge to be able to make wise and appropriate choices concerning nutritional security, health and environmental sustainability in the coming decades inthe issues surrounding agriculture. B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. Lendinginstrument The US$10.5 10millionproject would be partially financed by four GEF medium-sized grants in the aggregated amount o f US$3.00 million. Confirmed cofinanciers include: (i) World Bank The (US$1.56 million from Bank Budget and US$1.5 million from a DGF grant), (ii) UNEP (US$0.720 million in kind), (iii), UNESCO (US$0.225 million in kind), (iv) FA0 (US$0.225 million in kind); (iv) UNDP (US$lO thousand in kind), (v) the Governmant of Finland (US$0.350 million); and (vi) a multi-donor trust fund o f US$2.920 million from the Governments o f Australia, Canada, the European Commission, France, Ireland, Switzerland, the UK,the USA and the private sector (the Bank has receivedwritten and verbal commitments of US $2.625 million to-date). The European Commission, Switzerland and the USA are considering additional contributions next year, and several other governments are currently considering financial contributions. 2. Projectdevelopmentobjective and key indicators(see Annex 3) The Panel o f participating governments, taking into account the views o f the cosponsoring agencies (World Bank, FAO, WHO, UNEP, UNESCO, UNDP and GEF) and other stakeholders (private sector, NGOs, producer and consumer groups, international organizations, and the scientific community) at the IAASTD Intergovernmental Plenary held in Nairobi from 30 August to 3 September 2004, agreed on the objectives, goals, scope, key questions, design, preparation and peer review processes, outputs, timetable, budget and governance structure o f the IAASTD (Annex 13). The Bureau to the Panel includes 30 representatives from national governments and 30representatives from civil society and international organizations. Development obiective: The proposedproject i s to improve access to agricultural KST that will promote and facilitate sustainable agricultural practices with the aim to improve nutritional security, enhance rural livelihoods while reversing environmental degradation, redressing social and gender inequity, and ensuring human health and well-being. Towards this overall objective, the projects specific objectives are to: Undertake one global and five sub-global assessments (Sub-Saharan Africa; South and East Asia and the Pacific; Latin America and the Caribbean; Central and West Asia and North Africa; and North America and Europe) o f the role o f agricultural K S T in reducing hunger and poverty, improving rural livelihoods, and health, and facilitating equitable, environmentally, socially and economically sustainable development; Provide robust informationfor decision makers on how to ensure that policies, practices and institutional arrangements enable agricultural KST to help reduce hunger and poverty, improve rural livelihoods and health, and facilitate equitable, environmentally, socially and economically sustainable development; and Bring together the range of stakeholders (governments, NGOs, private sector, producers, consumers, the CGIAR and others in the scientific community, MEAs and international agencies, including the GEF) involved in the agricultural sector and rural development to share experiences, views, and gain commonunderstanding and vision for the future. 5 Development indicators: Appropriate policies, regulations, incentive structures, are developedto support sustainable agricultural management The capacity o f institutions is strengthened to design and implement sustainable management approaches Investments are made to address local, national, and global environmental issues within the context o f sustainable development 0 Improvement o f agricultural productivity under sustainable management, while enhancing the livelihoods o f producers Global Environment Obiective: Application o f the knowledge generated through the IAASTD should provide significant local, national, regional and global environmental benefits, including reducing the overall rate o f natural resource loss and land degradation, enhancing landscape biodiversitybothinareas of land use and inprotected areas, reducing the rate o f soil, runoff and nutrient losses, diminishing the contamination and eutrophication o f fresh waters and soils, reducing the rate o f greenhouse gas emissions, and increasing the amount o f carbon fixed in agricultural systems. This would be achieved if the knowledge generated by the IAASTD i s used to design and implement appropriate policies, regulations and incentive structures to support integrated natural resource and agricultural management, and to stimulate investments to address local, national, and global environmental issues within the context o f sustainable development. The IAASTD will also strengthen the capacity o f institutions to design and implement integrated management approaches, and provide information highly relevant to the work plans o f the Multilateral Agreements (Table 2 below). Sustainable agricultural practices will directly, and through improved natural resource management, contribute to improving people's livelihoods, food security and health. Global Environmental indicators: Appropriate policies, regulations and incentive structures are developed to support integrated natural resource management The capacity o f institutions strengthened to design and implement integrated natural resource management 0 Overall rate o f natural resource loss and land degradationreduced 0 Overall landscape biodiversity enhanced both inareas o f landuse and inprotectedareas 0 Rate of soil, runoff and nutrient losses reduced 0 Contamination and eutrophication o f fresh waters and contamination o f soils diminished 0 Rate of greenhouse gas emissions reduced, and more carbon fixed from agricultural systems Table 2: Relevance of IAASTD to Workplans of the Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) UnitedNationConvention Relevant questions Convention on Biological How have past changes inagricultural biodiversity affected rural Diversity (UNCBD) livelihoods and nutritional security? What are the impacts o f climate change o n agricultural biodiversity and loss o f agricultural biodiversity on climate change? What are the current and projected conditions of agricultural biodiversity? 6 Convention to Combat 0 H o w does desertification affect the prevalence o f poverty and Desertification (UNCCD) malnutrition? 0 Does a reduction indesertification help poverty alleviation strategies and improve nutritional security? Framework Convention on 0 What are the impacts o f climate change on agricultural biodiversity and Climate Change (UNFCCC) loss o f agricultural biodiversity on climate change? 0 What are the implications o f climate change for agricultural production, rural livelihoods and nutritional security? 3. Projectcomponents The project objectives would be achieved by supporting activities associated with the following five components (component 1 has already been completed using co-financing). For details on component description see Annex 4. Component 1- Development of a Conceptual Framework and annotatedoutlines for the global and sub-global assessments (US $0.600 million, o f which none is from GEF financing, 5.71% o f total project cost). Activities include: (i) selection of design team; (ii) and sub- global global design team meetings; (iii)integrated design team meeting; (iv) design o f the Conceptual Framework; and (v) approval o f the Conceptual Framework and annotated outlines byBureau. Component 2 - Global Assessment (US $1.430 million, of which US $0.690 million is from GEF financing, 13.61 percent o f total project cost). Activities include: (i) selection o f authors; (ii) preparation o f chapters, Summary for Decision Makers and the Synthesis Report; (iii) two- step peer review by experts and governments; and (iv) accepted and approved by governments. The global assessment will address gender issues in all four sections: (i) Context, Concepts, Historicaland Current Perspectives; (ii) Plausible Futures; (iii) Options for MakingAKST Work Better to Achieve the Development and Sustainability Goals: Technology and Capacity; and (iv) Options for Making AKST Work Better to Achieve the Development and Sustainability Goals: Investment and Policy. Component3 -Five Sub-globalAssessments (US $3.140 million, of which U S $1.961 million i s from GEF financing, 29.88 percent o f total project cost). Activities include: (i)selection o f authors; (ii) preparation o f chapters, Summaries for Decision Makers and the Synthesis Report; (iii)two-steppeer reviewbyexperts andgovernments; and (iv) accepted andapprovedby governments. The sub-global assessments will use the same Conceptual Framework and basic structure as the global assessment with a focus on priority issues for region. Component 4 - Outreach and Communications (US $1.480 million, o f which U S $0.349 million i s from GEF financing, 14.08 percent o f total project cost). Activities include: (i) Development o f a web site, which will include a compilation o f all relevant documents, e.g., annotated outlines o f the global and sub-global assessment reports; the Conceptual Framework; authors and review editors, meeting schedules; (ii)development o f outreach and communications strategy by Bureau and Secretariat; (iii) Targeted outreach to key user goups using media, workshops and conferences; (iv) Publication and distribution o f global and sub- global assessment reports; (v) Availability o f global and sub-global assessment reports on web (www.aaassessment.orq); and (vi) Monitoring o f uptake o f IAASTDproducts. 7 Component 5 - Project Management and Administration (US $3.860 million, o f which none i s from GEF financing, 36.73 percent o f total project cost). Activities include: (i) Selection o f Secretariat staff; (ii)Selection o f Bureau members; (iii) Selection o f IAASTD Co-chairs; (iv) budget management; (v) organization of all meetings (author and Plenary / Bureau); (vi) Management ofpeer review process; and (viii) editing and printing o f the global and sub-global assessmentreports. Sector Issues Addressed in the Proiect. The IAASTD will assess the efficacy o f the generation, access, dissemination and use o f agricultural KST, integrating local (including indigenous) and institutional knowledge, emphasizing gender issues. The knowledge gained from a historical analysis (past 50 years) and the insights gained from an analysis o f plausible futures (now to 2050) will form the basis for assessing options for action. The IAASTD will integrate biophysical factors and socio-economic driving forces and will bringthe best available informationto bear on analyzing how agricultural KST can be used to reduce hunger and poverty, improve rural livelihoods and health, increase incomes and facilitate equitable, environmentally, socially and economically sustainable development at global, regional, national and local scales. The IAASTD will build global and sub-global (community to regional) assessment capacities to undertake integrated scientific assessments o f agricultural KST, andbuildownership to implement actionbaseduponthe evidence inthe assessments. This may result in catalyzing additional sub-global assessments at the local, national and regional levels.3 The IAASTD will provide information on contentious, complex topics such as biosciences, but it will not set goals or advocate specific policies or practices. It will be policy relevant, butnot policy prescriptive, assessing options for action. The IAASTD will integrate scientific information on a range o f topics that are critically interlinked, but are often addressed independently, i.e., agriculture, poverty, hunger, natural resources, and development. The IAASTD will enable decision makers to bringricher base of knowledge to bear on policy and management decisions on issues previously viewed inan isolated context. The IAASTD will focus on assessing the demand for agricultural products and the environmental, social and economic consequences o f meeting this demand under a range o f plausible futures. The analysis o f plausible futures will acknowledge both endogenous and exogenous drivers. The analysis o f the consequences o f meeting demand within this range o f scenarios will be grounded inhistorical lessons 5. Lessons learned and reflected inthe project design While a number o f global assessments o f sub-sectors related to agriculture are available and form part o f the baseline o f this project, no assessment o f agricultural KST at global and sub- global levels has previously been attempted that fully integrates environmental and social concerns with agricultural productivity, livelihoods and human health issues. All previous assessments have limitations for the purpose o f this project, which i s an integrated scientific The IAASTD is likelyto the stimulatethe preparationof a number of sub-globalassessments ina manner similar to the MillenniumEcosystemAssessment, whichhas a significant number of affiliatedsub-globalassessments, not funded bythe MA. Inaddition, a number of governmentswho attendedthe first intergovernmentalplenarymeeting of the IAASTD inNairobistatedthat they would consider preparinga national assessment as input to the global and sub-globalassessments. 8 assessment o f the role o f agricultural KST in development. Earlier assessments looked at technologies for specific purposes inagriculture (e.g., soil conservation - WOCAT framework), and hence were highly selective, or they surveyed specific environmental assets with little, if any, connection to development goals. Frameworks and approaches commonly employed in earlier assessments, which have been reviewed for the IAASTD, include quantitative frameworks such as in Global Forum for Agricultural Research (GFAR) and qualitative as in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports and the MA. The most relevant framework for the IAASTD i s the MA, which linked drivers to ecosystem services to human well being. It is not surprising that there are no standardised frameworks, because each earlier assessment addressed a different range o f issues. Most of the findings from these assessments will provide useful information for some elements o f the IAASTD even though the findings cannot be integrated to address the range o f questions being addressed inthe IAASTD. Inmost cases, the scope o f the assessments has been limited, i.e., they have not been multi-thematic or multi-temporal, and have not addressed the policy, institutional and research issuesproposed for IAASTD. Furthermore, inmost cases they are not adequately linked with policy and decision making processes, and none have a governance structure or outreach and communications strategy that involves the full range o f stakeholders. The governance structure o f the IAASTD is a hybrid version o f the IPCC, which i s intergovernmental, and the MA, which is non-governmental. The IAASTD i s intergovernmental with a multi-stakeholder Bureau comprising of 30 government representatives and 30 representatives from civil society. This governance structure should ensure ownership o f the process and findings by the full range o f stakeholders. Basedon experiences o f the international ozone assessments, the Global Biodiversity Assessment (GBA), the IPCC and the MA, the following list o f characteristics have been found to be crucial for previous successful assessments and will be employed by the IAASTD: 9 Involve the best experts from all stakeholder groups in their individual capacity in the design, preparationandpeer review; 9 Conductaccordingto anopen, transparent, representativeandlegitimateprocess; 9 Evidence-based, notbasedonvalue systems; 9 Policyrelevant, notpolicyprescriptive,presentingoptionsnotrecommendations; 9 Encompassriskassessment, management andcommunication; 9 Technically accurate; 9 Assess local, regionalandglobalperspectives asappropriate; 9 Presentdifferent views, withquantification ofuncertainties, where possible; and 9 Identifythe keyscientificuncertaintiesandareaswhere research couldbefocused. 6. Alternatives considered and reasons for rejection The key design features o f the proposed IAASTD that were debated included the rationalehalue-added, goals, scope, scale, outputs, assessment characteristics, management and governance structures, composition and location o f secretariat, budget and funding philosophy. The key issues were: 0 Scope: narrow versus broad: Le., focus only on the factors that determine agricultural productivity, versus a full assment o f the role o f agricultural KST in addressing hunger, poverty and human health inan environmentally and socially sustainable manner; 9 Scale: global and/or sub-global, i.e., focus only on the key global issues or address both global and key sub-global issues; Knowledge systems: i.e., use only institutional peer reviewed literature or include local (traditional and indigenous) knowledge; Governance structure: i.e., an intergovernmental, non-governmental or ahybrid system; Management structure: i.e., one co-sponsoring agency versus multiple co-sponsoring agencies, and a centralizedversus distributed secretariat; Assessment characteristics: in particular whether the assessment should make policy recommendations or whether it should be policy relevant, but not policy prescriptive, identifyingoptions for action; Financing: Le., criteria for accepting funding; The final design features were approved during the first intergovernmental meeting inNairobi, Kenya in September/October 2004, based on the recommendations o f the steering committee, with careful consideration o f the outcomes from the regional meetings, the web site, and the Steering Committee meetings in Cork, Ireland (12-13 June 2003) and Budapest, Hungary (3 1 July - 2 August 2003). The IAASTD project has brought together a wide range o f stakeholders (governments; NGOs; private sector; producers; consumers; the scientific community, including the CGIAR; MEAs; and international agencies, including the GEF) involved in the agricultural and rural development sectors to design and implement the IAASTD and to share views and gain a common understanding and vision for the future. The final design o f the IAASTD i s multi-thematic (agriculture; hunger, nutrition and human health; poverty, livelihoods and economic growth; and environmental and social sustainability) rather than a narrow agricultural productivity focus; multi-spatial (local to national to regional to global) rather than global only as many o f the challenges in the agricultural sector are "place- based"; multi-temporal (historical to present to future) so that options for action can take into account both what has happened to date and what may happen in the future; and utlize both institutional and local knowledge, especially inthe sub-global assessments. The IAASTD will be co-sponsored by seven international agencies (World Bank, FAO, WHO, UNEP, UNESCO, UNDP and GEF) giventhat the assessment will address agricultural issues (FAO), development issues (World Bank and UNDP), health issues (WHO), environmental issues (UNEP and GEF) and scientific issues (UNESCO), and between them will manage a distributed secretariat. The IAASTD will be intergovernmental, but with a multi-stakeholder Bureau, and involve experts from all stakeholder groups in the design, preparation and peer review o f the global and sub- global assessments, to ensure ownership o f the process and findings. The assessment will be policy relevant, but not policy prescriptive. A well-defined set o f principles and procedures have been established to ensure that the IAASTD process will be open, transparent and legitimate. Therefore, the project's design reflected the desire o f stakeholders to assess in an integrated and interdisciplinary way questions concerning agriculture, climate, biodiversity, natural resources, hunger, poverty and development, which will enable decision-makers to better understand the connections between what they may have previously seen as isolated issues. The highly participatory design process addressed both issues o f technical and geographic scope. They rejected the typical country- and region-specific agricultural development assessments and emphasized instead the need to assess agriculture inthe broadest terms, hence to include issues o frural livelihoods, hunger, and the incorporation o f traditional knowledge. 10 C. IMPLEMENTATION 1. Partnershiparrangements The Heads o f the FAO, UNDP, UNEP, UNESCO, World Bank, WHO and GEF have agreed to co-sponsor the IAASTD. In addition, the Secretary-General o f the United Nations, Mr. Kofi Annan, has assured full cooperation and support for this project. The IAASTD will have a distributed Secretariat based at the World Bank in Washington, D.C, FA0 in Rome, UNEP in Nairobi and UNESCO inParis, with each Agency providing in-kindsupport inthe form o f staff time and travel for the Secretariat. The Secretariat will provide management and oversight o f the project, including monitoring the implementation and execution o f the project; ensure coordination among the global and sub-global assessments; manage the peer review process, provide technical support, and oversee communications and outreach. The Director o f the Secretariat and the IAASTD Chairs are jointly responsible for the intellectual leadership o f the project. Inaddition to the GEF funding and the in-kindagency staff support, the World Bank i s also providing financial support through the DGF and i s managing a multi-donor trust fund. 2. Institutionalandimplementationarrangements(See Annex 6) Members o f the distributed Secretariat will coordinate/oversee one or more o f the global and sub-global assessments. The World Bank will have overall responsibility for the global assessment, working closely with the other cosponsoring agencies intheir area o f expertise, and the sub-global assessments in East and South Asia and the Pacific (ESAP), Central and West Asia and North Africa (CWANA), and NorthAmerica and Europe (NAE); FA0 will coordinate the plausible futures work; and UNESCO will be responsible for Latin America and the Caribbean. UNEP will be responsible for Sub-Saharan Africa and issues pertaining to the environment on the all o f the reports. Each sub-global assessment, except for NorthAmerica and Europe, will be managedby a regional institute: the World Fish Center for ESAP; the African Centre for Technology Studies (ACTS) for SSA; the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA) for LAC; and the International Center for Agricultural Research in the DryAreas (ICARDA) for CWANA. The Panel o f participating governments will meet inplenary to accept the global and sub-global assessments and approve the Summaries for Decision Makers and the Synthesis Report. The multi-stakeholder Bureau will select the design teams, chairs, authors and review editors for the assessment and ensure a balance o f disciplines, views, regional representation and gender. The Bureau also has a fundraising and financial sub-committee with oversight responsibilities for the budget, and a communications and outreach sub-committee to assist the secretariat develop and implement an appropriate outreach and communications strategy. Roles and responsibilities o f all components o f the IAASTD management structure are discussed in Annex 16 Principles - and Procedures governing the IAASTD, which are modeled on those used by IPCC and MA, and approved by the Bureau inDecember 2004. The Secretariat liaises with governments, civil society organizations and the Bureau to facilitate project implementation. The IAASTD work plan i s inAnnex 17. The World Bank will act as the GEF Implementing Agency (IA) responsible for coordination with GEF Secretariat, and will manage the multi-donor trust hnd. The World Fish Center (otherwise known as ICLARM), ACTS, ICARDA, and IICA will be the Recipient Implementing Institutions for the GEF funds. The African Centre for Technology Studies and the Inter- American Institute for Cooperation in Agriculture will act as Recipient Implementing Institutions for the World Bank's DGF grant. The GEF resources will be used to provide 11 financial support to experts approved by the Bureau to participate in lead author meetings; honoraria/stipends for developing and developed country experts using criteria established by the Bureau; Bureau-selected regional institutes to manage the preparation and peer review of the sub-global assessments; Bureau and Plenary meetings, including travel expenses o f eligible participants; partial salary for the developing country co-chair; and publication and translation costs of the final reports. All expenses are consistent with the Bureau decisions taken in Montpellier, France inMay 2005. The Recipient ImplementingInstitutions will be involved in all aspects o f the assessment and ensure high quality technical implementation; however, UNEP will pay particular attention to the environmental dimensions, while FA0 will pay particular attention to the plausible futures and agricultural dimensions o f the IAASTD. Collaboration between the IA and the EAs (UNDP, UNEP, FAO, UNESCO, World Fish Center, ICARDA, ACTS and IICA) will be ensured through e-mails, teleconferences, and regular meetings associated with meetings o f the design teams, authors and Bureau. Budget analysts within the Secretariat will work together to ensure financial implementation is transparent and responsible. 3. Monitoring and evaluation of outcomedresults (see Annex 3) Project execution: The management and supervision o f project activities will be monitored by the IAASTD Secretariat, and the Panel o f participating governments through the Bureau (See Annex 16). The monitoring and evaluation of progress on timeliness o f activities and quality o f outputs will be an ongoing responsibility o f the IAASTD Secretariat, and includes reviewing budgets against agreed work programs and outputs, as reflected in the Project Perfonnance indicators in the Logical framework (Annex 3). The Bureau will convene four times over the course o f the project to assess and review annual work plans, provide specific input on ways to improve project execution, and assess progress made toward the stated goals o f IAASTD using performance criteria in the Logical framework. Evaluations o f progress will be documented in minutes o f meetings and in semi-annual progress reports to the IAASTD Secretariat, Co- sponsoring Agencies, Panel o f participating governments and donors. The Secretariat will be responsible for making improvements when inadequacies are noted and taking corrective action. The project's scientific outputs will be subjected to two government and expert peer reviews. The Secretariat and a set o f independent review editors will be responsible for ensuring that authors adequately address comments by peer reviewers. Independent mid-tern and final evaluations will be conducted by external evaluators to assess the project's performance in achieving strategic goals and objectives. The evaluators will be contractedby the World Bank, in consultation with the World FishCenter (otherwise known as ICLARM), ACTS, ICARDA, and IICA andthe other co-sponsoring agencies. Project performance: Internal evaluation will be conducted by the World Fish Center (otherwise known as ICLAFM), ACTS, ICARDA, IICA, the World Bank and the IAASTD Secretariat. Performance indicators will be as delineated in the Logical framework. (Annex 3). The quality of the global and sub-global assessments will be ensured through two rounds o f expert and government peer review, with an independent set o f chapter review editors. The final assessment reports will be approved at a plenary meeting o f governments and other stakeholders. Impact evaluation: Since the primary outputs (global and sub-global assessment reports) will not be disseminated until the completion o f the project, determination o f impact will occur post- 12 project. The cosponsoring agencies, however, will monitor web site usage during the project to assess effectiveness o f electronic outreach to stakeholders. 4. Sustainability& Replicability Sustainability: Sustainability has been optimizedby ensuringthe full range o f stakeholders have ownership in the IAASTD process and findings through their involvement inthe Bureau and in the design, preparation and peer review of the reports. The multistakeholder Bureau i s also responsible for overseeing the outreach and communications strategy to ensure wide dissemination and use o f the findings. The World Bank, UNEP, FA0 and UNESCO have committed financial resources, both cash and in-kindsecretariat support. Inaddition, a number of governments and the private sector have already committed funds in writing to a multi-donor trust fund managed by the World Bank (including Australia, Canada, European Commission, France, Ireland, Switzerland, UK, USA and the private sector), and Finlandhas provided funds towards the staff costs o f the Secretariat. Details on Project Cost and Cofinancing can be found in Annex 5. OECD governments, organizations and institutions will be primarily responsible for supporting participation o f developed country nationals. The IAASTD will build sub-global assessment capacities to undertake integrated scientific assessments o f agricultural KST, and build ownership to implement action based upon the evidence in the assessments. They will also help build synergy between regions in the development o f an internally consistent framework and will promote and extend linkages and partnerships that will enhance sustainable development. GEF resources are critical to supporting the environmental aspects o f the initiative, and in conjunction with the multi-donor trust fund will be used, among other things, to support developing country participation and the regional institutes. GEF support for the participation o f specialists from developing countries and countries with transitioning economies will enhance the sub-global, national and local capacity-building components o f the Project as specialists come together to share and assess knowledge and learn how to conduct effective scientific assessments. The four Recipient Implementing Institutions, the World Fish Center (otherwise known as ICLARM), ACTS, ICARDA and IICA will assist with implementing the sub-global assessments and engaging local scientists in project implementation. The involvement o f these institutions will ensure the inclusion and support of regional and local capacity and ground the IAASTD in regional and local concerns. Replicability: The IAASTD has been designed to incorporate the positive characteristics o f previous international assessments such as the IPCC, GBA, MA and the stratospheric ozone assessments. The regional institutions will use their substantial existing expertise as well as benefit from this additional experience gained inmanaging these sub-global assessments and in liaising with the authors in their respective regions. The institutions will benefit from the exposure to a large realm o f technical expertise and from south-to-south exchanges as they work to harmonize the sub-global assessments. The involvement o f local experts in conducting the sub-global assessments will contribute to the effectiveness o f the Project by providing a resource base for future regional and national assessments. 13 This design and implementation structure will allow for the needs of multiple institutions and users to be addressed and will facilitate the continuation of IAASTD endeavors at the local, regional, national and global levels. It i s anticipated that the use of IAASTD outputs will spread beyond the immediate stakeholders directly involved in the project. It is likely that the experience gained during the IAASTD will result in additional sub-global assessments being performed, especially at the national and regional level. 5. Critical risks and possible controversial aspects No issues have been identified that might pose reputational risks to the Bank or GEF. Even though the assessment will address controversial issues such as transgenic crops, the assessment will only assess policy options; itwill notmake policy recommendations. The major potential risks that may affect project success and their respective mitigation measuresincorporated into project design are: Risks Risk Mitigation Measures RiskRating wl Mitigation Improved information and The project designand decisionmakingprocess brought M knowledge does not in togetherrelevantstakeholdersfrom key governmental, NGO, aggregate leadto better producer, consumer, scientific and private sector organizations. management decisions Key issues and questionswere agreed and a process set inplace to insurewell informed decisionsinthe future. GEF IAs and EAs are GEF I A s and EAs are fully involved inall aspects ofthe M unableto mainstream IAASTD process. Relevantinternal committees havebeen IAASTD information into establishedto insure IAASTD resultsare mainstreamedinto programs and activities each organizationsprogramming. Insufficient involvement of Many ofthe countrieswhich are participating inthe IAASTD, L/N international scientific have also participatedinthe IPPC, the MA andthe MDG community processes.Participating governmentshavenominated excellent experts as authors.All stakeholder groups nominated excellent experts for the design team meetings,which were well attended. Insufficient involvement of Given the high level of participation during the designprocess, M relevant stakeholders, the projectsemphasis on an institutional framework with multi- including local communities stakeholder involvement, prospects for continued participation are very good. The lack of remuneration for authorswill limit t~ The World Bank, UNEP, F A 0 and UNESCO have all ~~~ Participating groups and LM institutions do not assign committed staff resources, which are complementedby adequate staff to carry out additional staff funded by Finland and through the Multi-donor projectsactivities. Trust Fund Unforeseentechnical or UNEP andthe World Bank have significant prior experience L/N logistical difficulties with internationalassessmentsincludingtheInternational StratosphericOzone Assessment, the Global Biodiversity Assessment, the A, and the IPCC. Decision-makersat all The Global and Subglobal consultative processwas widely L/N levels are unable and/or attendedby governmentofficials from over 100 countries. unwillingto enter into the They participatedactively inthe designprocess, and will dialogue on agricultural participateinthe nomination of authors,peerreview and KST fi OECD governments, This issue was raisedat the secondBureaumeeting and is M organizationsand being addressed,but not in a consistentmanner. institutions are unwilling to financeparticipation of their experts 14 I The institutional IExperience through the consultative process and at the first twoIL/N I arrangements (Panel, Bureaumeetings has been very positive. Routine Bureau, Secretariat and teleconferences among members of the Secretariat have been management entities) have implementedand will be part o f the project's coordination difficulty functioning in a mechanisms. well-coordinated, effective and harmonious manner. I1 The assessment is o f low The experts involved in the assessment are world class and the qualit 1 H=High;S = Substantial; M=Modest; LM=LowMegligible 6. Loadcredit conditions and covenants None 15 D. APPRAISAL SUMMARY 1. Economic andfinancialanalyses(see Annex 9) While an Economic and Financial analysis would not be applicable, the project's design includes cost effectiveness considerations to promote maximum implementation effectiveness, and replicationand impact o fproject results. The proposed approach has been designed to be cost-effective by having a smaller secretariat than previous assessments like the IPCC or MA, by only paying for the travel expenses (economy class) o f developing country experts and by not paying for the time o f the experts to design, prepare and peer review the IAASTD (as in the IPCC). International assessments that endeavor to encourage and support the participation o f specialists from developing countries and countries with economies intransition inherently cost more than similar activities that rely solely on experts from developed countries. However, the inclusion o f a broad range o f experts from developing countries i s a major strength o f the global and sub-global components o f the Project. The engagement o f experts from all stakeholder groups inall aspects o f the Assessment (design, drafting and reviewing) ensures that the appropriate questions are being addressed and that the knowledge o f experts i s fully utilized. It also ensures ownership o f the process and findings by all stakeholder groups, facilitates communication o f the results and hence greatly contributes to the effectiveness o f the Project. The cost-effectiveness of the outreach and communications is facilitated by using the already established networks o f the different stakeholder groups, i.e., cosponsoring agencies, MEAs, governments, private sector, NGOs, consumers, producers, the CGIAR and scientific community, extension services, etc. 2. Technical The IAASTD builds upon a wealth o f other assessment activities. Conceptual frameworks and approaches commonly employed, which have been reviewed for the IAASTD, include quantitative frameworks such as in GFRA and qualitative as in the IPCC reports and the MA. The most relevant framework for the IAASTDwas determined to be a variant o f the MA, which links drivers to ecosystem services to human well being. One key element o f the IAASTD, analogous to the IPCC, GEO and MA, i s the use o f scenarios to investigate plausible future worlds. Most o f the findings from earlier assessmentswill provide useful information for some elements o f the IAASTD even though the findings cannot be integrated to address the range o f questions being addressed inthe IAASTD. Inmost cases, the scope o f the assessments has been limited, i.e., they have not been multi-thematic or multi-temporal, and have not addressed the policy, institutional and research issues proposed for IAASTD, nor have they examined plausible futures. 3. Fiduciary (See Annexes 7 and 8for more information on Financial Management and Procurement, respectively) The project will have four implementing agencies: The World FishCenter (otherwise known as ICLARM), the African Center for Technology Studies (ACTS), the International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA), and the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA). Conducted Financial Management assessments were based on the Bank's overall review o f the financial management rules and regulations o f each 16 organization, the analysis o f the latest available audited financial statements and management letters prepared by the external auditors, and on internal World Bank inquiries. Following the detailed review o f information listed above, the World Bank concluded that ICLARh4, ACTS and ICARDA have established financial management arrangements in place, which meet the minimum requirements to the organization implementing the World Bank- financed project and lower the project riskto modest. While IICA has established financial management arrangements in place, the risk posed by placing Bank funds into this environment is still substantial. Mitigating measures have been proposedto lower the project risk. The project's disbursements will be transaction-based and will be made on the basis o f the Statements of Expenditures (SOEs). Each implementing agency will be responsible for the periodical (based on the disbursement needs) preparation o f their respective SOEs. While ICLARh4, ACTS and ICARDA will open a Special Account for the project disbursement purposes, IICA would operate by prepaying eligible project expenditures according to the implementation program, and subsequently submitting reimbursement applications, supported byallrequired documentation. 4. Social Stakeholder Participation. The strategic approach for stakeholder involvement in the Project i s based on lessons learned from the International Stratospheric Ozone Assessments, the Global Biodiversity Assessment, International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the Global Environment Outlook (GEO) process and the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA). These assessments demonstrated that the IAASTD must: 0 be conducted using an open, transparent, representative and legitimate process, with an agreed set o f Principles and Procedures; 0 involve a representative set o f experts from relevant stakeholder groups in the design, preparation and preparationo f the Assessment usinglocal and institutional knowledge; 0 incorporate gender issues; 0 be intellectually and scientifically objective (peer and stakeholder reviewed, with independentreview editors), but accessible and comprehensibleto non-specialists; 0 incorporate capacity-building activities; and 0 incorporate a continuous and effective outreach and communications strategy. The proposed intergovernmental governance structure resembles that o f the IPCC, but contains a multi-stakeholder Bureau similar to the MA Board o f Directors. The geographically based multi- stakeholder Bureau will be comprised o f 30 governments and 30 representatives from producer and consumer groups, NGOs, the private sector and international institutions, including the CGIAR, to ensure ownership o f the process and findings. The cosponsoring agencies, including the GEF, and the Multilateral Environmental Agreement secretariats are ex-offico members o f the Bureau. The project has already brought together a wide range o f stakeholders (governments, GEF and their implementing agencies, the cosponsoring agencies, Multilateral Environmental Agreements (e.g. UNCBD, UNCCD, UNFCCC and Ramsar), NGOs, consumers, producers, 17 private sector, foundations, UN agencies, the CGIAR and others in the scientific community) involved in the agricultural sector. A wide range o f stakeholders were involved in the regional consultations, and were represented on the international steering committee which guided the consultative process. Similarly, a wide range o f stakeholders are represented on the multi- stakeholder Bureau and will participate inthe plenary meeting, and all stakeholders are involved inthe design, preparationand peer review ofthe reports. A multi-stakeholder Bureauembedded withinanintergovernmentalprocess is unique. Local knowledge (traditional and indigenous) o f producers and NGOs will be incorporated along with institutional knowledge. A set o f lead authors will be chosen with the primary responsibility of ensuring that local knowledge i s fully assessed in the global and sub-global assessments. Participation of Civil Society. Key stakeholders (governments and a wide range o f civil society stakeholders) were involved in the discussion and preparation o f the initial project concept, consultative workshops, and final design, including the management and governance structures. Social Issues Important in the Project. The key social issues addressedby the project include: (i) the role o f agriculture in poverty alleviation and sustainable rural livelihoods; (ii) hunger alleviation and improved nutrition and human health; and (iii) dimensions in agriculture gender and rural deployment. 5. Environment Application o f the knowledge generated through the IAASTD should provide significant local, national, regional and global environmental benefits, including reducing the overall rate o f natural resource loss and land degradation, enhancing landscape biodiversity both in areas o f land use and inprotected areas, reducing the rate o f soil, runoff and nutrient losses, diminishing the contamination and eutrophication of fresh waters and soils, reducing the rate o f greenhouse gas emissions, and increasing the amount o f carbon fixed in agricultural systems. This will be achieved if the knowledge generated by the IAASTD i s used to design and implement appropriate policies, regulations and incentive structures to support integrated natural resource and agricultural management, and to stimulate investments to address local, national, and global environmental issues within the context o f sustainable development. The IAASTD will also strengthen the capacity o f institutions to design and implement integrated management approaches. Sustainable agricultural practices will directly, and through improved natural resource management, contribute to improvingpeople's livelihoods, food security and health. 6. Safeguard policies Safeguard Policies Triggered by the Project Yes N o EnvironmentalAssessment (OP/BP/GP 4.01) [I [XI Natural Habitats(OP/BP 4.04) [I [ XI Pest Management (OP 4.09) [I Cultural Property(OPN 11.03, beingrevised as OP 4.11) [I [X 1 [XI Involuntary Resettlement(OP/BP 4.12) [I [XI IndigenousPeoples(OD 4.20, being revisedas OP 4.10) [I [XI Forests (OPIBP4.36) [I [XI Safety of Dams(OP/BP 4.37) [I [XI Projectsin DisputedAreas (OP/BP/GP 7.60)* [I [XI Projectson International Waterways (OP/BP/GP 7.50) [I [XI *By supporting theproposedproject, the Bank does not intend toprejudice thefinal determination of theparties'claims on the disputed areas 18 Environmental Rating: C The Project is designated a Category C project, based on the above assessment ofpotential impacts (Annex 10). 7. PolicyExceptionsandReadiness The proposed project does not require any exceptions from Bank policies. 19 Annex 1: Country and Sector or Program Background GLOBAL:InternationalAssessmentofAgricultural Science andTechnology for Development (IAASTD) Between 2001 and mid-2002, the World Bank held a number o f meetings with the leaders inthe private sector and incivil society to discuss some o f the prominent issues inagricultural science and technology. Participants were asked for their views on how to advance the role o f agricultural science and technology in meeting future challenges to nutritional security and agricultural productivity inan environmentally and socially sustainable manner. Some suggested that a comprehensive, multidisciplinary assessment o f issues critical to policy formulation would have great value for decision makers confronting conflicting views on a number o f issues concerning agricultural science and technology, practices, policies and institutional effectiveness. Recognizing how important such an international assessment could be to achieving the Millennium Development Goals o f eradicating extreme hunger and poverty and ensuring environmental sustainability, inAugust 2002, FA0 and the World Bank announced at the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) inJohannesburg a global consultative process on a proposed international assessment o f the role o f agricultural science and technology in reducing hunger, improving rural livelihoods and stimulating environmentally sustainable economic growth over the coming decades. The goal o f the consultative process was to engage a balanced and representative set o f stakeholders ineach region (Sub-Saharan Africa; Central and West Asia and NorthAfrica; Latin America and the Caribbean; East and South Asia and the Pacific; and North America and Europe) indiscussions o f the questions they deemed critical for meetingthe goals o f nutritional security and enhanced rural livelihoods in an environmentally and economically sustainable way. The CGIAR, the Centre for Rural and Technical Cooperation (CTA) and the governments o f Finland, France and Ireland provided key financial and logistical support for the regional consultations The conclusions of each regional consultation are summarized on the IAASTD web site (www:agassessment.org). Representatives from relevant stakeholder groups, which included representatives o f FAO, UNDP, UNEP, UNESCO, the World Bank, WHO, and three Multilateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs) as well as representatives from governments, the private sector, producer and consumer groups, non-governmental organizations, international organizations, foundations, the CGIAR and other scientific organizations from around the world attended the first meeting inDublin, Ireland, inNovember 2002. Participants endorsed transparency and inclusiveness as guiding principles for the regional consultations. They recommended inviting specialists and generalists, natural and social scientists, local and institutional experts, producers, environmentalists and health professionals, as well as representatives from relevant stakeholder groups to the consultations. A 55-member Steering Committee comprised o f representatives from the stakeholder groups, including the cosponsoring agencies and the UNFCCC, UNCBD and UNCCD, was formed shortly after the Dublin meeting. Regional consultations involving nearly 900 participants representing 110 countries were subsequently held in: 9 Cairo, Egypt (Central and West Asia and NorthAfrica); 9 Paris, France(Eastern andWesternEurope); 9 Lima, Peru(SouthAmerica); 20 9 Washington, DC(North America); 9 SanJose, CostaRica(Central America); 9 New Delhi, India(SouthAsia); 9 Suva, Fiji(Pacific Islands); > Bogor, Indonesia(Southeast Asia); and 9 AddisAbaba, Ethiopia(Sub-SaharanAfrica) 9 Beijing, China(China)4 Presentations were also given at the following important stakeholder events: 9 Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research General Meeting (Philippines, September 2002); 9 Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in East and Central Africa (ASARECA) Annual Meeting(Kenya, January 2003); 9 FoodandAgriculture OrganizationCommitteeonAgriculture (Italy, April2003); and 9 ForumonAgricultural Researchfor Africaplenary (Senegal, May2003). After careful consideration of the outcomes from the regionalmeetings and input from the web site, the Steering Committee met inCork, Ireland (12-13 June 2003) and Budapest, Hungary (31 July - 2 August 2003) to finalize recommendations to the President of the World Bank and the Heads o f FAO, IFAD, UNDP, UNEP, UNESCO and WHO. The recommendations addressed the rationale, goal, scope, outputs, outcomes, assessment characteristics, management and governance structure, location o f secretariat, the proposedbudget and funding philosophy. In December 2003, the Secretary General o f the United Nations, Kofi Annan, wrote the President o f the World Bank, Jim Wolfensohn, expressing full support and cooperation for the initiative. ByJanuary 2004, FAO, WHO, UNEP, UNDP, UNESCO had agreed tojoin the World Bank incosponsoringthe Assessment, and inMay 2004, the GlobalEnvironmentFacility (GEF) agreed to provide PDF-B funding o f US$350,000 to sponsor the First Intergovernmental Plenary in Nairobi, Kenya. These funds were primarily used to support developing country participation. The Panel o f participating governments, taking into account the recommendations o f the multi- stakeholder steering committee that oversaw the consultative process, and the views o f other stakeholders at the IAASTD Intergovernmental Plenary held in Nairobi from 30 August to 3 September 2004, agreed on the objectives, goals, scope, key questions, design, preparation and peer review processes, outputs, timetable, budget and governance structure (Annex 13). The Bureau to the Panel includes 30 representatives from governments, 22 representatives from civil society (six NGOs, six producer groups, four consumer groups, six private sector entities) and eight fkom international organizations. This meeting was delayedbecauseo f SARS so was not held until after the Steering Committee report was finalized. 21 Annex 2: Major RelatedProjectsFinancedby the Bankand/or other Agencies Global- InternationalAssessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development(IAASTD) Latest Supervision Sector Issue Project (PSR) Ratings (Bank-financed projects only) lmplementati Development Bank-financed on Progress Objective (DO) (IP) Other Agencies UN MDG Task Forceon Hunger Inter-AcademyCouncil Study on Science and Technology Strategies for ImprovedAgricultural Productivityand FoodSecurityinAfrica UNEP Millennium EcosystemAssessment* UNEP GlobalEnvironmental Outlook ~~~ UNEPIWMO IntergovernmentalPanel on ClimateChange UNEP GlobalBiodiversityAssessment FA0 The State of FoodInsecurity * The World Bank contributed DGF resources to the MA RELATED ACTIVITIES This section summarizes the major related projects listed in the table above as well as a few additional projects which are relevant to the IAASTD. 1. The IAASTD will complement recently completed and/or ongoing activities. The two most relevant activities are the Inter-Academy Council Study on Science and Technology Strategies for Improved Agricultural Productivity and Food Security in Africa, and the MillenniumDevelopment Goal Task Force on Hunger. A memorandum of understanding (MOU) from the co-chairs o fthe IAC, MDGand IAASTD was forwarded to KofiAnnan on November 4, 2002. This MOU, which has since been updated, outlined the scope o f the three activities and demonstratingthe complementarities among them. 2. The Inter-Academy Council Study on Science and Technology Strategies for Improved Agricultural Productivity and Food Security in Africa: In March 2002, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan asked the InterAcademy Council (IAC) to develop a strategic plan on how best to harness technology and science to improve food security in Africa. The Final report was published in June 2004, and recommended specific actions broadly categorized as: B Science and technology options that can make a difference (e.g., promoting the conservation, sustainable and equitable use o f biodiversity); B Building impact-oriented research, knowledge and development institutions (e.g., designingand investing innational agricultural science systems that involve farmers in education, research and extension); B Creating and retaining a new generation o f agricultural scientists (e.g., reforming university curricula); 22 9 Markets and policies to make the poor income and food secure (e.g., increase investments inrural infrastructure); and 9 Engaging science and technology for the benefit of African agriculture in the near term. 3. Millennium Development Goal Task Force on Hunger: The UN General Assembly agreed to the MillenniumDevelopment Goals (MDGs) in September 2000. In2002, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan asked Jeffery Sachs to direct the UN MDG Program, a program designed to develop action plans to meet targets such as halving extreme poverty, achieving universal primary education, halting the spread o f HIV/AIDS and other diseases and reversing the loss o f environmental resources. The Hunger Task Force addressed the MDG target o f reducing by half the proportion o f people who suffer from hunger between 1990 and 2015. About 20 leaders from science, policy, the civil society, the private sector, UN agencies and developing country governments produced recommendations aimed at achieving this goal. These recommendations, released inDecember 2004, included: 4. 9 Movefrompolitical commitment to action; 9 Reformpoliciesandcreate andenablingenvironment; 9 Increasetheagriculturalproductivity offood-insecure farmers; 9 Improvenutritionfor the chronicallyhungryandvulnerable; 9 Reducevulnerability ofthe acutelyhungrythroughproductive safety nets; 9 Increase incomes andmakemarketswork for thepoor; and 9 Restoreandconservethe naturalresources essentialfor food security. Examples o f other international reporting, coordinating, research and assessment activities that the IAASTD will build upon include the following (others are listed in the economic and financial analysis -Annex 9): Reporting activity: The State o f Food Insecurity (FAOEOFI) reports, which are produced annually on global and national efforts to reach the goal set bythe 1996 World Food Summit: to reduce by halfthe number o fundernourishedpeople inthe world by the year 2015; Reporting activity: The Global Forum on Agricultural Research (GFAR), which is a multistakeholder initiative that contributes to eradicating poverty, achieving food security, and conserving and managing natural resources by enhancing national capacities to generate, adapt and transfer knowledge; Research/coordinating activity: The Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), which i s the largest publicly funded international research program focused on the needs o f developing countries, i s in the midst o f a reform and a research priority-setting exercise. The IAASTD will involve a large number o f CGIAR experts inthe design, preparation and peer review process; Research activity: The Global Plan o f Action for the Conservation and Sustainable Use o f Plant Genetic Resources for Foodand Agriculture (FAO); Research activity: The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), which has launched an initiative to develop scenarios o f plausible futures for use in upcoming studies, F P R Iwill play a major role onthe IAASTD plausible futures work; 23 Assessment activity: The work o f the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which includes plausible climate scenarios and an assessment o f the implications of global climate change on agriculture, and how agricultural practices effect the earth's climate system through emissions o f greenhouse gases from agricultural systems; Assessment activity: The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA), which includes an analysis o f historical and plausible future changes in agriculture on ecosystem services and changes in ecosystem services on agriculture; Assessment activity: Agriculture Towards 2015/2030 (FA0 2002); Assessment activity: The State of the World's Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (FA0 1998) andthe associatedregionalandnational reports, and Assessment activity: The CGIAR IWMI"Comprehensive Assessment o f Water Management in Agriculture: GuidingPolicy Investments inWater, Food, Livelihoods and Environment"; Assessment activity: The 2007 Global Environment Outlook (GEO), which will contain a major discussionon plausible futures. While the IAASTD will acknowledge, buildupon, and insome instances closely coordinate with (e.g., the CGIAR IWMI, and GEO assessments) the activities mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, the IAASTDhas a number o f unique attributes: Intergovernmental process with multi-stakeholder Bureau comprised o f 30 representatives from government and 30 from civil society; Multiple international agency cosponsorship (FAO, GEF, UNDP, UNEP, UNESCO, World Bank, and WHO); Well-defined user needs grounded inan internationalconsultative process; Inclusion o f hundreds of experts from all relevant stakeholder groups; Multi-thematic focus embracing nutritional security, livelihoods, human health and environmental and social sustainability; Multi-spatial: global and sub-global assessments with an intellectually consistent conceptual framework) Multi-temporal: historical-to-long term (till 2050) perspectives employing use of plausible scenarios; Integration o f local and institutional knowledge; Assessment of policies and institutional arrangements, as well as KST. 24 - 3 a . e e . e m [ & I 50 4- 0 wh * 35 (d E -0 5n 0 .3 e e e e e e E e '$ Y v) 0 0 m .3 a 8 a -c 2 .9 a8 n Monitoring and EvaluationAspects of the Project INTRODUCTION The objective of monitoring and evaluation i s to assist all project participants in assessing project performance and impact, in order to improve performance and increase impact. Monitoring is the continuous or periodic review and surveillance by management o f the implementation o f an activity to ensure that all required actions are proceeding according to plan. Evaluation i s a process for determining systematically and objectively the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness and impact o f the activities in light o f their objectives. Ongoing evaluation is the analysis, during the implementation phase, o f continuing relevance, efficiency and effectiveness o f outputs, effects and impact. The general and specific objectives o f the project, and the list o f its planned outputs, have provided the basis for this M&E plan. The specific objectives are to: (a) assess, quantify and analyze how agricultural knowledge, science and technology (KST) can improve livelihoods, improve nutritional security and assist poverty reduction; (b) build global and sub-global assessment capacity to undertake integrated scientific assessments o f agricultural KST and to buildownership to implement actionbaseduponthe evidence inthe assessments. The project will be evaluated on the basis o f 1. Executionperformance. Monitoring will concentrate on the management and supervision of project activities to ensure the efficiency and effectiveness o f project implementation. Information will be collected on programmed activities and compared to assess status o f accomplished with programmed tasks. This activity will be the direct responsibility o f the Director o f the IAASTD Secretariat who i s responsible for the quality o f the substantive work and will provide intellectual leadership, in collaboration with the IAASTD co-chairs, of the project. See Table D.1for the execution performance indicators. 2. Deliveredoutputs. Ongoing monitoring o f the project's success in producing each o f the programmed outputs, both in quantity and quality will be the responsibility o f the Project Secretariat. Indicators o f performance at Objective level and Output levelwill be the primary means o f monitoring delivery o f outputs. Internal project monitoring will be supervised by the Director of the IAASTD Secretariat. Mid-term and final outputs will be evaluated by external consultants contracted by the World Bank. For a summary o f expected outputs by project objectives, see the Project Logframe (Annex 3) for a list o f project activities and corresponding outputs. 3. Projectperformance.Performancemonitoring o f the project's success in achieving the two objectives (above) will be completed internally through reports and meetings o f the Secretariat at the World Bank, and by the multi-stakeholder IAASTD Advisory Bureau. Project performance success will be evaluated at mid-term (after two years o f project execution) and final (at the end o f project execution) by external consultants. See the Project Logframe for a summary o f the project performance indicators. 4. Project impact. Three major areas have been identified for impact evaluation, namely: (i) development o f detailed framework; (ii) global assessment focusing on policy and the institutional issues inthe context o f historical perspectives and plausible futures; and (iii) the five sub-global assessments. Impact evaluation in these three areas will depend upon the phases and milestones o f the project. 31 The rest o f the M&E Plan i s intabular form, as set out below: Table 1: lists the indicators o fproject executionperformance. Table 2: describes inputsand expected outputs and their timings. Table 3: summarizes indicators ofproject performance. Table 4: distinguishes the monitoringand evaluation responsibilities. Table 5: sets out the monitoring and evaluation reports, their content, timing and responsibility. Table 6: sets out the principal reportsby area o f activity, expected date, and drafting responsibility Table 1: Indicators of project execution performance Table 2 (See Annex 17:IAASTDPROJECTWORK PLAN2006 - 2008) Description and timing of expected outputs by project objectives Objectivesand inputs outputs Start Finish Outcomes 1. Development of Conceptual Conceptual Jan 05 May05 Conceptualframework, approved Framework(already Framework bythe Bureau,to guide the completed) preparationofthe globalandsub- global assessments 2. Developmentof annotated Annotatedoutlines Jan 05 May 05 Annotatedchapter outlines, outlines for the global andsub- approvedbythe Bureau, for the globalassessments(already Globalandsub-globalcomponents completed) consistent with the Conceptual Framework 3. GlobalAssessment Draftglobalreports June 05 June- GlobalAssessment reportapproved for expert andpeer Oct 07 by the Plenary andusedby all reviewandfinal relevantstakeholders approval by Plenary 4. SubglobalAssessments (5) Draftsub-global - June 05 June- Fivesub-globalassessment rewrts reports for expert Oct 07 approvedbythe Plenaryand;sed andpeerreviewand by all stakeholders final approvalby Plenary Continuousupdates Jan 05 April 08 Printedglobaland sub-global 5. Outreachand ofrelevantmaterial assessmentreports, each with a communication to ensure an open, Summary for DecisionMakers transparentprocess (SDM); SDMs publishedinsix official UNlanaguages) and a Globalandsub SynthesisReportandmadewidely globalassessment availableinprint andon the web reportsprintedand anddiscussedanddebatedin on the web workshops, conferences andused by all relevantstakeholders in SDMstranslated. decisionmaking. printedandonweb I 32 Table 3: Indicators of project performance Monitoring and Evaluation for the IAASTD A: Project monitoring For practicality, indicators o fperformancehave been chosen from the lists provided at Annex 3 to focus on the key processeso f each Component. These indicators will provide the basis for project monitoring. a Indicators o f an improved conceptual framework for the global and sub-global assessments a A conceptual framework that provides guidance for chapter contents for the global and sub- global assessments. a A conceptual framework that provides coherence amongthe global and sub-global assessments. Indicators of a global assessmentusingIAASTDconceptualframework a Informationcritically assessedwithin the conceptual framework a A historical assessmento fthe efficacy ofthe generation, access, disseminationand use of AKST inmeeting the development goals; a A set o f scenarios that will assessplausible future demands for agriculturalproducts, approaches to meet demand, the roles o f AKST inmeetingthe demand, and the implications for the development goals; a A set o foptions for action that arepolicy relevant butnotpolicyprescriptive; and a The global assessmentreport i s approved at a Plenary meeting o f governments and other stakeholders. Indicators of five sub-global assessments usingIAASTD framework a Information critically assessedwithin the conceptual framework. a A historical assessmento fthe efficacy ofthe generation, access, dissemination anduse of AKST inmeetingthe development goals ineach ofthe five regions; a A set o fregional scenarios that will assessplausible future demands for agricultural products, approaches to meet demand, the roles o f AKST inmeeting the demand, and the implications for the development goals; a A set of regional options for action that arepolicy relevant butnot policy prescriptive; a The sub-global assessmentreports are approved at a plenarymeeting o f governments and other stakeholders. Indicators of outreach and communicationof IAASTD findings invarious media and to all stakeholders at various levels a An accessible up-to-date web site with evidence o fuse by all stakeholders a Presentations at conferences, workshops, meetings o f Parties to environmetal conventions (e.g., CBD, CCD, Ramsar) during and after preparation o f the global and sub-global assessment reports a The global and sub-global assessmentreports, including the summaries for decision-makers, are rated well by the relevant stakeholders a IAASTDscientific outputs usedby Cosponsoringagencies, MEAs, Partiesto the Conventions, and other stakeholder groups 33 B: Elementsfor the TORfor the Independent mid-termevaluation The mid-term independent evaluationshould: (i) evaluate the current status o f the IAASTD in relation to the objectives set out inthe project document and the log-frame; and (ii) the appraise following aspects o f the IAASTD: a Appropriatenessof theproject approaches: o Is the conceptual framework providingcoherence betweenandamongthe global and sub-global assessments? o Is the conceptual framework being utilizedbythe global and sub-global assessments? o Were detailed chapter outlines developed for the global and sub-global assessmentsthat appropriately addressedthe environmental and development objectives set out inthe project proposal and log-frame? a Effectiveness and efficiency: o Was the framework development on schedule? o Are the global and sub-global assessments on schedule-has a first order draft been completed and sent for peer review? o Didthe first-order drafts ofthe global and sub-global assessments contain appropriate information on: 0 historical lessons; o plausible scenarios for agricultural consumption and production and implications for environmental conditions; o agricultural KSTpolicy and institutional arrangements inrelationship to environmentally sustainable agriculture; o Isthe web system providingauser-fiiendly platform for the authors and for the outside community o Has an effective outreach and communication strategy beendeveloped and is itbeing implemented? o Is the project within the approved budget? a Project institutional capacity: 0 I s the distributed secretariat appropriately staffed? 0 I s the multi-agency secretariat functioning efficiently? 0 I s the multi-stakeholder Bureau functioning effectively? 0 Is there sound financial management? 0 Didthe relevant experts participate inthe global and sub-global design team meetings? 0 Are the relevant experts participating inthe preparation o f the global and sub-global assessments? 0 Are the sub-global institutions effectively managing the sub-global assessments? 0 I s there an effective outreach and communications strategy? a Financial sustainability: o I s the IAASTDfinancially sound, Le., ithas the budgetrequired to complete the approvedwork program? o Are the OECDgovernments, organizations and institutions fbndingthe travel ofOECD experts? a Enabling environment: o Has the IAASTDretainedmulti-stakeholder ownership? o Is there ownership ofthe sub-global assessments? 34 C: Elements for the TORfor the Independent final evaluation The final independent evaluation should evaluate: (i) IAASTD inrelation to the objectives the set out inthe project document and the logframe; and (ii) appraise the following aspects o f the IAASTD: Appropriatenessof theproject approaches: 0 Didthe framework provide coherence betweenand amongthe global and sub-global assessments? 0 Didthe frameworkprove to be appropriate andutilizedbythe global and sub-global assessments? 0 Didthe chaptersappropriately address the environmental anddevelopment objectives set out inthe project proposal and logframe? 0 Effectiveness and efficiency: 0 Were the global and sub-global assessments completed on schedule? 0 Was the project completed within the approved budget? 0 Didthe globaland sub-global assessmentscontain appropriate information on: o historical lessons; o plausible scenarios for agricultural consumption andproduction andimplications for environmental conditions; o agricultural KSTpolicy and institutional arrangements inrelationship to environmentally sustainable agriculture; 0 Didthe web system provide auser-friendly platformfor the authors andpeer reviewers; 0 I s the web site user-friendly for the outside community and does it contain the appropriate material? 0 I s the outreach and communication strategy beingeffectively implemented to ensure ownership o f the findings? o Are the Summaries for Decision Makers effective documents for disseminatingthe key findingsto the full range o f decisionmakers; o Doesthe outreach and communications strategy ensure disseminationthe findingsto key stakeholders, including the cosponsoring agencies, the GEF and its implementing agencies and the MEAs and the Parties to the Conventions? Project institutionalcapacity: 0 Didthe multi-agency secretariat function efficiently? 0 Didthe sub-global institutions effectively manage the sub-global assessments? 0 Didthe multi-stakeholder Bureau function effectively? 0 Was there sound financial management? 0 Didthe relevant experts participate inthe design, preparation andpeer review ofthe global and sub-global assessments? 0 Was there an effective outreach and communications strategy? Financial sustainability: 0 Didthe IAASTD obtain the required funding? 0 Didthe OECDgovernments and other institutions fundthe travel o fOECDexperts? 35 Table 4: MonitoringandEvaluationResponsibilities The World FishCenter,ACTS, Panelof Multi- Sub-globa1 ICARDA andIICA (asMIS), in Participating stakeholder [nstitutes(The conjunctionwith theWorldBank Governments Bureau florld Fish IAASTD Secretariat :enter, ACTS, [CARDAand [ICA) Monitorthe agreedM&E Establishreporting Receivehalf-yearly Receivehalf-yearly nconjunctionwith planinaccordancewith guidelinesforparticipating activity andprogress activity and annual igencycosponsors the t e r n of agreement groups, andensurethat they reports progressreports,andall wersightof sub- with GEFSECM&E Unit meetreportingdates and substantive reports ;lobal assessments providereports ofsuitable Evaluate,acceptand Developconsolidated quality approvefinalreports Advise IAASTD SupplycontinuingM half-yearlyandannual Secretariat on 9z Edata as requested activity, progressand Reviewandcommenton implementation ~yIAASTD financialreports and half-yearly and annual problems that emerge, secretariat copiesofall substantive activityandprogressreports, andon desirable reports fromIAASTD sub-globalcoordinators' modifications to the Secretariat reports workplanfor the succeedingyear Projectmanager or Prepareconsolidatedhalf- deputyto attendand yearlyprogressreportsand participatefully in annualsummariesand Provideoverall Submitagreed generalprojectmeetings, substantiveandfinancial guidance for the project [ndicatorsto andmeetingsof the Panel reports implementation [AASTDSecretariat andBureau Canyout a programmeof Approveproject Engageandprepare regularvisits, inconjunction financingplan terms of reference for with the relemntco- independentM&E sponsoringagency, to sub- Design, inconjunction consultantsto conduct globalinstitutionsto with the IAASTD the mid-termreviewsand superviseactivities Secretariat, approve and final evaluation provideoversightfor theoutreachand Facilitatethe selective communications reviewofthe projectby strategy. STAPand/or GEFSEC Carryout suchother monitoringas is determinedin collaborationwith IAASTDSecretariat Table 5: MonitoringandEvaluationReports This refers to the 6-monthly administrative and financial reporting, with a fixed format to be respected by coordinators at the sub-global and global levels, i.e. from participating groups to the World Bank and IAASTD Secretariat. World Bank financing rules will be applied to all reports. Report I Formatand Content 1 Timing: 1 Resr>onsibilitv Activity andProgress (Reportswill use a standardformat Reports to be developedfollowing the World BankProgressReportmodel) Documentthe completionof PersonreportingandDate Half- yearly . - The WorldFishCenter, plannedactivities, and ACTS, ICARDA andIICA, describeprogressinrelation Activity nameandaccomplishments inconjunctionwith, the to the annualoperatingplan withineach activitythis half-year IAASTD Secretariat(Project 36 Manager)for use as Reviewany problemsor Targets for the nexthalf-year describedin Table D.4 decisionswith animpact on (above) performance Commentonperformanceon progress towardproject goals, and Provideadequate problems/constraints substantivedata on methods andoutcomesfor inclusion Reporton any unanticipatedresults inconsolidatedproject half- andopportunities,andon anychecks yearly and annual progress to projectprogress reports The World FishCenter, CTS, ICARDA and IICA Annual Project ImplementationReview Any highlights rask Managers / DGEF to Yearly 3EF Secretariat (Reports will use astandardformat ProgressReports to be developedfollowing the World BankProgressReportmodel) Summary of Sub-global Half-yearly,within The World FishCenter, yearly reportsofprogress Coordinators' reports and 30 days of endof 4CTS, ICARDA and IICA, regionalinstitutions eachreporting nconjunctionwiththe period, but not AASTD Secretariat(Project Reportonprogress ineach sub- requiredwhere a Manager) forwardingto globalassessment activity Consolidated Multi-stakeholderBureau Annual Summary Summaryofproblems andproposed Reportis due action Highlights (Reports will use a standard format Summary Progress reports to bedevelopedfollowing the World BankProgress Reportmodel) A consolidatedsummary of the half- Yearly, within 45 The World FishCenter, summary review ofprogress yearlyreports days of endof the ACTS, ICARDA and IICA, intheprojectas awhole, in reportingperiod inconjunctionwith the eachofits activities andin Summaryofprogress andof all IAASTDSecretariat(Project each output projectactivities Manager) for forwarding to Multi-stakeholderBureau Providessummary review Descriptionofprogress under each and assessment of progress activity andineach output under eachactivity set outin the annual workplan, Review of delays andproblems, and highlighting significant of actionproposedto deal with these resultsandprogresstoward achievementof the overall Reviewofplans for the following work programme period, withreportonprogress under eachheading Provides ageneral sourceof information, used inall generalprojectreporting Annual and interim The standardizedformat of the Periodicity: Eachcontractedinstiutions FinancialReports reportswill beagreed-uponduring annually and the negotiations andwill beattached quarterly to the MinutesofNegotiations. Financialaudit ofprojectaccounts Annual Eachcontractedinsitution Auditors 37 Table 6: PrincipalReportsbytitle, number,timingand responsibility. The Director of the IAASTD Secretariat will provide a standardized format for the global and sub-global assessments once a publishinghouse has been identified and a contract negotiated. There will be a global assessment report, five sub-global assessment reports, and a set of Summaries for Decision Makers and a Synthesis Report, which may be published separately. The IAASTD Secretariat, along with the global co-chairs and the chapter coordinating lead authors, are responsible for ensuring the reports are published and disseminated in a timely manner. Any additional scientific publications or related disseminated material would be the responsibility ofthe authors, subject to an agreement with the Secretariat. Report, number, title Format and Content Expected date 1Responsibility Global Assessment Contentwill be basedon theBureau Draftreportswill be The IAASTD Secretariat in approvedannotatedoutlines for the available for the conjunctionwiththe Sub-global assessment for globalandfive sub-global first roundof expert assessment co-chairsand the CWANA, ESAF', LAC, assessments, andsuggestions made and government chaptercoordinatinglead NAE and SSA regions. during the expert andgovernment peerreview in the authors. peer review. middle of 2006, and for asecondround by early 2007, with final approvalin late 2007 for publicationin early 2008 38 Annex 4: Detailed Description of Project GLOBAL: International Assessment ofAgricultural Science andTechnology for Development (IAASTD) At the First Plenary o f the IAASTD (AugusVSeptember 2004), the meeting agreed that the IAASTD would be comprised of a global assessment and five sub-global assessments addressing the role o f agricultural KST indevelopment, usinga common conceptual framework, with a strong outreach and communications strategy. Stakeholders from all relevant groups agreed on the broad scope o f the IAASTD, and a set o f indicative questions to ensure that the global and sub-global assessments would provide the information needed for sound decisions by a wide range of stakeholders on issues relatedto agriculture (see Annex 13). The IAASTD will seek to bring the best available information on agricultural KST to bear on policy and management decisions, and to build and enhance local and regional capacity to design, implement and utilize scientific assessments, The IAASTD will provide informationon contentious, complex topics such as biosciences, but it will not set goals or advocate specific policies or practices. It will be policy relevant, but not policy prescriptive, presenting a range o f options for actions and their likely consequences. The IAASTD will integrate scientific information on a range o f topics that are critically interlinked, but are often addressed independently. Highlighting linkages among questions concerning agriculture, poverty, livelihoods, economic growth, hunger, nutrition, human health, natural resources (especially water), and environmental and social sustainability, and development will enable decision makers to bring richer knowledge to bear on what they may have previously seen as isolated issues. The overarching question, which provides the framework for the global and sub-global assessments, is: "How can we reduce hunger and poverty, improve rural livelihoods, and facilitate equitable, environmentally, socially and economically sustainable development through the generation, access to, and use o f agricultural knowledge, science and technology?" This suggests four broad questions regarding agricultural KST: k What arethe challenges that canbe addressedthrough agricultural KST? 9 What arethe likelypositive andnegativeconsequencesofagricultural KST? k What are the enabling conditions required to optimize the uptake and diffusion of agricultural KST?and 9 Whatinvestmentsareneededto realizethepotentialofagricultural KST? Insummary, the five components are: Component 1- The development o f a conceptual framework and annotatedoutlines for the global and sub-global assessmentsfor conducting assessments at local, national, regional and global scales developed, tested and disseminated. This i s already completed using US $0.600 million co-financing sources Component 2 An expert and government peer reviewedglobal assessmentusingthe IAASTD - conceptual framework. Cost U S $1.430 million (US $0.690 million from the GEF grant). Component 3 Five expert and government peer reviewedsub-global assessmentsusingthe - IAASTDconceptual framework. Cost U S $3.140 million(US $1.961 millionfrom the GEF grant). 39 Component 4 -Outreachand communication ofIAASTD activities, meetings, and findings in various media, includinga web site, and to all stakeholders. Cost US $1.480 million, o f which U S $0.349 millionwill be from the GEF grant. Component 5 Coordinationand oversight (project management and administration). Cost US - $3.860 million, o fwhich none will be from the GEF grant. Component 1:Development of a conceptualframeworkand annotated outlinesfor the globalandsub-global assessments(already completed) The project will develop a conceptual framework and a set o f annotated outlines for conducting integrated agricultural assessments at local, national, regional and global scales that builds upon frameworks from previous assessments. Component2: GlobalAssessment The global assessment will have four sections. Each section will utilize the conceptual framework, and will incorporate gender issues: (i) Context, Concepts, Historical and Current Perspectives; (ii) Plausible Futures; (iii) Options for MakingAKST Work Better to Achieve the Development and Sustainability Goals: Technology and Capacity; and (iv) Options for Making AKST Work Better to Achieve the Development and Sustainability Goa1s:linvestrnent and Policy. Section I: Context, Concepts, Historical and Current Perspectives. This section will set the scene for the Assessment by discussing the key issues to be addressed, the context, the conceptual framework that will be used for both the global and five sub-global assessments, and will assess the current status o f development and sustainability conditions today. It will then present an historical analysis o f AKST and AKST systems including that o f the different actors/organizations (with different sources o f knowledge) who participated, the institutions that mediated the interactions among these actors, and the innovation processes that resulted. Furthermore, it will assess the contribution o f AKST and AKST systems in achieving the development and sustainability goals o f improved nutrition, human health, and livelihoods; reduced hunger and poverty; and environmental and social sustainability. It will critically assess factors that facilitated or constrained the role and contribution of AKST research agendas, capacities and capabilities inmeeting development goals. Section 11: Plausible Futures: This section will describe the design, construction, application, and outputs o f a range o fplausible futures o f relevance to IAASTD. This involves an analysis o f the past and projected trends in the indirect and direct drivers o f change identified in the IAASTD conceptual framework. Each o f the future world view views, or scenarios, is operationalized by a comprehensive storyline that describes the assumed evolution o f and linkages among drivers, as well as the evolution o f and impact on other factors o f interest in interpreting the future o f agriculture and, within than, AKST. Application o f the storyline o f each scenario over time involves a good deal o f analysis and interpretation that relies on both quantitative and qualitative methods. This section also includes a review o f the utility existing scenarios and storylines from other assessments and development exercises, and adapt past efforts to IAASTD's purpose and needs. Existing storylines will be enriched through a more comprehensive representation and analysis o f the development o f AKST, and then brought to life through the scripted storylines that weave together the global development goals, the key challenges and issues, AKST and enabling policy and institutional contexts. 40 Section 111: Options for Making AKST Work Better to Achieve the Development and Sustainability Goals: Technology and Capacity. This section will buildupon the findings from sections Iand I1and hence will be informed by historical lessons and plausible futures. The section will assess options to enhance the role of the generation, access, dissemination, and use o f AKST in achieving the development and sustainability goals (see Section I)in a more effective, efficient, equitable, sustainable and transparent way. This section will not be normative or policy prescriptive, but rather present options. Authors will consider addressing the implications o f emerging paradigms for improvingthe impact o f AKST on the development and sustainability goals; and the options for capacity strengthening, needed to ensure the capacity needed to address different the goals. The chapters will assess options with respect to the outputs o f the five plausible future scenarios: 0 Options to enhance the impact o f AKST. How can conventional technologies and knowledge, new agricultural technologies and knowledge, non-agricultural technologies and knowledge, and locally generated technologies and knowledge contribute to addressing the development and sustainability goals? What are the relevant contributions to achieving these goals o f individual, professional, institutional and social learning, change and commitment? 0 Options for Strengtheninp Capacitv. What are the ranges o f skills, institutions, organizations, modes o f behavior, and policies that are needed to strengthen AKST capacity? To what extent i s this capacity determined by different goals and contexts (including investments and optimal institutional arrangements) and what are the implications o f this for enhancing the role o f AKST inachieving the development and sustainability goals? Section IV: Options for Making AKST Work Better to Achieve the Development and Sustainability Goals:Investmentand Policy This section, like section 111, will build upon the findings from sections Iand I1and will be informed by historical lessons and plausible futures. It will not be normative or policy prescriptive, butrather present options. The sectionwill assess the policy, enabling environment and investment options to enhance the role o f the generation, access, dissemination, and use of AKST in achieving the development and sustainability goals in a more effective, efficient, equitable, sustainable and transparent way. The chapters will assess options with respect to the outputs o fthe five plausible future scenarios: 0 Options for the policv/enablina environment. How can policies, regulations and institutions be modified to create a stronger enabling environment that facilitates the generation, dissemination, access and adoption o f AKST and strengthen AKST capacity to address the development and sustainability goals and the key challenges and issues in an uncertain future? 0 Options for public and private sector investment inAKST, the implications inthe governance of the innovation system, and an assessment o f the economic returns and its distribution amonP different actors o f past and future investments. Component3: Sub-global Assessments Five expert and government peer reviewed sub-global assessments (Central and West Asia and North Africa; East and South Asia and the Pacific; Latin America and the Caribbean; North America and Europe; and Sub-Saharan Africa), each focusing on: (i) Context and Concepts; (ii) Historical and Current Perspectives; (iii) Plausible Futures; and (iv) Options for Making AKST Work Better to Achieve the Development and Sustainability Goals will be undertaken at the 41 regional, national or local scales, to complement the Global Assessment by examining regionally-specific aspects o f the Global Assessment. Each bf the sub-global assessments, except for North America and Europe (which will be coordinated by the main IAASTD, Secretariat) will be managed by a regional institute (World Fish Center (otherwise known as ICLARM); ACTS; ICARDA; IICA), and will use the same basic framework as the global assessment, Le., the impacts o f agricultural KST on rural livelihoods, nutritional security, equity, the environment and human health will be evaluated in relation to both the past and the future. The sub-global assessments will vary in scale from continents to communities, will use a consistent methodology, cover a range of agroecological systems, and employ selection criteria that take into account socioeconomic and institutional conditions, and poverty mapping. The assessment should seek to incorporate, and build upon, local and indigenous knowledge related to agricultural technologies and also assess the impact o fknowledge and technologies emanating from the informal agricultural research and innovation system driven by farmers and other local landusers. Component 4: Outreach and Communications An outreach and communications strategy will be developed by the Bureau inconjunction with the Secretariat, the regional institutes and the communications experts from the cosponsoring agencies for both the global and sub-global assessments. The outreach and communications strategy will include: 0 Development of a web site, which will include the minutes/decisions o f Bureau and Plenary meetings, annotated outlines o f the global and sub-global assessments, the Conceptual Framework, power-point presentations, list o f authors and review editors, schedule o f author, Bureau and Plenary meetings; draft reports for expert and government peer review; 0 Development o f outreach and communications strategy by Bureau and Secretariat 0 Targeted outreach to key user goups usingmedia, workshops and conferences 0 Publication and distribution o f global and sub-global assessmentreports 0 Availability o f global and sub-global assessmentreports on web site (www.agassessment.org) 0 Monitoring o f uptake o f IAASTDproducts Component5: Coordination and oversight (projectmanagementand administration). The project management and oversight o f the project i s through a distributed secretariat housed at the World Bank, FAO, UNEP and UNESCO, the regional institutes, and with a multistakeholder Bureau. Capacity Building - Capacity building is an implicit element of the IAASTD (also see paragraphs on replicability). The goal o f the IAASTD i s to enhance sub-global and global assessment capabilities to undertake integrated scientific assessments o f agricultural KST, and to buildownership to implement action based uponthe evidence inthe assessments. The IAASTD will result in an enhanced ability to conduct multi-scale integrated scientific assessments to understand the contribution o f agricultural KST inpoverty and hunger alleviation, improvement o f rural livelihoods and human health, and equitable and environmentally, socially and economically sustainable development. It will also improve the capacity to design and implement sustainable agricultural practices and policies by providing information to decision makers in relevant stakeholder groups through multistakeholder involvement and participation. This enhanced capacity will be developed through the involvement o f experts from all stakeholder groups in the design, preparation and peer review o f the global and sub-global 42 assessments. The involvement of the regional institutions (World FishCenter (otherwise known as ICLARM), ACTS, ICARDA and IICA) to manage the sub-global assessments will also result incapacity to carry out sub-global assessments inthe ikture. 43 Annex 5: ProjectCosts GLOBAL: InternationalAssessmentof Agricultural Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) ProjectComponent GEF Co-financing Total Funding Component 1: A conceptual framework 0 600,000 600,000 for conducting integratedassessments at local, national, regional and global scales developed, tested and disseminated. Component2: A global assessment using 690,000 740,000 1,430,000 the IAASTD framework (Output of Outcome 1) completed.* Component3: Five sub-global 1,961,000 1,179,000 3,140,000 assessments using the IAASTD framework are completed** Component4: Outreachkommunication 349,000 1,13 1,000 1,480,000 of IAASTD findings invarious mediaand Component5: Coordination and 0 1 3,860,000 1 3,860,000 oversight (project management and administration)* ** I II II I Total**** 3,000,000 7,510,000 10,510,000 ** travel, iegional institutes, partial Plenary/Burea; and co-chair salarycosts, honoraridstipends **** *** includes 60K contingency does not include the GEF I A fee or the multi-donortrust fund fee ofthe World Bank Name of Co-financier Classification Type US$* Status World Bank Multilateral In-kindand cash 3,060,000 Confirmed UNEP Multilateral In-kind 720,000 Confirmed UNESCO Multilateral In-kind 225,000 Confirmed FA0 Multilateral In-kind 225,000 Confirmed UNDP Multilateral In-kind 10,000 Confirmed Australia Bilateral Cash 240.000 Simed Ameement EuropeanCommission. ** I Bilateral 1Cash 300,000 I SignedAgreement France Bilateral Cash 300,000 SignedAgreement Ireland Bilateral Cash 300,000 SignedAgreement Switzerland Bilateral Cash 200,000 SignedAgreement USA I Bilateral I Cash I 250,000 I Inprogress Private Sector (Crop Life I Multilateral 1 Cash I 125,000 I Inprocess I Other donors I MuMBilateral I Cash 295,000 ITo beraised Sub-TotalCo-financine*** 7.510.000 I ** * Amounts may differ due to rate fluctuations betweenthe US$and other currencies (Euro, etc.). *** The EChas indicated a willingness to consider a secondtranche of 250,000 Euros. Includesthe 5% World Bank Multi-donor Trust Fundfee 44 Proiect activities at the Recident ImDlementinn Institutions Activities ACTS The Recipient shall contribute to the technical and logistical support o f the global assessment and be responsible for technical and logistical support o f the respective Sub-global component o f IAASTD activities, i.e., Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), as per the specific tasks and allocated budget set forthbelow. 921,000 U S dollars will be provided to the Recipient for project personnel, communications, administrative, travel, meetings (author meetings, also known as workshops, Bureau and Plenary meetings) and publication costs (see Recipient Budget table below) to undertake the specific tasks listed below. The travel costs (airline tickets; daily subsistence allowances for authors, Bureau members and government representatives) provided to the Recipient should, use criteria agreed upon with IAASTD Secretariat inthe World Bank. Specific tasks The Recipient i s responsible for overseeing andcoordinating the following: 1. Maintain databases o f authors and reviewers; 2. Serve as coordinating focal point for authors; 3. Organize the sub-global author meetings (workshops) for the SSA region; 4. Coordinate travel arrangements for eligible authors from the SSA region: a) The Institute will make travel arrangements for eligible authors to attend the global author meetings (workshops), the sub-global author meetings (workshops) and the final Plenary; b) "Travel arrangements" shall include providing the participants who qualify for travel support (developing country nationals who are NOT employees o f an international organization) with a round trip economy class ticket between point o f origin and the destination city where meetings are held; c) Providing the participants with a daily subsistence allowance. The amount o f the daily subsistence allowance will be determined by the IAASTD Secretariat in collaboration with ACTS prior to each meeting; d) Providing visa assistance to all eligible participants; 5. Coordinate travel arrangements for eligible Bureau members and government representatives from the SSA region to attend Bureau and Plenary meetings: a) The Institute will make travel arrangements for SSA Bureau members to attend two Bureau meetings and SSA government representatives to attend the final Plenary; b) "Travel arrangements" shall include providing the participants who qualify for travel support (developing country nationals who are NOT employees o f an international organization) with a roundtrip economy class ticket between their city o f residence and the destination city where the meetingsare held; c) Provide the participants with a daily subsistence allowance. The amount o f the daily subsistence allowance will be determined by the IAASTD Secretariat in the World Bank in collaboration with the respective sub-global instituteprior to each meeting; d) Providing assistance to all participants inobtaining visas. 6. Correspond with authors to ensure timely submission o f drafts; 7. Coordinate two rounds of peer review (experts and governments) and editing o f the drafts prepared by coordinating authors: a) Receive and integrate draft chapters o f the Assessment into a coherent document with a consistent structure; b) Send documents to experts and governments for peer review; c) Collate and file peer review comments; d) Send IAASTD documents to authors and IAASTD Secretariat; e) A copy edit ofthe final SSA sub-global report; f) Assist authors inthe preparation o fthe figures into a consistent format; g) Ensurereferences are complete; and 45 h) Preparethe final draft SSA sub-global assessmentfor acceptanceandapproval bythePlenary; i)PrintSSAreport. 8. Provide honoraria and stipendsper criteria establishedby the Bureau. 9. Translation of the Summary for Decision Makers into the other UN languages (exact number to be decidedby Bureau). 10. Support and participate in outreach and communications o f IAASTD activities and findings in various media, including the IAASTD web site and the publication and distribution of IAASTD publications. 11. Ensure all relevant stakeholders in the SSA region, especially governments, are kept informed of IAASTDactivities. 12. Work closely with IAASTDSecretariatto ensure timely completion o fthe work. Budgetfor ACTS Activity cost (US $) Institutecosts 65,000 Technical services: preparation, printingand distribution o f SSA report 63,000 Travel and workshotx: Travel expenses for experts for global and sub-global workshops 423,000 Travel expensesfor Bureaumembers and government representatives 140,000 Meetingcosts for Closing Plenary meeting 200,000 Outreach and Communications 30,000 Sub-total travel and workshops 793,000 ...................................................................................... Total 921,000 -- Cost: (The detailed budgetestimateof the goodslservicesprocuredand a brief descriptionof assumptions made and data usedto developthe estimate.) 1. Institute costs include mailing o f about 2,000 copies of the final publications ($10,000) and honoraridstipends as approved by the Bureau and confirmed by Secretariat ($55,000) = U S $65,000. 2. Technical services includepreparation, printingand distribution o f SSA report = US $63,000. Travel and workshops include: 3. Travel (economy class tickets plus DSA) for SSA experts to attend global assessment meetings and for SSA experts to attend the sub-global authors meetings in the SSA region), including travel expenses for one Co-chair ($10,000) = U S $423,000. 4. Travel (economy class tickets plus DSA) for SSA Bureaumembers and government representatives to attend the Bureauand Plenary meetings = $140,000. 5. Meeting costs (e.g., meeting rooms and equipment) for the final Plenary to be organized by UNEP (ACTS will provide money to UNEP). 6. Details of the Outreach and communications activities to be coordinated with the Secretariat. Sub-globalFinalAssessment Report: 300 pages (200 pagesofwords), with 5000 word SDMs Activity Estimated Cost (i) Thorough copy-edit $ 2,500 (ii) ComplexfiguresandSDMfigures $ 5,000 (iii) TranslationofSDMintoEnglishiFrench $ 1,000 Translation of full report into EnglisWFrench $27,000 (iv) Page setting $ 7,500 (v) Printing costs (1000 copies ineach language) $20,000 Total: $63,000 46 Activities ICARDA The Recipient shall contribute to the technical and logistical support o f the global assessment and be responsible for technical and logistical support o f the respective Sub-global component o f IAASTD activities, i.e., Central and West Asia and NorthAfiica (CWANA), as per the specific tasks and allocated budget set forth below. 732,000 U S dollars will beprovidedto the Recipient for project personnel, communications, administrative, travel, meetings (author meetings otherwise known as workshops, Bureau andPlenary meetings) and publication costs (see Recipient Budget table below) to undertake the specific tasks listed below. The travel costs provided to the Recipient to purchase the airline tickets and provide daily subsistence allowances for eligible authors, Bureau members and government representatives should use criteria agreed upon with IAASTD Secretariat inthe World Bank. Specific tasks The Recipient i s responsible for overseeing and coordinatingthe following: 1. Maintain databases o f authors and reviewers; 2. Serve as coordinating focal point for authors; 3. Organize the sub-global author meetings (workshops) for the CWANA region; 4. Coordinate travel arrangements for eligible authors from the CWANA region: a) The Institute will make travel arrangements for eligible authors to attend the global author meetings (workshops), the sub-global author meetings (workshops) and the final Plenary; b) "Travel arrangements" shall include providing the participants who qualify for travel support (developing country nationals who are NOT employees o f an international organization) with a round trip economy class ticket between point o f origin and the destination city where meetings are held; c) Providing the participants with a daily subsistence allowance. The amount o f the daily subsistence allowance will be determined by the IAASTD Secretariat directed by Robert Watson incollaborationwith ICARDApriorto eachmeeting; d) Providing visa assistance to all eligible participants; 5. Coordinate travel arrangements for eligible Bureau members and government representatives from the C W A N A region to attend Bureau and Plenary meetings: The Institute will make travel arrangements for C W A N A Bureau members to attend two Bureau meetings and CWANA government representatives to attend the final Plenary; "Travel arrangements" shall include providing the participants who qualify for travel support (developing country nationals who are NOT employees of an international organization) with a round trip economy class ticket between their city o f residence and the destination city where the meetings are held; Provide the participants with a daily subsistence allowance. The amount o f the daily subsistence allowance will be determined by the I A A S T D Secretariat in the World Bank in collaboration withthe respective sub-global instituteprior to each meeting; Providing assistance to all participants inobtaining visas. 6. Correspond with authors to ensure timely submission o f drafts; 7. Coordinate two rounds of peer review (experts and governments) and editing o f the drafts prepared by coordinating authors: Receive and integrate draft chapters o f the Assessment into a coherent document with a consistent structure; Send documents to experts and governments for peer review; Collate and file peer review comments; Send IAASTD documents to authors and I A A S T D Secretariat; A copy edit ofthe final CWANA sub-global report; Assist authors in the preparation of the figures into a consistent format; Ensurereferences are complete; and 47 h) Prepare the final draft CWANA sub-global assessment for acceptance and approval by the Plenary; i)PrintCWANAreport. 8. Provide honoraridstipends per criteria established by the Bureau 9. Translation o f the Summary for Decision Makers into the other UN languages (exact number to be decided by Bureau). 10. Support and participate in outreach and communications o f IAASTD activities and findings in various media, including the IAASTD web site and the publication and distribution o f IAASTD publications. 11. Ensure all relevant stakeholders inthe CWANA region, especially governments, are kept informedo f IAASTD activities. 12. Work closely with IAASTD Secretariat to ensure timely completion o f the work. Budgetfor ICARDA Activity cost (us $) 1. Institute costs for November 1,2006 to December 31,2007 167,300 2. Technical services: Preparation, printingand distribution o fthe C W A N A report 37,000 Travel and workshops: 3. Travel expenses for experts for global and sub-global workshops 370,000 4. Travel expenses for Bureau members and government representatives 140,000 5. Outreach and Communications 17,700 Sub-total Travel and workshops 527,700 Total 732,000 Cost: (The detailed budget estimate of the goods/servicesprocuredand a brief descriptionof assumptions made and data usedto develop the estimate.) 7. Institute costs for 14 months (November 1,2006 to December 31,2007), i.e., salaries for two staff members ($66,000), staff travel ($7,000), office space and associated costs, e.g., telephone, mail, copying, utilities ($21,OOO), fixed overhead ($5,000), mailing cost of about 2,000 copies o f the final publications ($lO,OOO), honoraria/stipends as approved by the Bureau and confirmed by Secretariat ($46,000), 2 annual audits o f the project accounts ($1,800) and a service charge for maintaining the Special bank account from April 1,2006 - Dec 31,2007 at $500 for 21 months ($10,500) for a total o f US $167,300. 8. Technical services includepreparation, printingand distribution o f C W A N A report = $37,000. The mailing cost o f 2,000 copies of the publications is included under Institute costs. Travel and workshops include: 9. Travel (economy class tickets plus DSA) for CWANA experts to attend the global assessment meetings and for CWANA experts to attend the sub-global authors meetings inthe C W A N A region) = U S $370,000 10. Travel (economy class tickets plusDSA) for CWANA Bureaumembers and government representatives to attend the Bureau and Plenary meetings = $140,000 11. Details o fthe outreach and communications activities to be coordinated with the Secretariat Sub-globalAssessments: 300 pages (200 pages o fwords), with 5000 word SDMs Activity EstimatedCost (i) Solidcopy-edit $ 2,500 (ii) ComplexfiguresandSDMfigures $ 5,000 (iii) TranslationofSDMintoArabicandFrench $ 2,000 (iv) Page setting $ 7,500 (v) Printing costs (2000 copies) $20,000 Total: $37,000 48 Activities IICA The Recipient shall contribute to the technical and logistical support o f the global assessment and be responsible for technical and logistical support o f the respective Sub-global component o f IAASTD activities, i.e., Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC), as per the specific tasks and allocated budget set forth below. 511,000 US dollars will be provided to the Recipient for project personnel, communications, administrative, travel, meetings (author meetings otherwise known as workshops, Bureau and Plenary meetings) and publication costs (see Recipient Budget table below) to undertake the specific tasks listed below. The travel costs (airline tickets; daily subsistence allowances for authors, Bureau members and government representatives) provided to the Recipient should use criteria agreed upon with IAASTD Secretariat inthe World Bank. Specific tasks The Recipient i s responsible for overseeing andcoordinating the following: 1. Maintain databases o f authors andreviewers; 2. Serve as coordinatingfocal point for authors; 3. Organize the sub-global author workshops (author meetings) for the L A C region; 4. Coordinate travel arrangements for eligible authors from the L A C region: a) The Institute will make travel arrangements for eligible authors to attend the global author meetings (workshops), the sub-global authors meetings (workshops) and the final Plenary; b) "Travel arrangements" shall include providing the participants who qualify for travel support (developing country nationals who are NOT employees o f an international organization) with a round trip economy class ticket between point o f origin and the destination city where meetings are held; c) Providing the participants with a daily subsistence allowance. The amount o f the daily subsistence allowance will be determined by the IAASTD Secretariat in collaboration with I I C A prior to each meeting; d) Providingvisa assistance to all eligible participants; 5. Coordinate travel arrangements for eligible Bureau members and government representatives from the L A C region to attend Bureau and Plenary meetings: a) The Institute will make travel arrangements for L A C Bureau members to attend two Bureau meetings and L A C government representatives to attend the final Plenary; b) Travel arrangements" shall include providing the participants who qualify for travel support (developing country nationals who are NOT employees o f an international organization) with a round trip economy class ticket between their city o f residence and the destination city where the meetings are held; c) Provide the participants with a daily subsistence allowance. The amount o f the daily subsistence allowance will be determined by the IAASTD Secretariat in the World Bank in collaboration with the respective sub-global institute prior to each meeting; d) Providing assistance to all participants inobtaining visas. 6. Correspond with authors to ensure timely submission o f drafts; 7. Coordinate two rounds o f peer review (experts and governments) and editing o f the drafts prepared by coordinating authors: a) Receive and integrate draft chapters o f the Assessment into a coherent document with a consistent structure; b) Send documents to experts and governments for peer review; c) Collate and file peer review comments; d) Send IAASTD documents to authors and IAASTD Secretariat; e) A copy edit o fthe final L A C sub-global report; f ) Assist authors inthe preparationo fthe figures into a consistent format; 49 g) Ensure references are complete; and h) Prepare the finaldraft LAC sub-global assessment for acceptance andapprovalbythe Plenary; i)PrintLACreport. 8. Provide honoraridstipendsper criteria established by the Bureau 9. Translation o f the Summary for Decision Makers into the other UN languages (exact number to be decided by Bureau). 10. Support and participate in outreach and communications o f IAASTD activities and findings in various media, including the IAASTD web site and the publication and distribution o f IAASTD publications. 11. Ensure all relevant stakeholders in the L A C region, especially governments, are kept informed o f IAASTD activities. 12. Work closely with IAASTD Secretariat to ensure timely completion o f the work. Budget for IICA Activity cost(us $) 1. Institute costs for January 1,2007 to December 31,2007 151,000 2. Technical services: Preparation, printingand distribution o f the L A C report 63,000 Travel and workshovs: 3. Travel expenses for experts for global and sub-global workshops 137,000 4. Travel expenses for Bureaumembers and government representatives 140,000 6 Outreach and Communications 20,000 Sub-total Travel and workshops 297,000 Total 511,000 Cost: (The detailed budgetestimateof the goodslservicesprocured and a brief descriptionof assumptions madeand data used to developthe estimate.) Institute costs for 12 months (January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2007), i.e., salaries for two staff members ($55,000), staff travel ($8,200), office space and associated costs, e.g., telephone, mail, copying, utilities ($4,000), overhead ($22,800), mailing about 2,000 copies o f the final publications ($1O,OOO), honoraridstipends as approved by the Bureau and confirmed by Secretariat ($46,000) and 2 annual audits o f the project accounts ($5,000) for total o f US$151,000, Technical services include preparation, printing and distribution o f L A C report in two languages (English and Spanish) =U S $63,000. The mailing cost o f 2,000 copies o f the publications is included underInstitutecosts. Travel and workshovs include: 3. Travel (economy class tickets plus DSA) for L A C experts to attend the global assessment meetings and for L A C experts to attend the sub-global authors meetings inthe L A C region) =U S $137,000. 4. Travel (economy class tickets plus DSA) for L A C Bureau members and government representatives to attend the Bureauand Plenary meetings = $140,000. 5. Details o f the outreach and communications activities to be coordinated with the Secretariat. Sub-global Assessments: 300 pages (200 pages o fwords), with 5000 word SDMs Activity EstimatedCost (i) Solidcopy-edit $ 2,500 (ii) ComplexfiguresandSDMfigures $ 5,000 (iii) TranslationofSDMintoEnglish $ 1,000 Translation o f fillreport into English $27,000 (iv) Page setting $ 7,500 (v) Printing costs (1000 copies ineach language) $20,000 Total: $63,000 50 Activities World FishCenter The Recipient shall contribute to the technical and logistical support o f the global assessment and be responsible for technical and logistical support o f the respective sub-global component o f IAASTD activities, i.e., East and South Asia and the Pacific (ESAP), as per the specific tasks and allocated budget set forth below. 836,000 US dollars will be provided to the Recipient for project personnel, communications, administrative, travel, meetings (author meetings, also known as workshops, Bureau and Plenary meetings) and publication costs (see Recipient Budget table below) to undertake the specific tasks listed below. The travel costs (airline tickets; daily subsistence allowances for authors, Bureau members and government representatives) provided to the Recipient should use criteria agreed upon with IAASTD Secretariat inthe World Bank. Specifictasks The Recipient is responsible for overseeing and coordinating the following: 1. Maintain databases o f authors and reviewers; 2. Serve as coordinatingfocal point for authors; 3. Organize the sub-global author meetings (workshops) for the ESAP region; 4. Coordinate travel arrangements for eligible authors: a) The Institute will make travel arrangements for ESAP authors to attend the global author meetings (workshops), the sub-global author meetings (workshops) and the final Plenary; b) "Travel arrangements" shall include providing the participants who qualify for travel support (developing country nationals who are NOT employees o f an international organization) with a round trip economy class ticket between point of origin and the destination city where meetings are held; c) Providing the participants with a daily subsistence allowance. The amount o f the daily subsistence allowance will be determined by the IAASTD Secretariat incollaboration with WFC prior to each meeting; d) Providing visa assistance to all eligible participants; 5. Coordinate travel arrangements for eligible Bureau members and government representatives from the ESAP regionto attend Bureauand Plenary meetings: a) The Institute will make travel arrangements for ESAP Bureau members to attend Bureau meetings and ESAP government representatives to attend the final Plenary; b) "Travel arrangements" shall include providing the participants who qualify for travel support (developing country nationals who are NOT employees o f an international organization) with a round trip economy class ticket between their city o f residence and the destination city where the meetings are held; c) Provide the participants with a daily subsistence allowance. The amount o f the daily subsistence allowance will be determined by the IAASTD Secretariat in the World Bank in collaboration with the respective sub-global institute prior to each meeting; d) Providing assistance to allparticipants inobtaining visas. 6. Correspond with authors to ensure timely submission o f drafts; 7. Coordinate two rounds o f peer review (experts and governments) and editing o f the drafts prepared by coordinating authors: a) Receive and integrate draft chapters o f the Assessment into a coherent document with a consistent structure; b) Send documents to experts and governments for peer review; c) Collate and file peer review comments; d) SendIAASTD documents to authors and IAASTD Secretariat; e) A copy edit o f the final ESAP sub-global report; 51 f ) Assist authors inthe preparation ofthe figures into a consistent format; g) Ensure references are complete; and h) Prepare the final draft ESAPsub-global assessmentfor acceptanceandapproval by the Plenary; i)PrintESAPreport. 8. Provide honoraridstipends per criteria establishedby the Bureau. 9. Translation of the Summary for DecisionMakers into the other UNlanguages (number to be decided byBureau). 10. Support and participate in outreach and communications of IAASTD activities and findings in various media, including the IAASTD web site and the publication and distribution of IAASTD publications. 11. Ensure all relevant stakeholders in the ESAP region, especially governments, are kept informed of IAASTD activities. 12. Work closely with IAASTD Secretariatto ensure timely completion o fthe work. Budgetfor World FishCenter Activity cost (us195,000 $) 1. Institute costs for Sept 1,2006 to Dec 31,2007 2. Technical services: Preparation, printing and distribution o f ESAP report 36,000 Travel and workshops: 3. Travel expenses for experts for global and sub-global workshops 423,000 4. Travel expenses for Bureau members and government representatives 140,000 5. Meetingcosts for global meeting 30,000 6. Outreach and Communications 12,000 Sub-total travel and workshops 605.000 Total 836,000 The detailed budgetestimateof the goodslservicesprocuredand a brief description of assumptionsmade and data used to developthe estimate. Institutecosts for 16months (September 1,2006 to December 31,2007), i.e., salaries for two staffmembers ($73,000), staff travel ($11,OOO), office space and associatedcosts, e.g., telephone, mail, copying, utilities ($24,000), overhead ($9,450), WFC service charge for maintainingthe Special account from April 1,2006 - Dec 31,2007 at $550 per month($11,550) and mailing cost o f about 2,000 copies o f the final publications ($1O,OOO), honoraridstipendsas approved by the Bureauand confirmedby Secretariat ($52,000) and two annual audits of the project accounts ($4,000) for total o f U S $195,000. Technical services include: Preparation, printingand distribution o f ESAP report ($36,000). The mailing cost of 2,000 copies o f the publicationsi s included under Institute costs. Travel and workshops include: 3. Travel (economy class tickets plus DSA) for ESAP experts to attend the global assessment meetings and for ESAP experts to attend the sub-global authors meetingsinthe ESAP region) =U S $423,000. 4. Travel (economy class tickets plus DSA) for ESAP Bureau members and government representatives to attend the Bureau and Plenary meetings= $140,000. 5. Meeting costs (e.g., meeting rooms and equipment) for the third global authors meeting - either WFC will pass the money through to a thirdparty to organize or hire additional staffto organize. 6. Details of the outreach and communications activities to be coordinated with the Secretariat. Sub-global Assessments: 300 pages (200 pages o fwords), with 5000 word SDMs Activity Estimated Cost (i) Solidcopy-edit $ 2,500 (ii) ComplexfiguresandSDMfigures $ 5,000 (iii) TranslationofSDMintoChinese $ 1,000 (iv) Page setting $ 7,500 (v) Printing costs (1000 copies for each language) $20,000 Total: $36,000 52 Annex 6: ImplementationArrangements GLOBAL: InternationalAssessmentofAgricultural Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) Implementation period. The proposed project would be implemented over a period o f two and half years (April 15,2006 to June 30,2008). Seven international organizations, FAO, UNDP, UNEP, UNESCO, World Bank, WHO and GEF, have agreed to co-sponsor the IAASTD. The IAASTDwill have a distributedSecretariat 'based at the World Bank inWashington, D.C, FA0 inRome, UNEP inNairobi and UNESCO in Paris. The Secretariat will provide management and oversight o f the project, including monitoring the implementation and execution o f the project; ensure coordination among the global and sub-global assessments; manage the peer review process, provide technical support, and oversee communications and outreach. The Director o f the Secretariat and the IAASTDCo- chairs are jointly responsible for the intellectual leadership o f the project. Members o f the distributed Secretariat will coordinate/oversee one or more of the global and sub-global assessments. The World Bank will have overall responsibility for the global assessment, working closely with the other cosponsoring agencies intheir area o f expertise, and the sub-global assessments in East and South Asia and the Pacific (ESAP), Central and West Asia and North Africa (CWANA), and North America and Europe (NAE); and UNESCO will be responsible for Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). Each sub-global assessment, except for North America and Europe, will be managed by a regional institute: the World Fish Center for ESAP; the African Centre for Technology Studies for SSA; the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation onAgriculture forLAC; and ICARDA for CWANA. The Panel o f participating governments will meet inplenary to accept the global and sub-global assessments and approve the Summaries for Decision Makers. The multi-stakeholder Bureau selects the design teams, chairs, authors and review editors for the assessment and ensures a balance of disciplines, views, regional representation and gender. The Bureau will also have fundraising and financial sub-committee with oversight responsibilities for the budget, and a communications and outreach sub-committee to assist the secretariat develop and implement an appropriate outreach and communications strategy. Roles and responsibilities of all components o f the IAASTD management structure are discussed in Annex 16 (Principles and Procedures governing the IAASTD), which are modeled on those usedby IPCC and MA, were approved by the Bureau in December 2004. The Secretariat liaises with governments, civil society organizations and the Bureau to ensure project implementation. The IAASTD work plan i s presented inAnnex 17. The World Bank will act as the GEF Implementing Agency (IA)responsible for coordination with GEF Secretariat, and will manage the multi-donor trust fund. The World Fish Center (otherwise known as ICLARM), the African Centre for Technology Studies (ACTS), the International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA), and the Inter- American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA) will be the Recipient Implementing Institutions for the GEF funds. ACTS and IICA will be the Recipient Implementing Institutions for the World Bank's DGF grant. The Recipient Implementing Institutions will be involved in all aspects of the assessment and ensure high quality technical implementation; however, UNEP will pay particular attention to the environmental dimensions, while FA0 will pay particular attention to the plausible futures and agricultural dimensions o f the IAASTD. Collaboration between the IA and the EAs (UNDP, UNEP, FAO, UNESCO, the World FishCenter (otherwise 53 known as ICLARM), ACTS, ICARDA, and IICA (the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation in Agriculture) will be ensured through monthly teleconferences, and regular meetings associated with meetings o f the design teams, authors and Bureau. Budget analysts within the Secretariat will work together to ensure financial implementation is transparent and responsible. The IAASTD i s fully compatible with the role o f the World Bank as an Implementing Agency (IA)inthe GEF, the largest contributor to the CGIAR, andamajor lender for agricultural S&T. As the IA, the Bank brings a unique strength to the Project by virtue o f the trust it developed among stakeholders during the consultative process and by its convening power and ability to engage policymakers and key decision makers indeveloping countries. The Bank also bringsits role as an invaluable resource for promotinginvestmentopportunities inagricultural science and technology and mobilizing private sector, bilateral, multilateral, and other government and non- government sector resources in efforts that are consistent with GEF objectives and national sustainable development strategies. This Project will enhance the capacity o f the World Bank to assist its member countries to better conserve and sustainably use their biological diversity, reduce their emissions o f greenhouse gases, manage their land and shared water bodies more sustainably. UNDP, UNEP, the World Bank and FA0 are all involved in assisting developing countries design and implement environmentally sound agricultural policies and projects. Through the partnership o f these agencies on this Project, their individual efforts to mainstream or incorporate global environment concerns as delineated by the GEF into all o f their agricultural policies and programs will be enhanced. The findings o f the IAASTD will be used to improve the design and implementation oftheir projects andpolicies relatedto agriculture (crops, forests, livestock, fisheries, biomass and other non-food crops). The four regional institutes that will act as the Recipient Implementing Institutions o f the GEF and DGF grants are all involved in the agriclultural sector. The World Fish Center (otherwise known as ICLAFW) and ICARDA are two CGIAR centers; IICA is responsible for coordinating the agricultural sector in Latin America and the Caribbean and ACTS i s a regional science policy institute addressing a broad range o f scientific and technical issues, including agriculture. 54 Annex 7: Financial Management andDisbursementArrangements GLOBAL: InternationalAssessment ofAgricultural Scienceand Technology for Development(IAASTD) I. ImplementingEntities 1.1. The World Fish Center (otherwise known as ICLARM) is an international nonprofit organization, a member o f the Consultative Group on international Agriculture Research (CGIAR). It is located in Penang, Malaysia. We performed an overall review o f the World FishCenter financial management arrangements. This included: 0 Review of the audited (unqualified) financial statements for the years ended December 31,2004 and 2003; 0 Review o f the Management Letter for the year ended December 31,2004, issued by the external auditors o f the organization; 0 Review of the Financial Management Rules and Regulations used by the organization (CGIAR Accounting policies and Reporting Practices). In addition, an inquiry was made to the EAP regional FM group, requesting information pertaining to the World FishCenter activities. Following the detailed review o f information listed above, it was concluded that the World Fish Center (otherwise known as ICLARM), has established financial management arrangements in place meetingthe Bank's requirements and loweringthe project risk to modest. 1.2. International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA) is an international nonprofit organization, a member o f the Consultative Group on international Agriculture Research (CGIAR). It is located in Aleppo, Syrian Arab Republic. We performed an overall review o f ICARDA financial management arrangements. This included: 0 Review o f the audited (unqualified) financial statements for the years ended December 31,2004 and 2003; 0 Review o f the Management Letter for the year ended December 31, 2004, issued by the external auditors o fthe organization; 0 Review o f the Financial Management Rules and Regulations used by the organization (CGIAR Accounting policies and Reporting Practices). In addition, an inquiry was made to the MENA regional FM group, requesting information pertaining to the ICARDA activities. Followingthe detailed review o f informationlisted above, it was concluded that overcoming the previously existing problems, ICARDA has established financial management arrangements in place meetingthe Bank's requirements and lowering the project risk to modest. 1.3. Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA) is an international nonprofit organization. It i s located in San Jose, Costa Rica. We performed a desk review of IICA financial management arrangements. This included: 0 Review o f the audited (unqualified) financial statements for the years ended December 31,2004 and 2003; 0 Review o f the Financial Management Rules and Regulations used by the organization. 55 IICA declined the World Bank's request to present the latest management letter, issued by the external auditors. In addition, an inquiry was made to the LAC regional FM group, requesting information pertaining to the IICA activities. Following the detailed review of obtained information, it was concludedthat while IICA has put in place financial management arrangements, the risk posed by placing Bank funds into this environments i s still substantial, therefore, there i s a need to set up special disbursement arrangements assuring that the risks posed to the World Bank funds would be sufficiently lowered. 1.4. African Centre for Technology Studies (ACTS) is an international nonprofit organization. It i s located in Nairobi, Kenya. We performed a desk review of ACTS financial management arrangements. This review included: 0 Review o f the audited (unqualified) financial statements for the years ended December 31,2004 and 2003; 0 Review o f the Management Letter for the year ended December 31, 2004, issued by the external auditors o f the organization ; 0 Review o f the Financial Management Rules and Regulations used by the organization. In addition, an inquiry was made to the AFR regional FM group, requesting information pertaining to the ACTS activities. Following the detailed review o f information listed above, it was concluded that ACTS has established financial management arrangements inplace meeting the Bank's requirements and loweringthe project risk to modest. 11. Accounting Systems and InternalControlsArrangements 2.1. The implementing agencies already have in place the structure, staff and internal controls, supporting financial management and accounting activities; thus, the project would utilize existing arrangements. 111. ReportingArrangements 3.1. Each of the four implementingorganizations will semi-annually prepare and submit un- audited interim financial statements, hereafter referred to as Financial Management Reports (FMRs) to the Bank. The FMRs should be prepared according to the requirements o f the Financial Management Practices in World Bank-Financed Investment Operations. Their format should be agreed upon by the sides during the negotiations. The FMRs should be submitted to the Banks review within 45 days following the end o f the reporting period. 3.2. The form and content o f the annual financial reports will be consistent with that o f the FMRs and in case o f ACTS it will be included to the annual financial statements o f the organization. N. FlowofFundsandDisbursements 4.1. The World FishCenter,ICARDA and ACTS will operate through the individualUSD Special Account, which will be opened and maintained at the commercial banks acceptable to the World Bank. The authorized allocation i s estimated to be U$200,000 for ACTS and 56 US$150,000 for ICARDA and World FishCenter respectively. Procedures for the flow o f funds from the grants will be implemented with due regard to safeguarding project's resources and ensuring timely execution o f payments. Before payments for acquisition o f goods and services can be processed, a purchase order or contract must exist. The implementing agencies will reconcile (monthly) the project bank accounts and include this reconciliation, along with the other required documentation to the withdrawal application submittedto the Bank. 4.2. IICA would operate by prepaying eligible project expenditures according to the implementation program, and subsequently submitting reimbursement applications, supported by all required documentation, to the World Bank. A minimum amount for an individual withdrawal application will be set at $ 20,000. IICA can also utilize the direct payment option to finance the eligible project expenditures. 4.3. Statements of Expenditures-based disbursement. The project's disbursements will be transaction-based and will be made on the basis o f the Statements o f Expenditures (SOEs). Each implementing agency will be responsible for the periodical (based on the disbursement needs) preparation o f their respective SOEs. V. ExternalAudit 5.1. Each organization will have the annual financial statements referred to in paragraph 3.2 above for each fiscal year (or other period agreed to by the Bank), audited, in accordance with the International Standards on Auditing, by an independent firm and according to the TORS acceptable to the Bank. The audit report will be due no later than 4 months after the end o f the fiscal year. VI. SupervisionArrangements 6.1, The project supervision arrangements should follow the requirements o f the Financial Management Practices in World Bank-Financed Investment Operations, and will involve participation o f the financial management specialists assigned to the respective regions at the request o f the project TTL. Suggestedperiodicity o f the project supervision i s once a year. VII. Disbursementfor Activitiesat RegionalInstitutes Disbursementsto RecipientImplementingInstitutionsby Disbursement Category(US $) The disbursement categories are: Technical Services: Disbursements for Technical services under this project are the translation and publication o f the Final Sub-global Reports (sub-global assessmentsreports). Travel and workshops: The Recipient Implementing Institutions will pay from project funds for air tickets, per diems and workshop relatedcosts for the Bureau and Plenary meetings and for lead authors from developing countries to attend global and sub-global assessment author 57 meetings. Outreach and communications costs are included. The travel o f the IAASTDCo-Chair to author meetings i s includedunder the Travel and workshops expenditure o fACTS. Operating costs: ICARDA, IICA and W C will be supported by project fbnds to pay project operating costs including salaries for two staff members, staff travel, office space (and associated costs, e.g., telephone, mail, copying, utilities) and a fixed overhead. In addition to this, the Recipient Implementing Institutes will pay an agreed amount o f honoraridstipends to authors for participating inthe IAASTDprocess and contributing to the development o f the Assessment. All the Institutes will also pay the mailing cost of 2,000 IAASTDpublications. Fundsare also included inOperatingcosts to supportthe audit ofproject accounts duringtwo years at ICARDA, IICA and WFC. 58 Annex 8: ProcurementArrangements GLOBAL: InternationalAssessment of Agricultural Scienceand Technology for Development (IAASTD) A: General Procurement for the proposed project would be carried out inaccordance with the World Bank's "Guidelines: Procurement under IBRD Loans and IDA Credits" dated M a y 2004; and the provisions stipulated inthe Legal Agreement. Procurement of Technical Services: Technical services procured under this project are the translation and publication o f the Final Sub-global Reports (sub-global assessments reports). Procurement of these Technical Services will be subject to Prior Review by the Bank. Services estimated to cost less than $100,000 shall be procured under contracts awarded on the basis of Shopping. Travel and workshops: The Recipient Implementing Institutions will pay from project funds for air tickets, per diems and workshop related costs for the Bureau and Plenary meetings and for lead authors from developing countries to attend global and sub-global assessment author meetings. Outreach and communications costs are included. The travel of the IAASTD Co-Chair to author meetings is includedunder the Travel and workshops expenditure o fACTS. Operating costs: ICARDA, IICA and WFC will be supported by project funds to pay project operating costs including salaries for two staff members, staff travel, office space (and associated costs, e.g., telephone, mail, copying, utilities) and a fixed overhead. In addition to this, the Recipient Implementing Institutes will pay from project funds an agreed amount of honorariahtipends to authors for participating in the IAASTD process and contributing to the development o f the Assessment. All the Institutes will also pay the mailing cost o f 2,000 IAASTD publications. Funds are also included in Operating costs to support the audit o f project accounts duringtwo years at ICARDA, IICA andWFC. The table below sets forth the Categories o f items to be financed out o f the proceeds o f the Grant and the allocation o fthe amounts o f the Grant to eachCategory. ProjectCost by RegionalInstitutesandProcurement Category Procurementcategory ACTS IICA ICARDA WFC TOTAL Technical services 63,000 63,000 37,000 36,000 199,000 Travel and workshops 793,000 297,000 527,700 605,000 2,222,700 Operating costs 65,000 151,000 167,300 195,000 578,300 Total cost 921,000 511,000 732,000 836,000 3,000,000 B: Assessment of the Recipient Implementing Institutions' capacity to implement procurementandthe Bank's review of procurementdecisions Only one procurement activity ("Publishing o fthe Final Sub-global Reports") is anticipated. Procurementwill be conducted by shopping method. Procurement activities will be carried out byACTS, IICA, ICARDA andWFC andprocurementrisk is minor as each step will beprior- reviewedby the Bank. 59 Annex 9: Economicand FinancialAnalysis GLOBAL:International Assessmentof Agricultural Science andTechnology for Development (IAASTD) SectionD1noted that an economic and financial analysis i s not applicable for this project, but that the project design includes cost-effectiveness considerations to promote maximum implementation effectiveness. Therefore, this Annex describes the Incremental Cost Analysis submittedto the GEF Councilfor approval. BROADENVIRONMENTALANDDEVELOPMENT GOALS Broad Environmental Goals: Application o f the knowledge generated through the IAASTD should provide significant local, national, regional and global environmental benefits, including reducing the overall rate o f natural resource loss and land degradation, enhancing landscape biodiversity bothinareas o f land use and inprotected areas, reducing the rate o f soil, runoff and nutrient losses, diminishing the contamination and eutrophication of fresh waters and soils, reducing the rate o f greenhouse gas emissions, and increasing the amount o f carbon fixed in agricultural systems. This would be achieved if the knowledge generated by the IAASTD i s used to design and implement appropriate policies, regulations and incentive structures to support integrated natural resource and agricultural management, and to stimulate investments to address local, national, and global environmental issues within the context o f sustainable development. The IAASTD will also strengthen the capacity o f institutions to design and implement integrated management approaches. Broad development goals: Application o f the knowledge generated through the IAASTD should assist in reducing hunger and poverty, improving rural livelihoods, and health, and facilitating equitable, environmentally, socially and economically sustainable development through; the development o f appropriate policies, regulations and incentive structures to support integratednatural resource and agricultural management; increasing investments that are made to simultaneously address local, national, regional and global environmental issues within the context o f sustainable agriculture; 0 improving agricultural productivity under sustainable management, while enhancing the livelihoods o fproducers; and The developmental goal o f IAASTD may therefore be summarised as the improved access to agricultural KSTthat will promote and facilitate sustainable agricultural practices. The current public and private sector funding for international agricultural research and development i s estimated to be about U S $33 billion per year, including the CGIAR, while public funding for research and monitoring on climate change and natural resources (including biodiversity) i s estimated to be more than U S $3 billionper year. It is the knowledge generated from these research and monitoring activities, as well as local and indigenous knowledge that will provide the base that will be assessedbythe IAASTD. The IAASTD will complement and establish linkages with other major regional and global initiatives such as NEPAD, the MDG Hunger Task Force, the Inter-Academy Council (IAC) Study on Science and Technology Strategies for Improved Agricultural Productivity and Food 60 Security in Africa, the FA0 State o f Food Insecurity Reports, the International Food Policy Research Institute's "plausible futures" work, the MA and the IPCC. Sustainable agricultural practices will directly, and through improved natural resource management, contribute to improvingpeople's livelihoods, food security and health. The multi-thematic nature o f the IAASTD is unique, i.e., the IAASTD will simultaneously address nutritional security, livelihoods, human health, and environmental sustainability. Without GEF financial support, it is highly unlikely that the environmental issues would be addressed indetail. BASELINESCENARIO Two factors make the baseline scenario o f IAASTD somewhat problematic to calculate. First, as with other global assessments such as the MA, the global scope o f the project presents methodological difficulties for the baseline costs, which are normally calculated in a national context. Therefore, the baseline (and incremental) cost analysis follows the procedures used in previous global assessments supported by GEF such as MA, LADA and GIWA. While a number of global assessments o f sub-sectors related to agriculture are available and form part of the baseline o f this project, no assessment o f agricultural KST at global and sub-global levels has previously been attempted that fully integrates environmental concerns with those o f productivity, livelihoods and human health. Secondly, there are a large number o f projects that could have been included in the baseline on the grounds that they have some relevance to IAASTD's global and sub-global activities. These could have included surveys o f global scope for agricultural science and technology conducted by OECD, UN scientific organizations such as FAO, UNESCO and UNRISD, as well as regional surveys conducted by the regional development banks, EU and bilateral aid organizations. Therefore, a fairly conservative estimate o f the contribution o f other projects has been retained for the baseline scenario to reflect IAASTD's global scope and its focus on a common framework for assessingthe impact o f agricultural KST on land managementpractices, rural livelihoods, nutritional status, health, equity and the environment. Without GEF funding, the IAASTD will not be able to move beyond the conventional approach to agricultural assessments, which tend to focus on production. The baseline for the four components o f IAASTD has therefore been constructed from an analysis o f the more recent (past and current) projects and the proportions o f their budgets that could be described as contributing to the IAASTD. INTERNATIONALAND GLOBAL (COMPONENTS 1,2 AND 4) Elements o f the following international and global projects contribute to the relevant component baselines and are also included in the International Associated Financing total (as noted only elements of each of these assessments addressed the issues to be dealt with inthe IAASTD). In most cases these estimated budgets do not include significant amounts of in-kindcontributions, e.g., salary costs o f authors. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment GEF Project Brief estimates that if all relevant initiatives were to be included for global assessments, a conservative estimate is that some US3 billion is spent annually on research or assessment work related to ecosystems. An even larger estimate could be put forward for KST for agriculture, climate and natural resources (about $36 billion per year), but is not included inthis incremental costs analysis. 61 The MDG HungerTask Force: US$3 million(estimated); The FA0 State o f FoodInsecurity Reports: US$l million(estimated); The International Food Policy Research Institute research on "plausible htures": US$2 million; The FA0 Agriculture Towards 2015/2030:U S $ l million The MillenniumEcosystemAssessment (World Bank & UNEP): US$12 million; IntergovernmentalPanel on Climate Change (WMO andUNEP) ThirdAssessment report: US$20million; Global InternationalWaters Assessment: US$13 million; Global Biodiversity Assessment: US$3 million; Global Forest Resources Assessment (FAO, 1992-1999): US$16.5 million; World Overview o f Conservation Approaches and Technologies (WOCAT): US$2.25 million; Science Policy focus assessment for CGIAR (FPRI-ISNAR Addis Ababa) US$1 million; Global Land Cover Network: US$1.2 million; Other projects (e.g. IWMIComprehensive Assessment o f Water, Food and Agriculture; FPRI Impact o f Agricultural Research on Poverty (IARP), UNEP surveys and data sets etc.): estimated US$15.5 million TotalAssociatedInternational and Globalprojects: US$91.45million SUB-GLOBAL (COMPONENTS 1,3 AND 4) The Inter-Academy Council (IAC) Study on Science and Technology for Improved Agricultural Productivity and Food Security inAfrica: US$1 million (estimated) The Millennium EcosystemAssessment (World Bank & UNEP): US$8 million; IntergovernmentalPanel on Climate Change (WMO andUNEP) Third Assessment report: US$5 million; Agriculture databases and policies, various projects 2002 onwards (OECD): US$2.7 million Assessment o f rural poverty: Asia and the Pacific - plus related projects 2002 onwards (FAD): $US3 million Environmental RiskAssessment for European Agriculture - EUConcerted Action: US1.1million Africover; Asiacover; and related sub-global databases (FAO); US$2.6 million Information and Communication Technologies for Development (IDRC - e.g. Assessment o f Animal Agriculture insub-Sahara Agriculture) - various projects: US2.85 million Agricultural technology, poverty reduction and food security in Asia (ADB) - various projects: US$16.5million Other regional and sub-global projects: est. US$20million TotalAssociatedSub-global projects: US$63 million BASELINEBYPROJECTCOMPONENT Component 1:Conceptual framework for integrated assessments An improved conceptual - framework for conducting integrated assessments at local, national, regional and global scales, and over multiple time-scales, developed, tested and disseminated. 62 A substantial body of past and current research underpins existing approaches and frameworks for assessments in the agriculture and environment sectors. However, these assessments have limitations for the purpose o f this project, which i s an integrated scientific assessmento f the role o f agricultural KST in development. Either they tend to take sets o f technologies for specific purposes in agriculture (e.g. soil conservation - WOCAT framework), thereby being highly selective inpromoting innovations inone area only, or they survey specific environmental assets with little, if any connection to developmental goals. Frameworks and approaches commonly employed, which have been reviewed for this baseline calculation, include quantitative frameworks such as in GFRA and qualitative as in the IPCC reports and the MA. The most relevant framework for the IAASTD i s the MA, which linked drivers to ecosystem services to human well being and used panels of experts to review and assess ecosystem components and impacts, and small writing teams to construct the full assessment according to a common template. The applicable baseline for these and other frameworks and approaches has been conservatively estimated at US$8 million. If the full historical and in-kindcost o f the projects that have been reviewed for this Component were to have been used, the baseline could have beenenhanced by a factor of at least ten. Component 2: Global assessment - A global assessment using the IAASTD framework [Output o fOutcome 11i s completed This component focuses on the global assessment. The baseline i s primarily comprised o f the major assessments conducted world-wide by scientific bodies (e.g. IPCC), other GEF-UN projects (e.g. MA) and multilateral institutions (GFRA - FAO). There are no standardised frameworks, because each assessment addressed a different range o f issues, but most o f the findings from these assessments will provide useful information for some elements o f the IAASTD. However, the findings from these other assessments cannot be integrated to address the range o f questions being addressed in the IAASTD. In most cases, the scope of the assessments has been limited, Le., they have not been multi-thematic or multi-temporal, and have not addressed the policy, institutional and research issues proposed for IAASTD. Furthermore, in most cases they are not adequately linked with policy and decision making processes, and none have a governance structure that fully involves the full range o f stakeholders. Ifthe baseline were to include the cost o f relevant research and development, and satellite and ground-based monitoring systems, then the baseline would be tens o f billions o f U S dollars per year. However, to include these would not be helpful in the baseline estimate since the focus o f IAASTD i s to assess and synthesize information and not generate or collect data. Only the parts o f listed projects at global level are most relevant to this IAASTD Component 2 have been factored into the baseline cost, which is conservatively estimated at US$ 50 million Component 3: Sub-global assessments Five sub-global assessments (community to regional - inscale) are completedusingtheIAASTDframework Existing surveys at local, national and regional levels o f many agriculture-related topics are commonplace and form the basis for assessments o f specific subject areas o f concern, such as land degradation, loss of biodiversity and land cover. They form a baseline for IAASTD in providing agricultural knowledge, science and technology. However, they are not using a standardised framework, the scope o f the assessments has been limited, i.e., they have not been multi-thematic, multi-spatial or multi-temporal, and have not addressed the policy, institutional and research issues as proposed for IAASTD, and are not generally integrated with social and economic issues. Inparticular, it i s difficult to use the existing assessments to make significant contributions to sustainable development and to achieving the MDGs. Furthermore, most are 63 not adequately linked with policy and decision making processes. Nevertheless, they will provide usehl information and data sources for the IAASTD. It i s difficult to isolate the sub- global elements o f all the baseline projects but for the purposes o f this calculation all regional delivery o f assessments have been factored in, as well as some o f the national assessments for which there is significant information and some more regional or transboundary applicability. The baseline i s conservatively estimated at US$30 million. Component 4: Outreach and Communication Outreach and communication o f IAASTD - findings invarious media andto all stakeholders at various levels Existing outreach and dissemination of agricultural KST and the findings o f the above- mentioned assessments related to agriculture i s sporadic. Nevertheless, there have been notable communications of some assessments such as the IAC, IPCC, MA, WOCAT and GLASOD which have informed global policy decisions and alerted decision makers to problems in land use and natural resource management. Regional centres, including those of the CGIAR, with environmental assessment capacity currently play an important role in disseminating information on how agricultural practices impact on hunger, poverty and the environment. International institutions *similarlyhave disseminated the results o f their assessments. However, in most cases the scope of the assessments has been limited, Le., they have not been multi- thematic, multi-spatial or multi-temporal, hence so i s the information they communicate. A major strength o f the IAASTD is the involvement o f all relevant stakeholders in the design, preparation, and peer review o f agricultural KST, thus ensuring ownership o f the findings, and the ability o f those involvedto communicate the results to colleagues within their own networks. The baseline i s conservatively estimated at US$25 million, although it should be pointed out that considerable additional sums have been expended inusingthe results of such assessmentsin new programmes andprojects. GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTALOBJECTIVE The global environmental objectives o f IAASTD are twofold. First, the project's assessment o f agricultural KST will contribute to catalyzing the widespread adoption o f agricultural practices that deliver global environmental benefits inbiodiversity conservation and its sustainable use in agricultural systems, reduced emissions o f greenhouse gases from agricultural systems, reduced vulnerability of ecological systems to climate change, reduced land degradation and improved quality o f international waters impacted by agricultural systems. It will address the UNCBD objectives o f conservation, sustainable use and equitable sharing o f the resources of biodiversity, for example. Secondly, IAASTD i s designed to promote the informationto catalyze widespread adoption o f comprehensive agricultural management practices that benefit the environment while at the same time supporting the livelihoods o f the rural land users that are guardians o f the environment. DOMESTIC ENVIRONMENTALOBJECTIVES Participating countries in IAASTD will receive a number o f benefits. The IAASTD will enable developed countries to disseminate their expertise and knowledge more widely to national and bilateral aid programmes. Environmental objectives form a large part o f bilateral support for many aid programmes. Such countries will be enhanced in their capability o f supporting developing country partners with appropriate inputs o f agricultural KST, targeted to the appropriate agricultural systems and socio-economic circumstances. The I A A S T D will enable developing countries to share and exchange their expertise and knowledge with developed and developing countries, as well as to build capacity to undertake IAASTD-based assessments 64 regionally, nationally and locally, thereby building an enhanced capacity to make informed decisions and providing better information to their own agricultural sectors. A particular feature for developing countries and their domestic environments will be support to their NAPS under the UNCCD and NARS. Without access to the best agricultural KST, many countries may see their agricultural productivity stagnate and the degradation o f their natural resource base accelerate. GEFALTERNATIVE Under the GEF alternative IAASTD will assess in-depththe impact o f agricultural knowledge, science and technologies, practices and policies on the environment, e.g., land, soils, water, biodiversity and climate. Hence, with GEF funding, the environmental as well as developmental aspects of agriculture will be addressed in detail, globally and sub-globally. In addition, the assessment will include the range o f stakeholders necessary to assess and synthesize what i s known and not known about agricultural science, technology and development in a way that i s readily accessible to decision makers, including themselves - ownership o f the process and findings by the stakeholders will ensure the information is widely disseminated and used in policy and project design and implementation. GEFALTERNATIVE BYPROJECTCOMPONENT Component 1: Conceptual framework and the development of annotated outlines for integrated assessments (already completed). The project will develop a conceptual framework and a set o f annotated outlines for conducting integrated agricultural assessments at local, national, regional and global scales that builds upon frameworks from previous assessments. The overall goal is: "How can we reduce hunger and poverty, improve rural livelihoods, and facilitate equitable, environmentally, socially and economically sustainable development through the generation, access to, and use o f agricultural knowledge, science and technology?" The global and sub-global assessments will each address: (i) Context, Concepts, Historical and Current Perspectives; (ii) Plausible Futures; (iii) Options for Making AKST Work Better to Achieve the Development and Sustainability Goals: technologies and capacities; and (iv) Options for Making AKST Work Better to Achieve the Development and Sustainability Goals: investment andpolicy. Section I:Context, Concepts, Historical and Current Perspectives. This section will set the scene for the Assessment by discussing the key issues to be addressed, the context, the conceptual framework that will be used for both the global and five sub-global assessments, and will assess the current status o f development and sustainability conditions today. It will then present an historical analysis o f AKST and AKST systems including that of the different actors/organizations (with different sources o f knowledge) who participated, the institutions that mediated the interactions among these actors, and the innovation processes that resulted. Furthermore, it will assess the contribution o f AKST and AKST systems in achieving the development and sustainability goals o f improved nutrition, human health, and livelihoods; reduced hunger and poverty; and environmental and social sustainability. It will critically assess factors that facilitated or constrained the role and contribution of A K S T research agendas, capacities and capabilities inmeeting development goals. 65 Section 11:Plausible Futures: This section will describe the design, construction, application, and outputs o f a range o f plausible futures o f relevance to IAASTD. This involves an analysis o f the past and projected trends in the indirect and direct drivers o f change identified in the IAASTD conceptual framework. Each o f the future world view views, or scenarios, i s operationalized by a comprehensive storyline that describes the assumed evolution of and linkages among drivers, as well as the evolution o f and impact on other factors o f interest in interpreting the future o f agriculture and, within than, AKST. Application o f the storyline of each scenario over time involves a good deal o f analysis and interpretation that relies on both quantitative and qualitative methods. This section also includes a review o f the utility existing scenarios and storylines from other assessments and development exercises, and adapt past efforts to IAASTD's purpose and needs. Existing storylines will be enriched through a more comprehensive representation and analysis o f the development o f AKST, and then brought to life through the scripted storylines that weave together the global development goals, the key challenges and issues, AKST and enabling policy and institutional contexts. Section 111: Options for Making AKST Work Better to Achieve the Development and Sustainability Goals: Technologyand Capacity. This section will buildupon the findings from sections Iand I1and hence will be informed by historical lessons and plausible futures. The section will assess options to enhance the role o f the generation, access, dissemination, and use o f AKST in achieving the development and sustainability goals (see Section I)in a more effective, efficient, equitable, sustainable and transparent way. This section will not be normative or policy prescriptive, but rather present options. Authors will consider addressing the implications o f emerging paradigms for improvingthe impact o f AKST on the development and sustainability goals; and the options for capacity strengthening, needed to ensure the capacity needed to address different the goals. The chapters will assess options with respect to the outputs o f the five plausible future scenarios: 0 Outions to enhance the imuact o f AKST. How can conventional technologies and knowledge, new agricultural technologies and knowledge, non-agricultural technologies and knowledge, and locally generated technologies and knowledge contribute to addressing the development and sustainability goals? What are the relevant contributions to achieving these goals o f individual, professional, institutional and social learning, change and commitment? 0 Options for Stren~heningCapacity. What are the ranges o f skills, institutions, organizations, modes o f behavior, and policies that are needed to strengthen AKST capacity? To what extent i s this capacity determined by different goals and contexts (including investments and optimal institutional arrangements) and what are the implications o f this for enhancing the role of AKST inachieving the development and sustainability goals? Section IV: Options for Making AKST Work Better to Achieve the Development and Sustainability Goals:Iinvestment and Policy This section, like section 111, will build upon the findings from sections Iand I1and hence will be informed by historical lessons and plausible futures, and will not be normative or policy prescriptive, but rather present options. The section will assess the policy, enabling environment and investment options to enhance the role o f the generation, access, dissemination, and use o f AKST in achieving the development and sustainability goals in a more effective, efficient, equitable, sustainable and transparent way. The chapters will assess options with respect to the outputs o f the five plausible future scenarios: 0 Options for the uolicv/enablinn environment. How can policies, regulations and institutions be modified to create a stronger enabling environment that facilitates the generation, dissemination, access and adoption o f AKST and strengthen AKST capacity to address the 66 development and sustainability goals and the key challenges and issues in an uncertain future? 0 Options for public andprivate sector investment inAKST, the implications inthe governance of the innovation system. and an assessment o f the economic returns and its distribution among different actors o f past and future investments. Component 2: Global assessment - An expert and government peer reviewed global assessment using the Bureau approved IAASTD conceptual framework and annotated outlines [Outcome of Component 11completedbuildingupon previous assessments. One o fthe principaloutputs o fIAASTDwill bean expert and governmentpeer reviewed global assessmento f agricultural KST, accepted and approved by the Panel o fparticipating governments, usinga consistent set o f concepts, and addressing historical and current perspectives; plausible futures; and options for makingAKST work etter to achieve the development and sustainability goals. The IAASTD will take into account enabling conditions and contextual issues that affect the generation, use, accessibility and effectiveness o f agricultural KST. The global assessment (and sub-global assessments) will be characterizedby following: 9 demand driven, andall stakeholder groups involvedinthe scoping, preparation, peerreview, > outreach and communication; process open, transparent, representative, and legitimate, with well defined principles and procedures; 9 whenappropriate, localandindigenousknowledge(often informal), aswellas formal scientific knowledge incorporated; 9 findingsandanalysestechnically accurate andevidence-based, notvalue- laden; >' policy relevant but not policy prescriptive, i.e. provide options rather than > recommendations; different points o f view and uncertaintieswill be presented and quantified, where possible. This project's assessment of agricultural KST will contribute to catalyzing the widespread adoption o f agricultural practices that deliver global environmental benefits in biodiversity conservation and its sustainable use in agricultural systems, reduced emissions o f greenhouse gases from agricultural systems, reduced vulnerability o f ecological systems to climate change, reduced land degradation and improved quality o f international waters impacted by agricultural systems. Component 3: Sub-global assessments Five sub-global assessments (community to regional) - usingthe Bureauapproved IAASTD conceptual framework and annotated outlines [Outcome of Component I]buildinguponprevious regional assessments. One o f the principal outputs o f IAASTD will be five expert and government peer reviewedsub- global assessments o f agricultural KST accepted and approved by the Panel o f participating governments, addressing the same basic issues which will be addressed inthe global assessment, i.e., historical and current perspectives; plausible futures; and options for making AKST work better to achieve the development and sustainability goals, but focusing on the highest priority issues for eachregion. The five sub-global assessments (Central and West Asia and North Africa; East and South Asia and the Pacific; Latin America and the Caribbean; NorthAmerica and Europe; and Sub-Saharan Africa) will be performed at the regional, national or local scales and will complement the 67 Global Assessment by examining context-specific aspects o f the Global Assessment. Each o f the sub-global assessmentswill use the same basic framework as the global assessment, i.e., the impacts o f agricultural KST on rural livelihoods, nutritional security, equity, the environment and human health will be evaluated in relation to both the past and the future. The sub-global assessments will vary in scale from continents to communities, will use a consistent methodology, cover a range of ago-ecological systems, and employ selection criteria that take into account socio-economic and institutional conditions, and poverty mapping. Component 4: Outreach and Communication Outreach and communication o f IAASTD - findingsinvarious media and to all stakeholders at various levels The GEF Alternative with IAASTD i s a substantially enhanced capacity for informed decision making related to interventions inthe agricultural, environmental and natural resource sectors. The outreach and communications strategy will include: 1. Development o f a web site, which will include all relevant documents including the minutes/decisions o f Bureau and Plenary meetings, annotated outlines o f the global and sub- global assessments, the Conceptual Framework, lists o f authors and review editors, meeting schedules (author, Bureau and Plenary); draft reports for expert and government peer review; 2. Development o f outreach and communications strategy by Bureau and Secretariat 3. Targeted outreach to key user goups usingmedia, workshops and conferences 4. Publication and distribution o f global and sub-global assessmentreports 5. Availability of global and sub-global assessmentreports onweb site (www.agassessment.org) 6. Monitoringo f uptake o f IAASTDproducts 68 i + 24 5 e, 8 *, e, VI &2m I U m U 9 E 0 I c Ef Annex 10: SafeguardPolicy Issues The Project is designated a Category C project as it i s likely to have minimal or no adverse environmental impacts. Beyond screening, no further EA action is required for a Category C project. Safeguard PoliciesTripgeredby the Project Yes No Environmental Assessment (OP/BP/GP 4.01) 11 [XI Natural Habitats (OP/BP 4.04) [I [ XI Pest Management(OP 4.09) [I [X 1 Cultural Property (OPN 11.03, beingrevisedas OP 4.11) [I [XI Involuntary Resettlement(OP/BP 4.12) [I [XI IndigenousPeoples(OD 4.20, being revisedas OP4.10) [I [XI Forests (OP/BP 4.36) [I [XI Safetyof Dams (OP/BP 4.37) [I [XI ProjectsinDisputedAreas (OP/BP/GP 7.60)' 11 [XI Projectson International Waterways (OP/BP/GP 7.50) [I [XI Environmental Rating: C 'By supportingtheproposedproject. the Bank does not intend toprejudice thefinal determination of theparties'claims on the disputed areas 73 Annex 11: ProjectPreparationandSupervision GLOBAL:InternationalAssessment ofAgricultural Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) Planned Actual PCNreview Initial PID to PIC Initial ISDS to PIC --- Appraisalhegotiations January 2006 BoardRVP approval March2006 Planned date of effectiveness March 2006 Planned date ofmid-tern review April 2007 Planned closing date June 2008 , Fuad Bateh Legal Advisor LEGEN Charles Di Leva Legal Advisor LEGEN Maurizio Ragazzi Legal Advisor LEGEN Elmas Arisoy Senior Procurement Specialist ECSPS Pekka Jamsen. Senior Technical Specialist ARD ~ Edward Daoud Senior Finance Officer LOAGl Hyachinth Brown Senior Finance Officer LOAG2 Total Bank funds expended to date on project preparation: GEFresources: $350,000 (PDF-Bgrant) Bank Budget: $30,000 Estimated Approval and Supervision costs: 1. Remaining costs to approval: 0 2. Estimatedannual supervision cost: $100,000 74 Annex 12: Documents inthe Project File GLOBAL:InternationalAssessment ofAgricultural Science andTechnology for Development (IAASTD) A: Project ImplementationPlan B: International SteeringCommittee Report C: DGFproposal D: GEF PDF-Bproposal E: GEFproposal F STAP review G: Letters o f agreement with UNEP for the DGF grant H: Letters o f agreement with UNEPfor the GEF PDF-B grant I: MDTFagreementdletters: Australia, Canada, EuropeCommission, France, Ireland, Switzerland, UK,USA and the private sector. J: Approval to hire a Finnishnational into the secretariat K: Decisions fromthe first IntergovernmentalPlenary L: Decisions from the first Bureaumeeting M: Decisions from the second Bureaumeeting N: Annotated outlines for the global and sub-global assessments 0: GEFSEC approval letter for the GEF proposal 75 Annex 13: Report of the First Plenary Meeting of the I A A S T D -Nairobi, Kenya GLOBAL:International AssessmentofAgricultural ScienceandTechnologyfor Development (IAASTD) FirstPlenary Meetingof the InternationalAssessment ofAgricultural Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) 30 August -3 September 2004, Nairobi, Kenya Agreed Decisions Introduction This paper reports the decisions agreed at the First Plenary Meeting o f the International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development held at UNEP Headquarters, Nairobi, Kenya from 30 August to 3 September 2004. Decision 1 Objectives, goals and outputs of the IAASTD The Plenary, having considered the recommendations o f the Steering Committee for the IAASTD consultative process, 1. Decides that the broad objectives o f the IAASTD are to: a. undertake global and sub-global assessmentso f the role o f knowledge, science and technology (KST) as it pertains to agriculture inreducing hunger and poverty, improving rural livelihoods, and health, increasing incomes and facilitating equitable, environmentally, socially and economically sustainable development; b. provide robust information for decision makers onhow to ensure that policies, practices and institutional arrangements enable KST to contribute to reducing hunger and poverty, improvingrural livelihoods and health, increasing incomes, and facilitating equitable, environmentally, socially and economically sustainable development; and c. bring together the range o f stakeholders (consumers, governments, NGOs, private sector, producers, scientific community, international agencies) involved inthe agricultural sector and rural development to share views, gain common understanding and vision for the future. 2. Decides that the primary goals o f the IAASTD are to: a. assess the effects o f agricultural KST policy and institutional environments, as well as practices, inthe context o f sustainable development'; b. make the resulting state-of-the-art, objective analyses accessible to decision makers at all levels - from small scale producers to those who create international policy; c. identifywhere critically important information gaps,exist inorder to more effectively target research; and d. further the capacity of developingcountry nationals and institutions to generate, access, and use agricultural KST that promote sustainable development. 3. Decides that the primary outputs will include published (printedand web-based) critical in-depth global and sub-global assessments o f local and institutional knowledge and experiences, and that the Summaries o f the reports will be translated into the six official languages o f the UnitedNations, 'Reducinghunger and poverty, improvingrural livelihoods, and health, increasing incomes and facilitating equitable, environmentally, socially and economically sustainable development. 76 4. Recognizes that the primary outputs o f the IAASTDmay lead to: a. more directed and targeted agriculturally relevant researchprograms and policies to contribute to reducing hunger and poverty, improving rural livelihoods and health, increasing incomes and facilitating equitable, environmentally, socially and economically sustainable development; b. more effective institutionalarrangements to enable the adoption of advances in agricultural KST, includingbetter integration o f traditional and institutional knowledge; c. increased uptake and adaptation o fknowledge, research results and technologies by producers; d. better integration ofresearch into outreachprograms and policy decisions; e. better understanding o f the effects o f agricultural polices, practices, technologies and institutional arrangements on ecosystems and their goods and services, and on biodiversity; and f. betterunderstanding ofoptions for making agriculture more environmentally sustainable. Decision 2 Structure and approach for the I A A S T D The Plenary 1. Decides that the IAASTD will use a multi-disciplinary approach, andbe multi-scale, addressing global and sub-global (community to regional) issues. The global component will address issues with broad relevance and be interlinked with the sub-global assessments. 2. Decides that the global component o fthe IAASTD will be framed by analyses o fhistory andthe future: Historical lessons a. an analysis o f existingknowledge to determine factors responsible for successes and failures inthe use o f agricultural KST (by region, farm scale, type o f technology, etc.) in the context o f sustainable development; b. IAASTDwill provide a critical retrospective ofproducer and consumer responses to local and institutional agricultural KST, institutional systems and policies and the subsequent effects on the environment, health, poverty, equity, and nutritional security; and c. an analysis o f the rate o f return on investments in agricultural KST. Plausiblefutures d. IAASTDwill present a plausiblerange o f future scenarios for agricultural production (crop, livestock, fishery, forest, fiber and biomass), demand and trade, nutritional security, and water, soil and land use between now and 2050 given a range o f demographic, climatic, ecological, economic, cultural, socio-political, and technological projections. This framework will provide the context for assessing the: e. relevance, quality and effectiveness o f agricultural KST; and f. effectiveness ofpublic andprivate sector policies andinstitutional arrangements (including at the community level) inrelation to agricultural KST; inrelation to thebroader objectives of: 1. hunger andpoverty reduction and the improvement o f rurallivelihoods and incomes; 2. the environment (water, landuse, soils, biodiversity and atmosphere); 3. equitable, socially and economically sustainable development; and 4. human health (nutrition and food safety). IAASTD will take into account enablingconditions and contextual issues that directly affect the generation, use, accessibility and effectiveness o f agricultural KST. 77 3. Decidesthat IAASTDwould complement not duplicate existing activities anddevelop a set o f strategic priority issues agreed by all stakeholders. 4. Decidesthat the sub-global assessmentswill use the samebasic framework as the global assessment, i.e., historical lessons andplausible futures will frame the assessments. The sub-global assessments will vary in scale from continents to communities, will use a consistent methodology, cover a range o f ago-ecological systems, and employ selection criteria that take into account socio- economic and institutional conditions, and poverty mapping. Decision3 Outlinefor the global componentof the IAASTD The Plenary Decidesthat the global assessmentwill contain 3 sections: (i) Historical lessons; (ii) Plausible futures; and (iii)Relevance, quality and effectiveness o f agricultural KST, and institutions andpolicies. Gender analysis will be utilized inall three sections. The chapters will be based on the questions developed by the Plenary, reviewed, and approved by the Bureau, taking into consideration the questions raised duringthe regional consultations andbythe Steering Committee that directed the consultative process. These questions are summarized inAppendix 1. Additional questions, consistent with the broad framework approved by the Plenary, can be taken into account by the design teams. Decision 2 summarizes the broad content o fthe chapters. Decision4 Approach for the sub-global components of the IAASTD The Plenary 1. Decidesto conduct five sub-global assessments: Sub-Saharan Afiica, East and South Asia and the Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean, Central andWest Asia andNorth M i c a , and Europe and North America. Eachsub-global assessment will utilize the methodology for the global assessment: that is, the impacts o f agricultural KST on rural livelihoods, nutritional security, equity, the environment and human health will be evaluated inrelation to both the past and the future. The methodology will explicitly acknowledge the multiple functions o f agriculture - satisfying demand; improving rural economies, livelihoods, and health; and sustaining its environmental and natural resource foundation. The scope o f each sub-global assessment will be determined by the priorities established within the region (consistent with the available budget), agreed by the regional Bureaumembers and approved by the full Bureau. 2. Decidesthat regional institutional partners nominatedby the Secretariat andapprovedby the Bureauwill assist with the sub-global assessments. The involvement o f regional institutions will ensure the inclusion and support o f authors and reviewers from the region and ground the IAASTD process inregional and local concerns. Utilizing institutional partners inthe design, implementation, and authorship of the Assessments will: a. enhance sub-regional, regional andlocal capacities; b. helpbuildsynergy betweenregions as they work together to develop internally consistent methodologies; c. promote and extend linkages and partnerships to enhance sustainable development beyond the lifetime of the IAASTD process; d. allow for the needs o fmultiple institutions andusers to be addressed; e. greatly extend the communities that will contribute to and learn of the results o f the IAASTD process at the local, national, and regional levels; f. facilitate the inputfromnational assessmentsintotheregional assessments; and 78 g. assist the Secretariat incommunication and outreachwithin the regions including with the Regional Development Banks. Decision5 Design meetingsfor the global and sub-global assessments The Plenary 1. Decidesto approve a design meeting o f about 85 experts, nominatedby governments and other stakeholder groups and selected by the Bureau, to prepare a detailed outline for the global assessment, based on the outline and questions approved inDecision 3. The Bureauwill ensure balance among the selected experts: geographic, area o f expertise, gender, andinstitutional/stakeholder. 2. Decidesto approve design meetings (one persub-global assessment) o f about 45 experts, nominatedby stakeholder groups and selected by the appropriate regional members o f the Bureau, to prepare a detailed outline for each o f the sub-global assessments, based on the approach approved in Decision 4. The Bureauwill ensure balance among the selected experts: geographic, area o f expertise, gender, and institutionallstakeholder. 3. Decidesto approve a final design meeting for the global and sub-global assessmentso f about 30 experts, representing the global and sub-global assessments, to finalize the designs and ensure methodological consistency and complementarity o f work. Decision6 Timetable for preparing,peer reviewing and approvingthe global and sub-global assessments The Plenary Decides, assuming fundingis immediately available, to approve a timetable, which includes the following key features: a. one additional Plenary meeting; b. three additional Bureaumeetings; c. a series o f design meetings; d. four lead author meetings for each o f the global and sub-global assessments; e. two combined global and sub-global lead author meeting; and f. two rounds ofexpert and government peerreview to ensure quality. Decision 7 The Budget The Plenary 1. Decidesto approve the baseline budget for the IAASTD o f US$10.76 Mover a maximumperiod o f three years with the assumption that at least 80% o fthe needed funds are secured by July 2005. 2. Decides that since the Plenary recognizes that there is value inundertaking further work beyond the IAASTD work plan as framed inDecisions 3,4 and 5, any additional work approved by the Bureauwould give priority to activities that increase ownership and broaden participation at regional and sub-regional levels. 3. Recognizesthat the baseline IAASTD budget is based on the following assumptions: a. the travel costs (transportation, hotel, per diem) o f authors from developingcountries and countries with economies intransitionto the design and author meetings are covered - coach class only; b. the travel costs (transportation, hotel, per diem) o f government representatives from developing countries and countries with economies intransition to plenary meetings are covered, limited to one representative per country - coach class only; 79 c. the travel costs (transportation, hotel, per diem) to Bureau meetings for government representatives from developing countries and countries with economies intransition who are elected to the Bureau are covered- coach class only; d. the travel costs (transportation, hotel, per diem) for NGO, consumer, producer and developing country private sector representatives elected to the Bureau are covered for Bureau and plenary meetings -coach class only; e. OECD governments pay their own travel costs to Plenary meetings and other relevant meetings; f. OECDgovernmentspay thetravel costs oftheir ownexperts to the leadauthor meetings; and g. some expert authors and review editors may be offered honoraria (butno salary compensation) based on criteria developedby the Bureau. 4. Recognizesthe major expenses o fthe baseline budget are: $US Plenary I 390K Design meetings 495K Meetings (plenary and bureau) 750K Meetings (global assessment) 980K Meetings (sub-global assessment) 1575K Sub-global institutions 960K Honoraria 150K Secretariat 3780K Communication and outreach 500K Publications/translation 1180K Contingency 0 TOTAL 10760K 5. Encouragesin-kindsupport from developing countries and civil society. For example, travel expenses for experts to attend designteam meetings andlead author meetings and representatives to attend Bureau and/or Plenary meetings, and self-funded national assessmentsutilizingthe same methodology as the sub-global assessments that contribute to the sub-global assessments. Decision 8 Approach for financialcontributions The Plenary 1. Decidesto adopt the approach taken by the IntergovernmentalPanel on Climate Change, i.e. voluntary contributions reflecting equitable cost sharing (not the UNindicative scale). 2. Decidesthat contributions would be sought from the co-sponsoring agencies (FAO, UNDP, UNEP, UNESCO, World Bank, WHO), the Global Environment Facility, governments, foundations, regional development banks and civil society, includingthe private sector. 3. Decidesthat cash contributions will be placed ina multi-donor trust fundmanagedby the Secretariat and dispensed based on funding decisions recommended by a finance committee and approved by the Plenary or by the Bureau. 4. Decides to accept in-kindor earmarked contributions, e.g., a Regional Development Bank contributing to a sub-global assessment, but must be approved by the Bureau to maintain overall transparency. 5. Recognizesthat the required financing o f about US$10.76M for the baseline budget over three years, which could be achieved by donations of: 80 a. US$3M from the World Bank budget and WB Development Grants Facility; b. US$3.35M from the GEF (includes $350K from a PDF-B grant); c. US$4.4 1 M from cosponsoring agencies, OECD governments, foundations, and others. 6. Decidesthat once the baseline budget o f US $10.76M is realized, additional fundingwill be sought to increase ownership and broadenparticipation at regionaland sub-global levels. Decision9 Compositionofthe Bureau, geographicgovernmentrepresentationon the Bureau, selection processesfor governmentand non-governmentBureaupositions, and terms of referencefor the Bureau The Plenary 1. Decidesto approve the composition o fthe Bureau, which is based on the recommendation o fthe multi-stakeholder steering committee, i.e. a Bureau o f 62 members: 2 co-chairs, 30 government representatives, 22 non-government representatives and 8 representatives from institutions. The 22 non-government representatives will consist of: a. 6 non-governmental organizations (NGOs); b. 6 private sector; c. 6 producers; and d. 4 consumers. 2. Decidesthat the co-chairs o fthe Bureau will be those electedbythe Bureauto co-chair the IAASTD. 3. Decidesto approve the proposedregional distribution: a. Central and West Asia and NorthAfrica (4); b. Sub-Saharan Africa (6); c. Latin America and the Caribbean (5); d. East and SouthAsia andthe Pacific (6); e. Europe and NorthAmerica (9). 4. Decidesthat Bureaumembers should have relevant technical or scientific expertise ina field such as agriculture (production, marketing, processing, research, etc.), health, nutrition, gender, rural development or the environment, and that members shouldpromote trust among the stakeholders and demonstrate broad vision. 5. Decides that: a. the IAASTD co-chairs will be electedby the Bureau; b. the plenary (i.e. the Panel o fparticipating governments) will elect the government representatives of the Bureau, with each region selecting its own members, taking into account areas of expertise and gender balance and the criteria set out above; c. the non-governmental stakeholders (producer and consumer organizations, NGOs and the private sector) select their own members o f the Bureau, taking into account geography, expertise, and gender, via four nominating committees (one from each group) based on the criteria set out above; d. the following institutionswill also be representedonthe Bureau: CAB International (CABI); the Consultative Group on InternationalAgricultural Research (CGIAR); the Kyrgyz Agricultural Research Institute; the International Center for Research on Women (ICRW); the InternationalCouncil for Science (ICSU); the Rockefeller Foundation; the ThirdWorld Academy of Science (TWAS); the World Conservation Union (IUCN); and e. the cosponsoring agencies and the Global Environment Facility will serve as ex-officio members o fthe Bureau. 6. Decidesthat once the Bureaumembership has been finalized, the members will be listed in Appendix 2. 81 7. Decides that the terms o f reference for the Bureau include: a. designing the nomination process for the IAASTD co-chairs; b. selecting authors for the design meetings; C. selecting authors for the preparation o fthe global and sub-global assessments; d. selecting review editors; e. developing an outreach and communications strategy; f. developing a capacity-building strategy; 5 overseeing the management o f the sub-global assessments; h. advising the Plenary on emerging issues o f concern; i. acceptingadditionalfunctionsrequestedbythePlenary;and j. oversight o f the budget. 8. Decides that if a vote needs to be taken on a specific issue, ie., inthe event that consensus cannot be reached, only the government members will vote, after listeningto the views o f the non-government representatives, given the intergovernmental nature o f the IASSTD Decision 10 Principles and Procedures for the I A A S T D The Plenary 1. Decides to forward for review andapproval the Principles and Procedures inIAASTD-PI/Doc. 8 to the Bureau, which are based on those developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change andthe internationalMillennium Ecosystem Assessment, and endorsedbythe steering committee, and address the following key issues: a. composition and roles and responsibilities o f the Bureau; b. roles and responsibilities of the Secretariat; c. eligibility for participation inthe plenary; d. conflict resolution; e. procedures for the preparation, review, acceptance, approval, adoption and publication o f the IAASTD; f. processes for the selectionofauthors andreview editors; and g. tasks and responsibilities o f the lead authors, coordinating lead authors, contributing authors, expert reviewers, review editors and focal points. Decision 11 Criteria and process for the selection of co-chairs for the I A A S T D The Plenary 1. Decides to request the Bureau, with the assistance o f the Secretariat, to design a nomination process for two co-chairs to be elected at the beginning o f the second Bureau meeting, with due consideration for balance with respect to gender, geography, area o f expertise and sector o f employment: a. one co-chair should be from a developed country and the other from a developing country; and b. one should have abackground inthe naturalsciences and the other insocial sciences. 2. Decides the selection criteria for the co-chairs should include: a. well respected intheir field o f expertise; b. capacity to facilitate a complicatedprocess; c. demonstrated intellectual leadership; d. ability to inspire unity among stakeholders; e. impartiality on contentious issues, such as biosciences; f. commitment to allocate at least 30% o f their time over the three years o f the IAASTD process; 82 g. ability to co-chair intergovernmental meetings(i.e., the plenary meetings) andmulti- stakeholder Bureaumeetings; h. ability to chair multi-disciplinary scientific meetings; i. politicallyastute; j. fluency inEnglish; with excellent ability to communicate, verbally and inwriting; k. experience with international andor assessmentprocesses; and 1. literacy across bothnaturaland social sciences. 3. Decides to charge the Bureau with assessing whether an honorarium is required for one or both co- chairs and the appropriate level. 83 Annex 14: Decisionsmade at IAASTDBureauMeetingin Montpellier 25-27 May 2005 Decisions The issues requiringdiscussion/decisions at the second IAASTD Bureaumeeting were 1. Approval o f the IAASTD Conceptual Framework (s) 2. Approval o f the annotated outlines for the IAASTD Global and Sub-global Assessments 3. Current Status o f Implementationo fthe IAASTD 4. Budget and Finances Status o f funding and approval o fbudget 0 Establishment o f finance committee and its terns o f reference Travel support for OECD academic, civil society and governments authors Compensation for co-chairs 0 Honorarium 5. Selection and roles o f regional institutes 0 Relationship with Secretariat and Bureau 6. Philosophy of, and process for, author selection 0 Establishment o f a sub-committee for selection o f authors for the global assessment 7. Establishoutreach and communication committee and terms o f reference 8. Approval o f Principles & Procedures 9. Time schedule 10. Website 0 Alternative web sites 0 Privacy Concerns 11. Approval o f the process for developing a set o f indicators to be used throughout IAASTD Most o f these issues were covered, although two were inadvertently missed. We ask you to comment on these two issues by email by 17 June. Thereafter, the Secretariat will send out an amended decision paper. The two items that were not discussed were: #4 Budget and Finances: Compensation for Co-chairs. Inthe NairobiPlenary meeting, it was decided that the Bureaucould decide on the amount of compensation for the developing country co-chair. On the advice o f the chair o f the board for the African Centre for Technology Studies, we request the Bureauapprove compensation inthe amount o f US$40,000 annually to be paid to ACTS for Professor Wakhungu's time. The Secretariat suggests that, for this year, the Outreach and Communications and Publications & Translation line items inthe budget be reduced by $22.5 K each; assuming the Bureau approves this expenditure. Ifthe Bureau approves this expenditure, but does not agree with the Secretariat's suggestion, we seek your advice as to which budget line items should be reduced. The Bureau, when it meets next year, should decide on the source for the second year funding o f Professor Wakhungu's time inthe amount o f $45 K. # I O Website: Privacy concerns Would the Bureau have an objection to their contact information (name, organizatiodgovemment, work telephone number and e-mail address) made available on the password protected I A A S T D intranet (not the publicly accessible IAASTDwebsite)? Minutes of Bureau Meeting 25-27 May 84 M a y 25 The Bureau met inPlenary with the members o f the Integrated Design team on Wednesday, 25 May 2005. The conceptual framework(s), annotated outlines for the global and sub-global assessmentswere presented, discussed and subsequently approved after a number o f suggested changes were approved. * Decision 1 Approve the Conceptual Framework After minor modifications, the Bureauendorsed the use o f two compatible conceptual frameworks to guide the global andsub-global assessments. The first provides aworldview, which places AKST as one driver among a larger group o f drivers o f change affecting the development and sustainability goals. The second provides a framework to guide the way the Assessment will explore how AKST relates to and interacts with other drivers, agricultural goods and services and the development and sustainability goals. Decision 2 Approve the annotated outline of the Global Assessment The Bureau approved the annotated outline o f the global assessment with the following caveats: (i) a numbero f simple, but important changes aremade, e.g., explicitly mention HIV/AIDS and communities as important actors; (ii) enhanced emphasis on gender; (iii) harmonization o f the issues listed inchapters 1,4 and 7 (Appendix 1); and (iv) Chapter 3 and Section 4 modified to better incorporate some o f the issues listed inthe former chapter 12. The Bureau agreedthat special emphasis/coordination will be needed for: (i)the access, availability and management o f natural resources, particularly water; (ii) public and private sector investments inAKST; and (iii) markets. One outstanding question that does not need to be resolved at present i s whether a twelfth chapter i s needed to synthesize the findingso f Section 4, or whether this will be adequately covered inthe Summary for Decision Makers. Decision 3 Approve the annotated outlinefor Central and WestAsia and North Africa The Bureau approved the annotated outline with only minor changes. Decision 4 Approve the annotated outline for Sub-Saharan Africa The Bureau approved the annotated outline on conditionthat the details included inthe Nairobiversion were incorporated into the structure presentedto the Bureau. Decision 5 Approve the annotated outlinefor East and South Asia and the Pacific The Bureau approved the annotated outline with only minor changes. Decision 6 Approve the annotated outlinefor North America and Europe The Bureau approved the annotated outline with only minor changes. Decision 7 Approve the annotated outlinefor Latin America and Caribbean The Bureau approved the annotated outline with only minor changes. Thursday and Friday, 26-27 M a y The Bureau met inPlenary to discuss the following agenda items. Decision 8 Approve the budget The Bureau discussed and approved the budget with the following amendments: (i) agreement to re- an instate the Bureau meeting scheduled for 2006; (ii) to decrease the budget lines for outreach and communications and publications by $70K each to pay for the re-instated Bureau meeting; (iii) to increase the baseline budget from $10.76M to $10.86M to reflect the additional cash contributions o f the cosponsoring agencies during the last year; and (iv) to show in-kindcontributions from OECD governments, institutions and international organizations in footnotes (travel costs incurred for the design team meetings, travel costs projected for the remainder ofthe assessment). The Bureau endorsed the Secretariat's efforts to limit travel costs by selecting less expensive cities for author meetings. Decision 9 Approve the continuation of the IAASTD 85 The Bureau agreed the Assessment should proceed given that more than 90% o f the baseline budget has been secured (assuming the GEF grant for $3Mwill be forthcoming). Ireland committed to provide an additional $1OOK, subject to appropriate contributions relative to their size fromother governments, and France re-affirmedtheir commitment for a total o f $300K. The private sector agreed to give serious consideration to provide financial support, and the Secretariat committed to send a formal proposal to the private sector. Decision 10 Approve thefund-raising strategy The Bureau agreedthat the'finance and fund raising committee would assist the Secretariat in fundraising. The Bureau notedthat promotional literature was needed for additional fundraising and tasked the Secretariat with developing a brochure as soon as possible. Decision 11 Approve aprocess tofacilitate travelfunding for OECD experts The Bureau recognizedthe importance o f this issue and agreed to investigate possible approaches at the national level to ensure that travel funds would be available to ensure the participation of OECD experts inthe global andNAEsub-global assessment. Decision 12 Approve criteriafor honoraria, amount and timeforpayment The Bureau agreed that coordinating lead authors (CLAs) from non-OECD countries andwho do not work for an IGO or one o f the CGIAR centers are eligible for an honoraria o f US$2000 in acknowledgement of chapter coordination functions. The Secretariat was given authority by the Bureau to use the remaining funds allocated for honoraria as they deem appropriate. Therefore, up to seven lead authors per sub-global assessment who are responsible for accessing and assessing local knowledge and who are not CLAs are eligible for an honoraria o f $1000. Decision 13 Approve the selection of thefour regional institutes The Bureau confirmed the selection o f the African Centre for Technology and Science (ACTS) as the institute responsible for coordinating the Sub-Saharan assessment and the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA) for the Latin America and Caribbean assessment. The Bureau also agreed that regional institutes were needed to coordinate the sub-global assessments inCentral and West Asia and North Africa (CWANA) and East and South Asia and the Pacific (ESAP). The Bureau approved the Secretariat to contact ICARDA and the World FishCenter to coordinate the CWANA and ESAP sub-global assessments, respectively. These regional institutes will be asked to partner with National ResearchInstitute o f Morocco and the Chinese Academy o f Agricultural Sciences, respectively. Duringthe discussion onthe roles o fthe four regional institutes, the Bureau clarified that they should assist inidentifying authors within their region, but not participate intheir selection, which is the role of the Bureaumembers. The Bureaualso endorsed the regional institutes playing a key role inoutreach, communications and publicity. Decision 14 Approve theprocess to select authorsfor the Global Assessment The Bureau agreed that the approved annotated outline for the global assessment will be sent to all Bureaumembers by June sthor earlier, accompanied by: (i) a 1-2 page initial selling document, and (ii) a 1-2 page report on the responsibilities and time requirements of the authors and review editors, as well as a schedule for author meetings. The Bureau agreed that all nominations with a CV of up to 3 pages, for the global assessmentmust be received by the Secretariat by June 27'. The Secretariat will map the nominations against the approved annotated outline and send the mapped list to the selection committee (see next paragraph) by July 17th. The Bureau agreed to establish a selection committee to screen the nominations for full Bureau approval. The selection committee, which will be comprised o f the 20 members (shown intable below), will have two weeks to make their selections. The Bureau agreed that if four or more members o f the Bureau objected to the recommended selection o f a C L A or LA, the selection committee would take that into consideration inmaking its final recommendations to the Bureau. The Bureau requested the selection committee to select a complete set o f alternates so that the Secretariat can proceed inthe case of nominatedauthors declining the invitation to serve. The author selection becomes final one week after 86 the Bureau receives the nominations from the selection committee unless, as noted, there are four objections. The goal i s to send invitations to selected authors by August 12" for a meeting from November 14" - 17". Private sector Producers Consumers Institutions NGOs Steve Parry Prabha Mahale GregJaffe Emile Frison M.Rahmaniam Gisele D'Almeida ShoaibAziz Jose Vargas M.Hassan Romy Quihano ESAP NAE CWANA LAC SSA Philippines France Iran Uruguay Mozambique Australia USA Turkey Brad (TBD) There was general agreement that the expected time requirement for lead authors (LAs) is about 1month per year and for coordinating lead authors (CLAs) about 6-8 weeks per year. Inaddition, the Secretariat agreed to send a sample o f the letter that was previously sent to governments soliciting author nominations for the global assessment. The Bureau also agreed that CLAs can suggest LAs, but the CLAs mustreceive approval from the Bureau. The CLAs and LAs can solicit contributions from contributing authors without Bureau permission. Duringthe Bureau meeting it was notedthat several of the experts who are selected for Section I1 (Current and Historical) may be selected for section IV (Options for Action) to ensure consistency inthe issues addressed. The Bureau agreed that each o f the four sections o f the global assessment, i.e., (i) context; (ii) current and historical; (iii) scenarios/plausible futures; and (iv) loolung forward/options for action, will be coordinated by a member o f the secretariat (Hans Herren, Judy Wakhungu, Bob Watson and Prabhu Pingali) along with one o f the coordinating lead authors. Decision 15 Approve theprocess to select authorsfor the Sub-Global Assessments The Bureau agreed that the approved annotated outline for the sub-global assessments willbe sent to all governments/institutions withintheir region accompanied by: (i)1-2 page initial selling document, and a (ii)1-2pagereportontheresponsibilitiesandtimerequirementsoftheauthorsandrevieweditors,as a well as and schedule for author meetings. A linkto the revisedglobal outline will also be provided for governments/institutionsso they can nominate additional authors (with a deadline o f June 27). As inthe case o f the global assessment: (i)there was general agreement that the expected time requirement for lead authors (LAs) is about 1monthper year and for coordinating lead authors (CLAs) about 6-8 weeks per year; (ii)that CLAs can suggest LAs, but the CLAs must receive approval from the Bureau; and (iii) CLAs and LAs can solicit contributions from contributing authors without Bureau permission. The Bureau agreed that all nominations for the sub-global assessment must be received by the Secretariat by July 20. The Secretariatlregional institutes will map the nominations against the approved annotated outline and send the mapped list to the regional selection committees (see next paragraph). The Bureau agreed that the regional and institutional Bureau members will screen within two weeks the nominations for their region for full Bureau approval. As inthe case for the global assessment, if four or more members o f the Bureau objected to the recommended selection o f a C L A or LA, the selection committee would take that into consideration inmaking its final recommendations to the Bureau. The Bureau requested the selection committee to select a complete set o f alternates so that the Secretariat can proceed inthe case o f nominated authors declining the invitation to serve. The author selection becomes final one week after the Bureaureceives the nominations from the selection committee unless, as noted, there are four objections. The Bureau also agreed that the LAs will self-select two co-chairs for their respective sub-global assessment from among themselves. Decision 16 Approve the composition of thefinance andfundraising committee 87 The Bureau agreed that the finance and fundraising committee would have an open membership. The initial members include: Australia, Brasil, Canada, China, France, Ireland (chair), Saudi Arabia, UK, U S A Syngenta, Consumers for Science inthe Public Interest. Decision 17 Approve the terms of reference for thefinance andfundraising committee The Bureau agreedthat the finance and fundraising committee will prepare decision papers and other documentation for the full Bureau to approve. The primary responsibilities o f the committee will include: (i) theSecretariatwithfund-raising;(ii) assisting facilitatingpreparation o f budget material for full Bureau approval; and (iii) ensuring compliance with agreed expenditures. The work o f this committee will be done through regular email and teleconferences. Decision 18 Approve the composition of the outreach and communications committee The Bureau agreedthat the committee would have an open membership. The initial members include: Canada, Ireland, Russia, UK,USA, ATDP, CAB1(chair), Greenpeace, Cargill, and Consumers International LatinAmerica. Betsi Isay will be point person inthe Secretariat for the committee. Other Bureaumembers mayjoin ifinterested. Decision 19 Approve the terms of reference for the outreach and communications committee The Bureau approved an initialterms o f reference for the outreach and communications committee, which included: (i) developing an outreach andcommunications strategy; (ii) proposing, incollaboration with the Secretariat, an allocation o fresources for approval bythe Bureau; (iii) advising on the web site; (iv) promoting the IAASTDat international meetings andother fora; and(v) publicizingthe work plan. The committee has beentasked with developing a final terms o f reference, for review and approval by the Bureau. The work o f this committee will be done through regular email and teleconferences. Decision 20 Approve the revised Principles and Procedures The Bureau approved the changes inlanguage on decision making and a few other minor changes. Decision 21 Approve the time schedule After an in-depth discussion o f the time required for the author nomination and selection process, the Bureau agreed to delay the sub-global author meetings untilafter September. The Secretariat was tasked with working with the regionalinstitutes to develop a revised schedule. The Bureau agreed that the most appropriate time for the next Bureau meeting would be afier the first peer review, but prior to the third meeting of authors, inorder to assess whether the global and sub-global assessments were providing the type o f information expectedby the Bureau. The Bureauwill not provide a technical assessment, rather programmatic guidance. Decision 22 Approve theprocessfor Bureau-Secretariat-Regional Institutes interactions. The Bureau agreed that members should go through the Secretariat for contactingregional institutes in order to maintain clear lines o f communication. Contacts within Secretariat for regional institutes are as follows: UNESCOLAC Guillen Calvo sc.ecol @unesco.org UNEP/SSA Anna Stabrawa anna.stabrawa@unep.org Nalini Sharma nalini.sharmaaunep.org WB/ESAP Eija Pehu epehu@,worldbank.org WB/Global Beverly McIntyre bmcintvre0,worldbank. org WB/NAE (Finnishnationalto be named later; for nowuse WB/Global contact) FAOICWANA (to be namedlater; for now use WB/Global contact) Decision 23 Approve theprocessfor developing a set of indicators The Bureau agreed that the Secretariat should develop a short paper on indicators within next three months for review and approval by the Bureau. The indicators should buildon the substantial work done to date by the cosponsoring agencies and through the MDGprocess, and should balance innovation and pragmatism. 88 Scenarios: TheBureau approvedthefollowing scenarios design team meetings: 18-20 July A small exploratory/methodological meeting inFAO, Rome, consisting o fexperts and Secretariat staffto: (i) how to methodologicallyintegrate AKST into the discuss MAscenarios; (ii) abroadapproach to structure AKST; (iii) how to frame assess bring the global storylines/scenarios, which have regional specificity, together with the detailed regional storylineshcenarios; and (iv) assess what methods are available to quantitatively and qualitatively model the global and sub-global storylines. The Bureau agreed that the Secretariat should invite one expert from each o f the sub- global design team meetings. Mid-August A meeting, incollaboration with the UNEP Global Environment Outlook (GEO), to develop detailed regional AKST storylines. The invitees would consist o f a subset o f experts from the sub-global design teams, in addition to the GEO experts. The IAASTDwould provide funding for four experts from each sub-global design team meeting. 14-17 September A meetingof experts to finalize the global and sub-global AKST storylines, which willbe embedded within the MA storylines, and to agree on how to model the storylines. The Bureau agreed to nominate experts for this meetingby June 27, particularly experts on technologies, institutional arrangements andpolicies, who did not attend any o f the global or sub-global designteam meetings or who were not involved inthe MA process. The Secretariat would develop a recommended invitation list for review and approval by the Bureau, usingthe same procedures as for the selection o f authors for the global and sub-global assessments. This meeting will includemany, but not all o fthe authors selected for the scenarios sections o f the global and sub-global assessments. Web-site: TheBureau approvedguidelinesfor use of theIAASTD logo and name The Bureau agreedthat: (i) Secretariat will develop a set o f guidelinedethics for the password the protected site; (ii) use o f the IAASTD logo, stationary, etc., i s only with Bureau approval; (iii)the IAASTD acronym can only be used as a domain name (url) on the official web site and cannot be used for any another web site. Translation: There was an in-depthdiscussion o f the issue o f languages. The secretariat noted that the global assessment and sub-global assessmentswould primarily be inEnglishdue to the issues o f cost and time. While limited interpretation i s possible insome author meetings, the time and cost of translation o f draft reports would be prohibitive. However, regions such as L A C may primarily work in Spanish, while SSA inEnglishandFrench. The sub-global institutes needto evaluate the feasibility o fworking inmultiple languages recognizingthe issues o f time and cost. 89 .... a .. * E%8 w * E58 P F c) 3 55 d 0 Y Annex 16: Principlesand ProceduresGoverningthe InternationalAssessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development GLOBAL: InternationalAssessmentofAgricultural ScienceandTechnology for Development (LAASTD) Definitionof anAssessment 1. A scientific assessmentis a critical, objective evaluation and analysis o f information, includingindigenous and localknowledge, designedto meet user needs and support decision making. It applies thejudgment o f experts to existing knowledge to provide scientifically credible answers to policy relevant questions, quantifyingwhere possible the level o f confidence. Purpose 2. The internationalassessmentonthe role o f agricultural science and technology inreducing hunger and poverty, improvingrural livelihoods, and facilitating equitable, environmentally, socially and economically sustainable development through the generation, access to, and use o f agricultural knowledge, science and technology (hereinafter referredto as IAASTD) shall concentrate its activities on a critical assessment o f the literature, experience and knowledge pertaining to the scope o fIAASTD as defined by the Panel o fparticipating governments. 3. The role o f IAASTD will be to comprehensively, openly and transparently assess the scientific, technical and socio-economic literature, experience andknowledge relevant to how agricultural science and technology can reduce hunger and poverty, improverural livelihoods, and facilitate equitable, environmentally, socially and economically sustainable development through the generation, access and use o f agricultural knowledge, science and technology. The IAASTD Report shouldbe policy relevant butnot policy prescriptive, and deal objectively with scientific, technical and socio-economic issues. 4. Peer review o f local and institutional knowledge byrelevant experts ingovernment and civil society shall be an essential part o fthe I A A S T Dprocess. Organization 5. The Panel o f participating governments, which shall be open to all Member states o f the cosponsoring agencies, shall make major decisions concerningI A A S T D inPlenary meetings with advice from a 60-member multi-stakeholder Bureau comprisedof 30 governments and 30 members from civil society, the private sector and scientific institutions. Responsibilitieso f the Bureauwill include making decisions on authors, reviewers and financial matters. All Bureaumembers should haverelevanttechnical and scientific expertise ina field such as agriculture (production, marketing, processing, research, etc.) health, nutrition, gender, rural development or the environment. Inaddition, individuals should promote trust among the Stakeholders and demonstrate broadvision. The Bureau will be effectively balanced with respect to gender and geographic representation. The Bureau will form committees as needed for selection o f global authors, finance and fund-raising, and communications and outreach. These committees will prepare documents as needed for considerationby the full Bureau. The Panel o fparticipating governments will elect government representatives o f the multi- stakeholder Bureau. Representatives from producer, consumer, nongovernmental, and private sector entities will nominatetheir delegates through a parallel process. 93 The Cosponsoring Agencies (FAO, UNDP, WHO, UNEP, UNESCO and the WB) will serve as ex officio membersof the Bureau. The Panel will approve the membership o f scientific organizations on the Bureau with input from the Cosponsoring Agencies. Two co-chairs (one from a developed country and one from a developing country) will be elected bythe Plenary with consideration for gender and expertise.The co-chairs will chair the Plenary and Bureau sessions, sessions o f the Global authors andprovide intellectual leadership for IAASTD. The Secretariat will overseethe day-to-day management of IAASTD.The Secretariat will act as a technical support unitfor IAASTD andwill organize sessions o f the Panel and Bureau and sessions of the global and sub-global (community to regional) assessments. The Secretariat will propose the annual budget and manage the Trust Fund.Itwill oversee and coordinate IAASTD public information and outreach activities and it will publicize and disseminate reports to the relevant stakeholder groups, including translation of summaries into all six official UN languages. The Secretariat will monitor the progress of I A A S T Dactivities and ensure coordinationamong global and subglobal (community to regional) assessments. Itwill liaise with member governments and other relevant stakeholder organizations on IAASTD matters. The Director of the Secretariat will be appointed by the Heads o f CosponsoringAgencies and will provide intellectualleadership along with the Co-chairs. The Director will appoint the staff, which will be drawn from within and from outside of the Cosponsoring Agencies. Staff will have the requisite technical, communication and administrative skills. Participation 6. Participationinthe Plenarywill be open to all Membercountries o f the Cosponsoring Agencies. Interpretationinall six official UNlanguages shallbe provided for sessions o f the Plenary. Invitationsto participate inthe Plenary meetings shall be extended to governments and participatingorganizations by the co-chairs of IAASTD. 7. Experts from Member countries or international, intergovernmentalor non-governmental organizations maybe invitedintheir personal capacity to contribute to the preparation andpeer review of IAASTD. Decisions 8. Intersessional decisions are adopted five working days after communication to the members o f the Bureauon ano-objectionbasis. All recommendations o f a subcommittee o f the Bureau willbe sent to the full Bureaufor approval on ano-objectionbasis. Bureaumembershave one week to review and comment. Iffour or more membershave an objection to a subcommittee recommendation, thenthe subcommittee should take any substantiated objections into account inmaking their final decision, which i s then communicated to the full Bureau. Inthe case of the fund-raising and finance committee, all decisions will be taken by the full Bureau. 9. For the subcommittees on author selection the following will apply. Experts from member countries or international, intergovernmentalor non-governmental organizations may be invitedintheir personal capacity to contributeto the preparation andpeer review o fthe IAASTD. The subcommittees will make the initial selection ofcoordinating leadauthors, lead authors, review editors and alternatesbased on nominations from all stakeholder groups and the subcommittees will communicate the list to the full Bureau inaccordance with paragraph 8. The Secretariat should inform Governments o f citizens selected from their countries. 94 Conflict resolution 9. The Panel shall endeavor to reach consensus intakingdecisions regardingall matters related to IAASTD, and inapproving, adopting and accepting the Report. Ifconsensus isjudged impossible by the relevant body, the following proceduresshould be followed: (a) on procedural issues the Rules and Procedures of UNEP GoverningCouncil should be followed to resolve the matter; (b) for decisions on approval, adoption and acceptanceo f the report, the differing views shall be explained and, upon request, recorded. Differingviews on a matter concerning a scientific, technical or socio-economic document shall be represented inthe document concerned. Differing views on matters o f policy shall be recorded inthe report of the session. Procedures for the preparation, review, acceptance, approval, adoption and publication of the IAASTDReport 10. Definitions "Acceptance" signifies that the materialhas not been subjected to line-by-linediscussion and agreement, but represents a comprehensive, objective and balanced view o f the subject matter "Adoption" i s a process o f endorsement section by section (i.e., not line-by-line). "Approval" signifiesthat the material has been subjectedto line-by-line discussion and agreement. "IAASTD Report" i s the ensemble of the Global Assessment Report; the Subglobal Assessment Reports; and their Summaries for DecisionMakers; "Panel Members or Members o f IAASTD" are countries that are Members o f the Cosponsoring Agencies. "Session of the Bureau" refers to meetings of the elected governmental andnon-governmental members of the IAASTDBureau-elected membersmay be accompanied by a representative of their organization for non-technicalissues, e.g., budget. "Plenary Session" refers to meetings of the Member countries and observers. 11. Preparation and Peer review Process The preparation and peer review process shouldtake place in six stages: 0 Preparation of the first-order draft report; 0 Government and expert (peer) review of the first-order draft report; 0 Preparation o fthe second-order draft report; 0 Government/expert review of the second-order draft report; 0 Preparation of the final report; and 0 Government review and approval o f the Summaries for Decision Makers At least six weeks should be allowed for review by experts and governments. All written expert and government review comments will be made available to reviewers on request duringthe reviewprocess and will beretainedinan open archive ina location determinedbythe IAASTD Bureau on completion of the Report for a period of at least five years. 95 The purpose of the review process i s to ensure that the IAASTDReport presents a comprehensive, objective and balancedview of bothlocal and institutionalknowledge. The content o f the authored chapters i s the responsibility of the leadauthors. After acceptanceby the Panel, only grammatical and or minor editorial changes can be madeprior to publication. To ensure proper preparation andreview, the following steps shouldbe taken: (a) Compilation o f governmental and non-governmental Focal Points andnominees for Coordinating LeadAuthors, LeadAuthors, ContributingAuthors, Expert Reviewers, Review Editors and (b) Selectionof CoordinatingLeadAuthors and LeadAuthors (c) Preparation o f draft Report (d) Review Firstdraft by governments and experts Seconddraft by governments and experts (e) Preparation of final draft Report (f) Acceptance o fReport at a sessionofthe Plenary The IAASTDReport shallbe made available to governments and other participating organizations by the Secretariat at least six weeks inadvance of the Plenary for final acceptance/adoption/approvaland, to the extent possible, the Summaries for Decision Makers for the Global Assessment and Subglobal Assessmentswill be distributedinall official UN languages. 12. Compilation of Nominees for Authors, Reviewersand ReviewEditors The Secretariat will request that all governments andparticipatingorganizations identify appropriate experts with local and institutionalknowledge for eachChapter inthe Report to act as Coordinating LeadAuthors, LeadAuthors, Contributing Authors, Expertreviewers or Review Editors. To facilitate the identification o f experts and peer review by governments and non- governmental stakeholders, governments and non-governmental stakeholders should designate Focal Points. Bureaumembers should ensure, where necessary, balanced representation o f experts and reviewersfrom developed countries, developingcountries, and countries with economies intransition. These recommendations shall be maintainedby the Secretariat andbe available to all Members o f the Panel. The tasks andresponsibilities of CoordinatingLead Authors, LeadAuthors, LeadAuthors, Contributing Authors, Expert Reviewers, Review Editors and focal points ingovernment and participatingorganizations are outlined inAnnex 1. 13. Selection of Authors andReview Editors The Bureau shall select Coordinating Lead Authors, Lead Authors and Review Editors for each chapter from those experts nominatedby governments and participating organizations. The composition of the group shall reflect the needto aim for a range of views, expertise, gender and geographical representation, taking into account local and institutional knowledge. The CoordinatingLeadAuthors and LeadAuthors may enlist other experts as Contributing Authors to assist intheir work. At the earliest opportunity, the Secretariat shall informthe Panel andparticipating organizations of the Coordinating LeadAuthors and LeadAuthors responsible for each chapter. 14. Preparation of Draft Report 96 Coordinating Lead Authors and LeadAuthors should undertake preparationo f the first draft o f the Report. Local and institutionalknowledgeshouldbeusedas appropriate. Expertswho wishto contribute local and institutional knowledge for consideration inthe first draft should submit it directly to the LeadAuthors. Contributionsof institutional knowledge shouldbe supported as far as possible with references from thepeer reviewedand internationally available literature, includingselectednon-peer review manuscripts that can be made available for review according to Annex 2. Institutionalknowledge that i s notpublishedmay only be included ifits inclusion i s fully justifiedinthe context ofthe IAASTDprocess. Clear indicationso fhow to access the latter should be included. 15. Review Three general principles should govern the reviewprocess o f the Report, which should include the most recent scientific, technical and social findings as comprehensively as possible: (a) Circulation should aim to involve as many experts as possible, with particular attention to independent experts (not involved inthe preparation of the chapter) from developed countries, developingcountries, and countries with economies intransition; (b) The reviewshouldbeobjective, open andtransparent; and (c) Appropriate experts shouldreviewlocal and institutionalknowledge. Firstand SecondDrafts: The drafts should becirculatedto all reviewerssubmittedby governments and other participatingorganizations, as well as those suggestedby the Bureau, noting the need for a range o f views, expertise, and geographical representation. Drafts shouldbe sent to eachgovernment andparticipating organization Focal Point. Coordinating LeadAuthors, inconsultation with the ReviewEditors and the Secretariat, may supplementthe draft revisionsprocesswith awider meetingofprincipal LeadAuthors and expert reviewers, iftime and fundingpermit, inorder to pay special attention to particular points where major differences exist. Expertreviewersshouldprovide comments to the appropriate LeadAuthors with a copy to the government or participatingorganization Focal Point. Each government and each participating organization should send one integrated set of comments. 16. Preparation of final draft The Coordinating LeadAuthors and LeadAuthors inconsultationwith the ReviewEditors should prepare the final draft Report. Government and expert comments shouldbe consideredin this final draft. Ifnecessary, andiftime and finances permit, awider meetingwithCoordinating LeadAuthors and LeadAuthors and expert and government reviewersmay be heldinorder to attend to particular areas where there are major scientific differences. It i s important that the Report describe different (possibly controversial) scientific, technical, and socio-economic views on a subject, particularly ifthey are relevant to apolicy debate. The final draft should credit all CoordinatingLeadAuthors, LeadAuthors, Contributing Authors, reviewers and Review Editors byname and affiliation at the end of the Report text. 17. Approval and acceptanceof Summaries for Decision Makers Summary sections ofthe Report acceptedbythe Panel will comprise the Global and Sub-global Summariesfor DecisionMakers. Itshouldbe subject to simultaneous review byboth experts and governments and to a final line-by-line approvalby a session o f the Plenary. The Global and Subglobal Summaries for Decision Makers should be prepared concurrently with the main Report. 97 Approval of the Summariesfor Decision Makers signifies that they are consistent with the factual material contained inthe Report. Coordinating LeadAuthors may be asked to provide technical assistance inensuring the documents are consistent. The Summaries for Decision Makers should be formally andprominentlydescribed as: "Report o fthe InternationalAssessment on Agricultural Scienceand Technology for Development." Annex 1: Tasksand responsibilitiesfor IAASTDLeadAuthors, CoordinatingLead Authors,ContributingAuthors, ExpertReviewers andReview EditorsandFocalPoints 1. Lead Authors Function: Responsible for the production of designated sections o f the global and subglobal assessments based on the best scientific and technical information available. Comment: LeadAuthors will typically work ingroups that have the responsibility for ensuring that the various components of their section are broughttogether on time, are o f uniformly highquality, and conform to any overall standardso f style set for the document as a whole. The task o f LeadAuthors i s a demanding one and inrecognition o f this, the names of Lead Authors will appearprominently inthe final Report. Duringthe final stages o f Report preparation, when the workload i s oftenheavy and Lead Authors are heavily dependent upon eachother to read and edit material, and to agreeto changespromptly, it is essential that the work shouldbe accorded the highest priority. The essence o f the LeadAuthors' task i s the synthesis of relevant material. LeadAuthors, in conjunction with Review Editors, are also requiredto take into account expert and government review comments. LeadAuthors musthave the proven ability to develop text that i s scientifically and technically sound and that represents, to the extent that this i s possible, contributions by a wide variety o f experts. The ability to complete work by deadlines i s critical. LeadAuthors are requiredto record inthe Report views that cannot be reconciled with a consensusview but that are nonethelessscientifically or technically valid. LeadAuthors may convene meetings with ContributingAuthors, as appropriate, inthe preparations o f their section or to discuss expert or government review comments, subject to budget availability. The names of all LeadAuthors will be acknowledged inthe Report. 2. Coordinating LeadAuthors Function: Overall responsibility for a chapter. Comment: Coordinating LeadAuthors will function as LeadAuthors and ensure that the Chapter o f the Report for which they areresponsible i s completedto a highstandard ina timely manner and in conformance with style requirements. Coordinating Lead Authors will play a leadingrole in ensuring the coordination of crosscutting scientific andtechnical issues acrossdifferent chapters so the report is complete, coherent and reflects the latest information available. It i s essential that Coordinating LeadAuthors have organizational skills as well as the skills andresourcesrequired o f LeadAuthors. The names o f Coordinating LeadAuthors will be acknowledged inthe Report. 3. Contributing Authors Function: 98 Prepare technical informationinthe form of text, graphs, or data for assimilationby Lead Authors. Comment: Inputfrom awiderange ofcontributors will becritical to the success o fthe Report. Contributions should be supported with referencesfrom the peer reviewedand internationally available literature ifpossible. For materialthat does not fit into these categories, copies must be provided to the Secretariat with clear instructions onhow to access the material. Institutional knowledge will be supplemented as appropriate with localknowledge. 4. Reviewers Function: To comment on the accuracy, balance and completeness ofthe scientific and technical content. Comment: Reviewers for local and institutional knowledge will comment according to their ownknowledge and experience. 5. Review Editors Function: Will assist inidentifying reviewers, ensurethat all substantive expert and government review comments are givenappropriate consideration, advise lead authors on how to handle contentious/controversial issues and ensure genuine controversies are adequately reflectedinthe text o fthe Report. Comment: Inorder to carryoutthesetasks, typically oneortwoReviewEditorswithabroadunderstanding of the wider scientific and technical issues will be required. Although responsibility for the final text remains with the LeadAuthors, Review Editors will needto ensure that where significant differences o f opinion remain, such differences are described inan annex to the Report. 6. Government and ParticipatingOrganization Focal Points Function: To nominate experts as requiredto prepare andreviewthe global and sub-global assessment reports and to provide integrated comments on the accuracy, balance, and completeness o f the scientific andor technical content. Comment: Government review will typically be carried out within andbetween a number o f Departments and Ministries often with assistance o f the academic community. For administrative convenience, each government andparticipatingorganization should designate one Focal Point for all Assessment activities, provide full information on contact coordinates for this personto the Assessment Secretariat and notify the Secretariat o f any changes inthis information. The Focal Point should liaise with the Assessment Secretariat regarding the logistics o f the review process. Annex 2: Proceduresfor usingnon-publishedhon-peerreviewedsourcesinthe Assessment Report 1.Responsibilities of Coordinating, Lead and Contributing Authors Authors who wish to include information from a non-publishednon-peer reviewed source are requestedto: a. Critically assess any source. Each chapter team should reviewthe quality o f the material and the validity o f the source. 99 b. Sendone copy of eachunpublishedor non-refereed source to the CoordinatingLead Authors, including the following information: Title Author(s) English-language executive summary or abstract, if sourcenot writteninEnglish Names and contact information for 1to 2 people who canbe contacted for more information about the source. 2. Responsibilities of Review Editors: The Review Editorswill ensure that these sources are selected and usedina consistent manner across the Report. 3. Responsibilities of theAssessment Secretariat: The Secretariatwill store the complete sets o f indexed, non-published sourcesand sendcopies to reviewers who request them. 4. Treatment in Report: The reference sectionsofthe Report will containboth sourcesthat have beenpeer reviewed and those that have not beenpeer reviewed.Ifthe source was not peer reviewed, a note will indicate that this i s the case andwill provide details on how to access the material. 100 MAP SECTION