RESEARCH TURAL Research for Sustainable Development: From Words to Action AGRICUL TIONAL INTERNA ON GROUP TIVE A T Annual Report 2002 CONSUL Tribute to CGIAR Partners The year 2002 will be remembered as the Year of the Summits. At diverse fora and locales, the international community coalesced around a set of critical themes such as the challenges of financing development, reducing hunger and promoting sustainable development. The con- sensus emerging from the summits was unequivocal: partnerships are key to reducing poverty, hunger and environmental degradation -- the global challenges that are integrally linked to the research-for-development efforts of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). The reports presented in this document demonstrate how the CGIAR alliance is helping to fulfill the objectives of the 2002 summits by mobilizing agricultural science to reduce poverty, foster human well-being, promote agricultural growth and protect the environment. We take this opportunity to acknowledge the support of our partners representing the public and private sectors, civil society and farmer groups, and the broader scientific and academic community in industrialized and developing countries. Our achievements and positive impacts would simply not be possible without their unstinting support. African Development Bank Indonesia Pakistan Arab Fund for Economic Inter-American Peru and Social Development Development Bank Philippines Asian Development Bank International Development Portugal Australia Research Centre Rockefeller Foundation Austria International Fund for Romania Bangladesh Agricultural Development Russian Federation Belgium Islamic Republic of Iran South Africa Brazil Ireland Spain Canada Israel Sweden China Italy Switzerland Colombia Japan Syngenta Foundation for Commission of the Kellogg Foundation Sustainable Agriculture European Community Kenya Syrian Arab Republic Côte d'Ivoire Republic of Korea Thailand Denmark Luxembourg Uganda Arab Republic of Egypt Malaysia United Kingdom Finland Mexico United Nations Food and Agriculture Morocco Development Programme Organization of the Netherlands United Nations United Nations New Zealand Environment Programme Ford Foundation Nigeria United States of America France Norway World Bank Germany OPEC Fund for India International Development Table of Contents CGIAR at a Glance: Mobilizing Agricultural Science 3 CGIAR and the Summits: Agriculture at the Heart of the Development Agenda 4 Message from the Chairman and Director: From Words to Action 5 Year of the Summits 2002: The Third Phase by Nitin Desai 8 The FAO­CGIAR Partnership: Together Against Hunger, Poverty and Environmental Degradation by Jacques Diouf 10 The New Morocco­CGIAR Alliance: High Expectations to Meet Pressing Needs by Hamid Narjisse 12 Board Chairs and Center Directors: Close Consultation Ensures Understanding and Trust 13 The Future Harvest Centers of the CGIAR 15 Expanding Partnerships in 2002 Recovery From Conflict and Disaster: Partnerships for Rebuilding Agriculture 34 Challenge Programs: New Partnerships for Development Impact 35 Global Conservation Trust: Taking Biodiversity to the Bank 36 Awarding Excellence: Nothing Succeeds Like Success 37 Executive Summary of the 2002 CGIAR Financial Results 39 Who's Who in the CGIAR in 2002 50 Acronyms and Abbreviations 56 2 CGIAR at a Glance: Mobilizing Agricultural Science 3 The Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) is a strategic alliance of countries, international and regional organizations, and private foundations supporting 16 international agricultural research Centers that work with national agricultural research systems, the private sector and civil society. The alliance mobilizes agricultural science to reduce poverty, foster human well-being, promote agricultural growth, and protect the environment. More than 8,500 CGIAR scientists and other staff Major reforms designed to mobilize science, extend the members in over 130 countries work within the CGIAR alliance, streamline governance and maximize impact on alliance. Their research addresses every critical compo- issues of global significance are gaining ground and yield- nent of the agricultural sector, including agroforestry, ing benefits. The innovative Challenge Program initiative biodiversity, food, forage and tree crops, environment- is designed to address such important regional and global friendly farming techniques, fisheries, forestry, livestock, issues as combating the micronutrient deficiencies that food policies and agricultural research services. afflict more than 3 billion people and addressing freshwater Specifically, the research targets the special needs, crops scarcity by improving water-use efficiency in agriculture. and ecologies of poor farming communities worldwide. Challenge Programs are facilitating collaborative research and helping to mobilize knowledge, technology and The CGIAR has five areas of focus: resources. Increasing productivity of crops, livestock, fisheries, forests and the natural resource base; > CGIAR RESEARCH SPECIFICALLY TARGETS THE SPECIAL Strengthening national systems through joint NEEDS, CROPS AND ECOLOGIES OF POOR FARMING research, policy support, training and knowledge-shar- COMMUNITIES WORLDWIDE ing; Protecting the environment by developing new tech- The CGIAR alliance is open to all countries and organiza- nologies that make more prudent use of land, water tions sharing a commitment to a common research agenda and nutrients and help reduce the adverse impacts of and willing to invest financial support and human and agriculture on ecosystems; technical resources. In 2002, Israel, Malaysia, Morocco Saving biodiversity by collecting, characterizing and and the Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture conserving genetic resources (the CGIAR holds in pub- joined the alliance, whose membership is poised to grow lic trust some of the world's largest seed collections, further. which are freely available to all); and Improving policies that affect agriculture, food, CGIAR contributions totaled $357 million in 2002 -- the health, the spread of new technologies, and the man- single-largest investment in mobilizing science to generate agement and conservation of natural resources. public goods for the benefit of poor farming communities worldwide. C G I A R A T A G L A N C E : M O B I L I Z I N G A G R I C U L T U R A L S C I E N C E CGIAR and the Summits: Agriculture at the Heart of the Development Agenda The summits of 2002 focused the world's attention on the development challenges confronting the human family and offered a road map for achieving sustainable development. Prominent 4 among the outcomes was the recognition accorded agriculture and rural development as the twin pillars central to the agenda for sustainable development. Recognizing the important, agenda-setting function of the summits, the CGIAR adopted a proactive stance, working closely with the United Nations system and other partners. A small CGIAR task force led by the International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI) and chaired by Coosje Hoogendoorn, IPGRI deputy director general for programs, coordinated the System's presence at these key events. CGIAR engagement and contributions included providing technical inputs and par- ticipating in deliberations, preparatory committee meetings and plenary sessions. The focus through- out was to demonstrate the beneficial impacts of new, science-based agricultural technologies specifically adapted to the crops, ecologies and development needs of poor farmers -- benefits that foster economic growth that is environmentally friendly and socially responsible. > WATER. ENERGY. HEALTH. AGRICULTURE. BIODIVERSITY. FIVE AREAS IN WHICH PROGRESS IS POSSIBLE WITH THE RESOURCES AND TECHNOLOGIES AT OUR DISPOSAL TODAY. FIVE AREAS IN WHICH PROGRESS WOULD OFFER ALL HUMAN BEINGS A CHANCE OF ACHIEVING PROSPERITY THAT WILL NOT ONLY LAST THEIR OWN LIFETIME, BUT CAN BE ENJOYED BY THEIR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN TOO. -- KOFI ANNAN, UNITED NATIONS SECRETARY-GENERAL, MAY 2002 The benefits of these efforts were tangible. Whether the spotlight was on the need for sustainable financing as in Monterrey, or on the call for redoubling efforts to combat the scourge of hunger as in Rome, or on charting the way forward for achieving sustainable development as in Johannesburg, the multifaceted contributions of science-based agricultural development figured prominently at the summits. In addition, the CGIAR System is an active and contributing partner to the range of sum- mit follow-up activities that are underway. C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H Message from the Chairman and Director: From Words to Action 5 Several summits in 2002 explored the challenges and opportunities of international development. These summits serve as the backdrop to this annual report. We are honored to include contributions from distinguished members of the CGIAR partnership. Jacques Diouf, director-general of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), a CGIAR Cosponsor, developed the concept of a World Food Summit. Nitin Desai was secretary-general of the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg. Hamid Narjisse is the representative to the CGIAR from Morocco, which joined the alliance in 2002. Updated information from CGIAR-supported Centers, and the System's financial data, round out the contents of this report. The challenges of poverty, hunger and environmental the $1-per-day poverty line by 6.25 million. Improved degradation define the international development agenda. income is only the beginning. The evidence is clear that Over a billion human beings continue to live in absolute a thriving agricultural sector helps to enhance the well- poverty -- on less than a dollar per day. An additional 2 being of people in many ways: improved nutrition and billion exist on less than $2 per day. But poverty is not health, better education and social empowerment, and only a matter of low incomes. The poor lack decent shel- greatly expanded opportunities for participating in ter, clothing, education and nutrition. They lack access to economic growth. social and political participation. The world cannot stand idly by while these conditions persist. The necessary caution is that agricultural development that is environmentally harmful creates a new set of > IT IS ENCOURAGING THAT THE CENTRALITY OF AGRICULTURE AS A COMPONENT OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IS ENJOYING RENEWED FOCUS IN PUBLIC POLICY No country has been successful in fighting the many dimensions of poverty without the underpinnings of eco- nomic growth linked with poverty-reduction policies and programs. Agricultural growth is the starting point of eco- nomic growth in most developing countries because agri- culture (encompassing crops, livestock, fisheries and forestry) is the single most important sector of their economies. An increase in crop yield of 1 percent in the Ian Johnson poorest countries can reduce the numbers living under CGIAR Chairman M E S S A G E F R O M T H E C H A I R M A N A N D D I R E C T O R : F R O M W O R D S T O A C T I O N Francisco Reifschneider presents the CGIAR Annual Report 2001 to Sudesh P. Singh, a Rice-Wheat Consortium farmer in India. 6 problems that can offset the gains. Biodiversity, crop- lands, fish stocks, forests and water resources are already > A RANGE OF AGRICULTURAL ISSUES -- BIODIVERSITY, FOOD under threat. These trends must be reversed. Thus, agri- SECURITY, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS, NATURAL cultural development and effective management of natural RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, NUTRITION, PRODUCTIVITY AND resources are complementary and have to be treated as two aspects of a single endeavor: achieving sustainable TRADE -- FIGURED PROMINENTLY AT THE WORLD SUMMIT ON development. Agricultural research committed to generat- SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN JOHANNESBURG ing public goods can create new knowledge, thereby engendering new science-based technologies for achieving the sustainable agricultural productivity that supports Because of its all-encompassing approach, the most far- robust, equitable development. reaching of the summits was the Johannesburg Summit 2002 -- the World Summit on Sustainable Development. The CGIAR is encouraged, therefore, that the centrality of In preparation for that event, UN Secretary-General Kofi agriculture as a component of sustainable development is Annan launched what came to be known as the WEHAB enjoying renewed focus in public policy. This process initiative for the five areas in which it calls for urgent began at the Rio Earth Summit, the landmark United and integrated action: water, energy, health, agriculture Nations Conference on Environment and Development of and biodiversity. CGIAR-supported research positively 1992. Rio produced a new paradigm of environmentally affects all of them, so it is not surprising that a CGIAR and socially sustainable development founded upon inter- contribution figured prominently in the framework paper national conventions on biodiversity, climate change and for action on agriculture presented in Johannesburg as desertification. part of the WEHAB initiative. The CGIAR was, in fact, very much engaged in preparations for the summit and was The Millennium Development Goals renewed the goals of actively and capably represented in Johannesburg. The the Rio Earth Summit, while the Monterrey Consensus impact of the outstanding research carried out by CGIAR- (2002) laid the foundation for a new development partner- supported Centers drew many favorable references. ship in a number of areas including trade, official develop- ment assistance, domestic savings and debt reduction. A range of agricultural issues -- biodiversity, food security, intellectual property rights, natural resource management, The World Food Summit: five years later (2002) reaffirmed nutrition, productivity and trade -- figured prominently the goal adopted at the World Food Summit (1996) of in Johannesburg. Participants reaffirmed the critical halving the number of the world's hungry by 2015. The importance of agriculture, adopting targets and timetables Summit Declaration made specific reference to the CGIAR's for action on a number of fronts. These include reducing research-for-development efforts. biodiversity loss by 2010, restoring depleted fisheries by C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H 7 2015, halving the proportion of people without access to The CGIAR has approved two Challenge Programs as clean water or sanitation by 2015 and, by 2020, producing pilots; Water and Food is already in development, as is and using only those chemicals that do not harm human Biofortified Crops for Improved Human Nutrition. A third health or the environment. program, Unlocking Genetic Diversity in Crops for the Resource Poor, is under review. A fourth, led by the The CGIAR is ready to confront the complex challenges regional Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa, has of the present and future. Our ongoing reform program been endorsed for full preparation. is yielding benefits. The inclusion in 2002 of Israel, Malaysia, Morocco and the Syngenta Foundation for > AGRICULTURAL GROWTH IS THE STARTING POINT OF Sustainable Agriculture considerably strengthened the ECONOMIC GROWTH IN MOST DEVELOPING COUNTRIES CGIAR alliance. A new Science Council is being estab- lished to ensure that CGIAR science continues to meet the highest international standards for quality and And so we move on, from words to action. We thank all relevance. The new Challenge Programs are broadening those who have already joined the CGIAR and warmly research partnerships, aligning CGIAR research more welcome new partners who are considering joining the directly for achieving Millennium Development Goals. alliance. Together, we can turn even the most difficult Finally, streamlined governance and nimbler decision- challenges into creative opportunities for science-based making are providing value to CGIAR stakeholders, while solutions that have lasting, beneficial impacts on people's increasing the overall effectiveness of the System. lives and our environment. Highlights of the efforts by CGIAR Centers to design and implement programs consistent with the summits' priori- ties are spelled out in this annual report. Additionally, Ian Johnson the Challenge Programs, which the CGIAR has embraced to CGIAR Chairman target issues of global significance, received recognition at the Johannesburg Summit as an innovative and effec- Francisco J.B. Reifschneider tive form of development partnership. Challenge Programs CGIAR Director are conceived and fleshed out in collaboration with scien- tists in the national agricultural research institutes of developing countries, advanced research institutes, and other stakeholders representing the public and private sectors, civil society and farmer groups. M E S S A G E F R O M T H E C H A I R M A N A N D D I R E C T O R : F R O M W O R D S T O A C T I O N Year of the Summits 2002: The Third Phase by Nitin Desai, Secretary-General, World Summit on Sustainable Development 8 The summits and conferences of the last decade succeeded in making socioeconomic development a central concern of national and international policy frameworks. There was a global consensus to focus policies related to finance, investment, trade and the environment on improving the plight of the poor. This could be called the first phase of the process of building a global consensus on the shared objectives of sustainable development. The second phase was the Millennium Summit, which turned this consensus into goals and time-bound frame- works backed by the highest level of political commitment. The third phase started in 2002, which featured three tion to the forefront of the multilateral agenda. This also important meetings: the International Conference on helped in paving the way for forging close cooperation Financing for Development, in Monterrey, Mexico, in between the United Nations and the Bretton Woods insti- March; the World Food Summit: five years later, in Rome, tutions (World Bank and International Monetary Fund). Italy, in June; and the World Summit on Sustainable Second, the decade provided a substantive framework for Development, in Johannesburg, South Africa, in August international cooperation and refining a multilateral system and September. These were preceded by another signifi- of finance and trade. Today, the goals of international cant meeting, that of the World Trade Organization (WTO) trade negotiation can no longer be framed simply in terms in Doha, Qatar, in November 2001, which led to the of liberalization but must also consider their contribution launch of a development trade round and marked a turn- to promoting development and reducing disparities among ing point in the trade liberalization. The third phase -- nations. Third, the decade engaged civil society, activist beginning with the Year of the Summits -- in some ways groups, businesses, cooperatives, trade unions and other signaled the move from promise to performance, from relevant actors on an unprecedented scale. words to action. While the three phases are somewhat diffuse, there are > THE YEAR OF THE SUMMITS SIGNALED THE MOVE FROM some significant features that signify new steps toward PROMISE TO PERFORMANCE, FROM WORDS TO ACTION the goal of sustainable development and poverty eradica- tion. The decade of the UN summits and conferences started in June 1992 with the Conference on Environment The second phase of this process was the consolidation and Development in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, which set the of these efforts. At the turn of the millennium, the stage for lending visibility and credibility to efforts to Millennium Summit in New York achieved this goal by improve the plight of the poor while conserving the natu- providing a fairly comprehensive development agenda ral resource base. This decade achieved, among other with well-defined goals and targets. The Millennium things, three main objectives. First, it brought the issues Development Goals have proved to be very effective tools of socioeconomic development and environmental protec- for galvanizing the world community into action. C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H Against this backdrop, the three summits of 2002 and the Sustainable Development focused on programmatic issues WTO meeting in Doha set the stage for the third phase, of development per se. which is the phase of implementation. How did these summits contribute to setting in motion the era of action The World Food Summit: five years later focused primarily and implementation? on implementing the central target of the 1996 World Food Summit: to halve the number of undernourished and Doha set the stage by putting development at the center hungry people by no later than 2015. The summit of the trade negotiations. There were clear commitments renewed its political commitment for achieving this target to giving priority to the interests of developing countries and pledged to increase public investment in agriculture and to realizing the benefits of trade liberalization and rural development for the Food and Agricultural envisaged at the time of the Uruguay Round of trade Organization's new Anti-Hunger Program launched in June negotiations. The promise of a development round of 2002. This recommitment to alleviate hunger was a sig- 9 trade negotiations made at Doha not only recognized nificant contribution toward achieving the Millennium the crucial role of trade in development, but also reaf- Development Goals. firmed the importance of a multilateral approach to trade liberalization. However, progress in realizing the The World Summit on Sustainable Development addressed commitments has not been very encouraging, and the the whole question of ends and means with special focus upcoming meeting of the WTO in Cancún, Mexico, in on implementing the Rio vision on sustainable develop- September 2003 holds the key to maintaining momentum ment, as it has been enriched by the subsequent decade in this third phase of our work. of conferences. It added a new, practical dimension to the Rio vision by specifying targets and timetables in critical The results of the International Conference on Financing areas. A 10-year framework of programs to change unsus- for Development are groundbreaking in more ways than tainable patterns of consumption and production includes one. The secretary-general of the United Nations referred specific programs on chemicals, sanitation, energy, biodi- to the Monterrey Conference as a "turning point in the versity and fisheries. Agricultural productivity is one of quest for economic and social progress, which has been the main areas of focus, as it is key to achieving the high on the agenda of the UN from its earliest days." Millennium Development Goals. Monterrey marks a sea change on the macroeconomic pol- icy front, in particular with respect to the relationship Johannesburg also made another important groundbreak- between the United Nations, international financial insti- ing contribution to the move from words to action, and tutions and the WTO. These institutions are all working that was the launching of partnerships. These partner- toward one end, which is coherence and consistency ships mark a new way of involving major groups and between development goals and the objectives to be other relevant actors in the process of implementation. achieved through macroeconomic policies. Moreover, the The Rio Conference opened the door for civil society, and Monterrey Consensus provides a new compact between the Johannesburg Summit has paved new avenues for developed and developing countries based on partnership practical cooperation among all actors. and mutual responsibility. Johannesburg has also generated new momentum for The Monterrey Conference also resulted in pledges by achieving concrete goals in some critical areas by involv- donors to increase development assistance that could ing the actors who really matter on the ground. A partner- amount as much as $12­13 billion in new, additional ship like the CGIAR could serve as a model for launching resources by 2006. This is a major step forward in terms initiatives in the areas of energy, water and sanitation. of providing the means for achieving the agreed ends for sustainable development and poverty eradication. The Year of the Summits has created new opportunities for realizing the vision that came out of the decade of While Doha and Monterrey dealt with the macroeconomic the summits. Availing ourselves of these opportunities policy framework for pursuing development, the World demands enhanced global cooperation, strengthened Food Summit: five year later and the World Summit on mutlilateralism and broad-based participation. Y E A R O F T H E S U M M I T S 2 0 0 2 : T H E T H I R D P H A S E The FAO­CGIAR Partnership: Together Against Hunger, Poverty and Environmental Degradation by Jacques Diouf, Director-General, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 10 The roles that agricultural research and rural development play in alleviating hunger and poverty are recently gaining ever greater attention and momentum. International events such as the World Food Summit in 1996 and the World Food Summit: five years later (WFS:fyl) in 2002 made important contributions in this respect. The WFS:fyl called on the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), in conjunction with the CGIAR and other international research institutes, to advance agricultural research. Proven new technolo- gies, including biotechnology, should be introduced in a safe manner and adapted to local conditions to help improve agricultural productivity in developing countries. The aim of both the WFS:fyl and the World Summit on Information is a powerful weapon against poverty and Sustainable Development (WSSD), as documented in the hunger. FAO's World Agricultural Information Centre and Johannesburg Plan of Implementation, is to eliminate the the CGIAR have developed the Information Finder service suffering of extreme poverty. This is the major challenge to help disseminate CGIAR research outputs, documenta- facing humanity and the sine qua non of sustainable tion and a variety of electronic data through the FAO Web development. Both events recognized the importance of pages. agriculture in that effort. Sustainable agriculture, rural development and forest management, integrated land and > THE FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION AND THE water resource management, mountain development, and CGIAR ARE DEEPLY ENGAGED TOGETHER IN A BROAD AND conservation of agrobiodiversity emerged as key contribu- VARIED SET OF ACTIVITIES RESPONDING TO SUMMIT tions to poverty reduction and rural livelihoods. PRIORITIES FAO cooperates with the CGIAR and its 16 Centers to achieve common development goals. That cooperation not Attacking poverty requires solid knowledge of its geo- only supports general science, but is also of a specific, graphic distribution. Together with the United Nations substantive nature. A continuing goal of both organiza- Environment Programme and the CGIAR, FAO initiated a tions is to achieve and maintain the highest possible poverty-mapping project to address this problem, intro- standards in the quality and relevance of science for ducing a spatial component to poverty statistics by incor- development. The former Technical Advisory Committee porating geographic information systems and spatial (TAC) of the CGIAR, soon to be replaced by the new analysis tools. Spatial parameters are also important for Science Council, contributes to ensuring the relevance understanding correlations of poverty with environmental and quality of science in the System and advises on factors. strategic scientific issues relevant to its goal and mission. FAO has hosted the Secretariat of TAC for many years and The Global System for the Conservation and Utilization of interacted closely with it on a number of activities. Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture is another C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H 11 area of major collaboration. It includes joint monitoring FAO is a partner with several Centers in the of the Global Plan of Action, information sharing and early Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management in warning systems. The International Treaty on Plant Genetic Agriculture and is, like the International Water Resources for Food and Agriculture has posed a serious Management Institute of the CGIAR, one of the 10 mem- challenge to both FAO and the CGIAR. Collaboration also bers of the steering committee of the Dialogue on Water, includes crop improvement and integrated pest manage- Food and Environment, which aims to find solutions to ment programs. the worsening problem of water scarcity and competition for this vital resource. FAO units are in continual contact > COOPERATION BETWEEN THE FOOD AND AGRICULTURE with Centers for specific activities dealing with irrigation technologies and planning, groundwater use in agricul- ORGANIZATION AND THE CGIAR NOT ONLY SUPPORTS GENERAL ture, rice-fish farming and gender issues. SCIENCE, BUT IS ALSO OF A SPECIFIC, SUBSTANTIVE NATURE In short, FAO and the CGIAR are deeply engaged together FAO is working closely with a number of Centers on initia- in a broad and varied set of activities responding to the tives such as the Global Conservation Trust, Global call of the WFS:fyl and the WSSD to advance agricultural Cassava Development Strategy, and International Rice research and technology -- and their use to build a more Commission, whose secretariats are hosted by FAO. And food-secure world. The already extensive cooperation FAO is the lead agency for the International Year of Rice between FAO and the CGIAR will likely continue to grow 2004. A number of the Centers also participate in FAO's in the future. Special Programme for Food Security. T H E F A O ­ C G I A R P A R T N E R S H I P The New Morocco­CGIAR Alliance: High Expectations to Meet Pressing Needs by Hamid Narjisse, Director, National Agricultural Research Institute, Morocco 12 Morocco is currently facing social and economic challenges that have arisen as a result of the country's com- mitment to expanding its market economy and forging free trade agreements with many foreign partners. These multifaceted challenges, while planting the seeds of progress and more competitive production systems, are also a source of concern to policymakers. This is because they threaten the nation's food security and social stability and cohesion, especially in the poor rural poor communities that rely primarily on agriculture for their livelihood. Agriculture continues to provide the main source of research organizations including CGIAR-supported Centers. income for over 40 percent of Moroccans and contributes INRA has already enjoyed fruitful and mutually beneficial on average 13 percent to the annual gross national prod- collaborations with the International Center for uct. While the Moroccan agricultural export sector is in Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas, International general adequately developed, many Moroccan farmers are Maize and Wheat Improvement Center, International Plant still small holders dependent upon very low-performing Genetic Resources Institute, and International Service for farming systems, mostly in marginal areas. These systems National Agricultural Research. Through its new member- generate enormous problems for poverty alleviation and ship in the CGIAR, it aims to strengthen existing relation- environmental conservation. ships and establish new ones with other Centers that share common interests. Central to meeting the formidable challenges facing Moroccan agriculture is to increase its competitiveness. INRA-Morocco is dedicated to expanding its participation This will require new technologies, new partnerships and in the global system for agricultural research. Morocco's effective delivery systems to improve productivity and diversity of farming systems and ecosystems, and its rich rural income and to manage natural resources in a sus- biological diversity, offer a wealth of research possibilities tainable way. As the mandate of the National Agricultural and constitute, without doubt, a significant research Research Institute (INRA by its French acronym) is to asset. The Moroccan scientific community is willing to generate, adapt and validate technologies related to crops share its resources with its CGIAR partners and to engage and livestock, it is well positioned to lead the battle to in collaborative research programs. INRA strongly believes raise productivity in Moroccan agriculture, enhance food that the time is right for a concerted effort to develop security and reduce poverty in rural areas. efficient South-to-South and South-to-North research collaboration with the aim of launching a new green To enhance its effectiveness -- and to make the most of revolution and thereby expanding opportunities for poor Morocco's comparative advantages, and those of its part- farming communities. The CGIAR alliance can play an ners, to help the country achieve international levels of instrumental role in catalyzing and facilitating progress agricultural productivity, quality and efficiency -- INRA is toward achieving this ambitious objective. seeking partnerships with international agricultural C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H Board Chairs and Center Directors: Close Consultation Ensures Understanding and Trust 13 The Committee of Board Chairs is a valuable source of wisdom, experience and advice for the CGIAR System. It acts as custodian of the System's resources and provides the framework through which constructive changes in strategies and policies are legitimized and implemented. The Committee is also a catalyst to ensure the neces- sarily diverse approaches of the Centers align along uniform principles and goals. As arguably the leading agent of change responsible for While the Centers continue to respond to change and the effectiveness and efficiency in the System, the Committee challenges that lie ahead, the Committee monitors devel- of Board Chairs actively contributed to the continuing opments to ensure that the diversity of mandates and CGIAR reform program throughout 2002. The Committee operations among the Centers is not threatened. The syn- commenced reviewing the selection processes of board ergies that are now emerging through the Challenge and members with the aim of securing the best possible mix Systemwide Programs are the direct result of the diversity of skills and experience; reviewing Center grievance pro- that exists among Centers. Only by maintaining diversity cedures and developing model guidelines; and analyzing can synergies create new results and impacts. changes occurring in the System while assessing opportu- nities for improving Center effectiveness and facilitating And, finally, in this year of international summits, many cooperation among Centers and partner­Center linkages. of the Centers made major contributions to the enlarge- ment of international policy on agriculture and poverty. On all these issues we work in close consultation with the The diversity of mandates, skills and capacities that exists Center Directors Committee to ensure that understanding across the CGIAR Centres and their partners equips them and trust between management and governance is encour- to make a major impact wherever knowledge is needed to aged across the System. The Committee also offers advice create solutions to the problems of poverty, hunger and to the chairman and director of the CGIAR through regu- environmental degradation. The challenge ahead is for the lar contact and correspondence. The roles and responsibil- Centers to transform the words generated by the summits ities of Committee of Board Chairs are outlined in detail into cohesive action. on the CGIAR Web site at www.cgiar.org. John Vercoe, Chair, Committee of Board Chairs C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H In 2002, the Center Directors Committee (CDC) recognized the fast pace of reform in the CGIAR System and emphasized improving efficiency and effectiveness in its own operations. It embarked on a path of renewal to develop more strategic approaches to serving the vision, goals and operating ambitions of the System. The CDC recognized that each of the major pillars of opportunity to propose that portions of the World Bank reform in the CGIAR means new ways of doing business contribution to CGIAR core funding be allocated to support for the CDC and the Centers. some of the programs. The creation of the Executive Council (ExCo) in 2001 has > EACH OF THE MAJOR PILLARS OF REFORM IN THE CGIAR sped up CGIAR processes, and the CDC is learning to MEANS NEW WAYS OF DOING BUSINESS contribute more effectively as a member of ExCo. The Challenge Programs are elevating the game in terms 14 of the research program and bringing about a leap in Among the more contentious and often polarized issues the extent and complexity of partnerships linking the touching the work of all Centers, albeit in different ways, Centers, national agricultural research systems, civil is the development and use of genetically modified organ- society and the private sector. The Centers are develop- isms. For those Centers already working on transgenic prod- ing new codes of conduct to make explicit how they will ucts targeted to contribute to poverty alleviation, these operate in Challenge Programs, including addressing the issues touch on their freedom to operate their complete twin challenges of competition and cooperation that program. The Centers also have interests regarding the role such research programs demand. The Centers are also of genetically modified organisms in policy analysis and addressing the need for new and additional sources of advice (for example in respect of trade, food safety, funding and program support services for such areas as biosafety and standards) and the question of IPR in trans- Challenge Program intellectual property rights (IPR), genic work. Finally, the Centers must assess the different increasingly formal partner relations, research manage- risks and benefits that may apply to genetically modifying ment, financing and public awareness. different types of organisms, such as livestock, fish and The System Office presents the Centers with opportuni- trees, or to using genetic modification to produce vaccines. ties and some housekeeping matters. The CDC recognizes that it must create greater synergy among the units for The CDC is therefore working on how best to present a which it holds sole or joint responsibility. The CDC will common position that also recognizes the different ways in need to define and refine its role in the governance of which the issues touch each Center. The CDC stresses that the System Office and will be an active partner in its the Centers not only have a responsibility to ensure that longer-term development. appropriate and safe biotechnology is directed to address The CDC trusts that defining the shape of the emerging the mission of the CGIAR but also that an important part Science Council will clarify what types of strategic of this responsibility is to keep the products and methods changes it will require of the Centers. in the public domain. The CDC reiterated the importance of resource mobilization The CDC stresses the growing importance of Centers' actively and public awareness to the future success of the System managing IPR to keep results available in the public and supports developing a coordinated, unified strategy in domain. In addition to providing continuing support to the these areas. The CDC will look into the need for more effec- Central Advisory Service on Intellectual Property, several tive information management and communication, and it Centers have employed or regularly use IPR specialists. The will examine the transition to wider ownership of resource Centers recognize that the use and establishment of IPR mobilization and public awareness within the CGIAR System. will be a central issue demanding attention in the suc- cessful implementation of the Challenge Programs. Systemwide and ecoregional programs have been around for about a decade, and many have struggled to get basic sup- Adel El-Beltagy, Chair, Center Directors Committee port. Thus the CDC was delighted to receive in 2002 the C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H 15 The Future Harvest Centers of the CGIAR T H E F U T U R E H A R V E S T C E N T E R S O F T H E C G I A R Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT) Headquarters: Cali, Colombia | www.ciat.cgiar.org A Progressive Science Program for Sustainable Rural Livelihoods 16 The World Summit on Sustainable Development in serve as entry points for broader economic development. Johannesburg signaled the return of agriculture to a cen- Through postharvest handling and processing, for exam- tral place in development programs. Despite debate on ple, farmers and local entrepreneurs can add value to such contentious issues as the effect agricultural subsi- agricultural produce and increase their income. To help dies in industrialized countries have on trade opportuni- farmers learn to compete more effectively in growth mar- ties for the developing world, the summit's message was kets, CIAT has developed an innovative approach toward clear: Sustainable agriculture is vital for achieving food assisting agroenterprise development. security, reducing poverty and protecting the environ- ment, and it is closely linked to other high-priority issues In this approach, local interest groups are formed to such as conserving biodiversity and water resources. identify and analyze new market opportunities, seize the most promising options through integrated projects, and reinforce the support services needed for agroenterprises > EXPERIENCE SHOWS THAT IMPROVED CROPPING SYSTEMS to prosper. One of those services is timely access to infor- DEVELOPED WITH SUPPORT FROM CGIAR CENTERS CAN SERVE mation about prices, technologies, quality standards and AS ENTRY POINTS FOR BROADER ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT so forth. To help build local capacity for creating knowl- edge and providing information services, CIAT is exploring the potential contribution of new information and com- The International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT by munications technologies delivered through rural commu- its Spanish acronym) pursues a progressive program of nity telecenters, in combination with traditional media. research and development that helps farmers build sus- tainable livelihoods, based on competitive agriculture, As new agroenterprises emerge, farmers should have healthy agroecosystems and rural innovation. In close stronger incentives to invest in restoring the soil, water collaboration with national institutions, nongovernmental and biodiversity on which rural livelihoods depend. A organizations and the private sector, Center scientists central challenge is to devise new technologies and employ participatory methods that offer farmers an active approaches that encourage and enable farmers to respond role in building rural agroenterprises, managing soil, to these new incentives. One recent initiative to meet water and pests, and improving cropping systems. By this challenge is the Alliance for Integrated Soil Fertility pursuing its progressive program across Africa, Asia and Management, jointly established by CIAT's Tropical Soil Latin America, CIAT also creates unique opportunities for Biology and Fertility Institute and the World Agroforestry South­South exchanges of technical and social innova- Centre (ICRAF). By combining the research-and-develop- tions in agriculture. ment experience, networks and partnerships of these international institutions, the alliance offers farmers, Experience shows that improved cropping systems devel- especially in Africa, new hope for achieving sustainable oped with support from CIAT and other CGIAR Centers can rural livelihoods. C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) Headquarters: Bogor, Indonesia | www.cifor.org Dialogue Leads to Partnerships in the World's Forests 17 The Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) has forests support rare and endangered animals and plants, played a leading role in establishing two major partner- as well as providing food, materials and shelter for mil- ships that combine governments, businesses and civil lions of people in Cameroon, Central African Republic, society in promoting the sustainable development of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Republic of Congo, world's forests. The Asian Forest Partnership and the Equatorial Guinea and Gabon. Congo Basin Forest Partnership are new agreements sealed in 2002 that work to protect these forest regions and the Bushmeat hunting, unsustainable logging and political people who depend on them. instability threaten the forests of the Congo Basin, prompting CIFOR to join discussions in 2002 that led 29 Asian forests continue to decline, ruining livelihoods and governments, international organizations, and environ- hampering economic growth. Illegal logging persists, fires mental and business interests to form the Congo Basin spread in previously resistant areas, exotic pests impede Forest Partnership. The partners are discussing a long- natural regeneration, and degraded forests languish. term plan to conserve the natural resources of the Congo Basin forests by monitoring and evaluating forest ecosys- Drawing on its long experience in working with forest tems, creating protected forest areas, strengthening people, CIFOR joined The Nature Conservancy and the human capacity and participatory management, assessing governments of Indonesia and Japan to lead the new the worth of the environmental services offered by Asian Forest Partnership, which includes 12 governments, forests, and managing harvested forests. eight intergovernmental organizations, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the International Tropical Timber Organization, and several > THE ASIAN FOREST PARTNERSHIP AND THE CONGO BASIN nongovernmental organizations. The Partnership aims to FOREST PARTNERSHIP WORK TO PROTECT THESE FOREST address the urgent issues of good governance and forest REGIONS AND THE PEOPLE WHO DEPEND ON THEM law enforcement, control of illegal logging and forest fires, and reforestation of degraded lands in Asia. It will operate by increasing cooperation among the govern- Both partnerships are Type 2 outcomes (public­private ments and organizations involved. Much of the work collaborations) of the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable under discussion will build on the foundations of CIFOR's Development designed to maximize impact. As examples earlier work in the region. of words to action, they are major developments in their regions that also serve as global precedents showing how The tropical forests of the Congo Basin in Africa are dialogue can generate augmented resources and higher- among the last large areas of primary forest left in the level commitment from partners and donors. world, second only to those of the Amazon Basin. These T H E F U T U R E H A R V E S T C E N T E R S O F T H E C G I A R Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maiz y Trigo (CIMMYT) Headquarters: Mexico City, Mexico | www.cimmyt.org Connecting People to Save African Lives and Livelihoods 18 The International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center partnerships, and the attention of government officials (CIMMYT by its Spanish acronym) began devising its new and policymakers on soil fertility and the dissemination long-term strategy in 2002. The strategy will help CIMMYT of best bets. Members developed specific fertilizer recom- translate the values endorsed by the summits of 2002 mendations for hybrid maize in Malawi, for example, and into tangible improvements in people's lives. A clear the country's Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation offi- message from the summits is that there is no single path cially released practices for improving soil organic matter. to sustainable development. What are the implications of Members also provided technical input for a multi-donor this message for CIMMYT, a global institution seeking to "starter pack" program for farmers nationwide, which effect change at the local level? Can any of our current increased maize production and -- in a year of acute partnerships signal future directions? hunger -- saved lives. For 8 years, SoilFertNet -- a collective effort to improve Other mechanisms for providing knowledge and inputs soil fertility on small landholdings in southern Africa -- also fostered the use of best bets. Farmer-participatory has assembled a mosaic of approaches and resources to co-learning opportunities are a widespread feature of address a mosaic of local development needs and oppor- SoilFertNet. For example, almost 4,000 farmers in tunities. Developed with the Rockefeller Foundation, Chihota, Zimbabwe, have learned about new soil fertility SoilFertNet is shorthand for the CIMMYT-coordinated Soil practices, and more than 2,300 used one or more of Fertility Management and Policy Network for Maize-Based them. SoilFertNet members also trained private input Farming Systems in Southern Africa (www.soilfertnet- dealers to offer appropriate seed, fertilizer and lime and southernafrica.org). The network has developed, tested to advise smallholders according to their particular needs. and extended best-bet soil fertility practices -- more This training helps rural agribusinesses transfer and sup- efficient use of mineral fertilizers as well as legume rota- port soil fertility technologies. Finally, network members tions, green manures and other organic approaches -- assess constraints to adoption and, when necessary, pro- through partnerships with research and extension servic- mote policy changes. es, farmer groups, and nongovernmental organizations in Malawi, Mozambique, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Beyond An enlightened funding partner has provided extended narrowly improving soil fertility, these practices expand support for the network and mobilized additional research biodiversity in cropping systems, rendering them more resources for members. Current membership surpasses productive and resilient to stresses like drought and 200, mostly from the region but also from the rest of disease, and so broaden livelihood opportunities. Africa and the world. Success comes from design based on Financial and risk analyses have demonstrated the potential local circumstances. The network's integrative approach profitability and sustainability of best-bet options. encourages continued learning and efficiency and makes it a valuable model for CIMMYT to study as it plans for Regarding maize in Malawi and soybeans in Zimbabwe, the future. national commodity task forces have focused resources, C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H Centro Internacional de la Papa (CIP) Headquarters: Lima, Peru | www.cipotato.org New Tools to Crack the Hard Poverty 19 In its battle against poverty, the International Potato Meanwhile, CIP's longstanding partnership called Vitamin Center (CIP by its Spanish acronym) is deploying new A for Africa battled devastating nutrient deficiency by analytical tools, longstanding partnerships and the indis- disseminating vitamin A-rich orange-fleshed sweet pota- pensable collection of crop biodiversity that it holds in toes through the Regional Potato and Sweet Potato trust. Improvement Network for East and Central Africa (PRAPACE by its French acronym). Since its inception 20 years ago, "If we want to crack the really hard poverty in marginal PRAPACE has invested heavily in rural seed production in environments," explained Pamela Anderson, CIP's deputy an effort to deliver improved varieties where they are director general for research, "the next logical step in our needed most. In 2002, more than 1.2 million farmers research agenda is to move from our focus on the field to participated in PRAPACE seed programs through hundreds a broader view of the systems in which those fields are of nongovernmental and community-based organizations. embedded." To this end, CIP is developing new analytical and modeling tools to improve its effectiveness in com- > NOW RESEARCHERS CAN BETTER JUDGE THE POTENTIAL plex, dynamic systems, in particular in the mountains BENEFITS OF TECHNOLOGIES BEFORE COMMITTING RESOURCES that are crucial to the planet's environmental health. TO THEM "The Rio Summit generated the political will to undo hun- dreds of years of mismanagement and neglect," observed The heart of CIP is the root and tuber collection it holds Hugo Li Pun, CIP's deputy director general for corporate in trust. This has allowed the Center to respond quickly development. "Ironically, at the time we didn't really have and effectively to the growing threat of late blight in the the tools to act." The new tools now available will help potato's center of origin. Until recently, late blight was researchers judge the potential benefits of technologies almost unknown in the very high Andes, but now, report- before committing resources to them. For example, CIP ed breeder Maria Scurrah, "The pathogen is moving up the social scientists, working last year in tandem with geo- mountainside." CIP scientists are using materials from the graphic information systems (GIS) specialists and crop genebank to develop new disease-resistant, high-yielding scientists in Africa, used satellite imagery and GIS soft- varieties. These new B1 potatoes, as they are known, also ware to calculate the potential of improved crop varieties mature rapidly, thereby reducing the time they are to alleviate malnutrition in the East African highlands. exposed to the disease in farmers' fields. Meanwhile, more "In the past, it might have taken years to gather that than 20 developing countries -- including major potato kind of information, if it could have been done at all," producers such as China, Kenya and Peru -- are releasing Li Pun added. late blight-resistant potatoes from an earlier CIP popula- tion known as B3. T H E F U T U R E H A R V E S T C E N T E R S O F T H E C G I A R International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA) Headquarters: Aleppo, Syrian Arab Republic | www.icarda.org Global Cooperation Bears Fruit 20 Global efforts such as the World Summit on Sustainable growing vegetables in moisture-conserving plastic houses Development (WSSD) and the United Nations Convention with drip irrigation, and so intensify agriculture and to Combat Desertification have fostered regional and increase income. All of the materials for building the interregional collaboration focused on such issues as structures and irrigation systems are available locally and globalization, international water rights and climate easily assembled. By making good use of limited water change. These efforts are gaining the momentum needed resources, Yemeni farmers are returning the previously to meet the challenges of alleviating hunger and poverty degraded terraces to profitability and so convincing and keeping the environment healthy and productive. young people to stay on the land, instead of migrating to urban areas. In 2002, the International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA) helped national agri- > COLLABORATIONS MELD LOCAL KNOWLEDGE WITH THE BEST cultural research systems (NARS) in Central and West Asia OF MODERN AGRICULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE and North Africa in setting their priorities. This was achieved in collaboration with the Association of Agricultural Research Institutes in the Near East and Raising livestock is another important livelihood strategy North Africa; Central Asia and the Caucasus NARS Forum; in arid highlands that is limited by subsistence practice. NARS leaders; farmer union representatives; nongovern- ICARDA is working with herders to develop innovative and mental organizations; and other civil society organiza- practical ways to make high-quality feed more available tions. The objective is to capitalize on the comparative and affordable and to increase livestock productivity. advantage of each NARS for the benefit of the entire Among the technologies being improved and promoted is region, while integrating regional research efforts with on-farm feed-block production, which uses agricultural the CGIAR agenda. waste to ensure year-round feed availability. The Center is also working to improve animal health and profitability, In cooperation with subregional organizations and nation- in part by promoting small-ruminant dairy production. In al programs, ICARDA has prepared a comprehensive inven- Central Asia, where farmers traditionally raise sheep only tory of water resources in West Asia. The results include a for wool, pelts and meat, the adoption of milking, with review of on-going efforts to improve the management of technical backstopping from ICARDA, has brought imme- scarce water resources. The Center is also implementing diate increases in farm-family income. And, because projects to address water salinity and the need to women handle most livestock tending, this work is help- improve mountain agriculture and rangelands. Local com- ing them find employment opportunities both on and off munities implement each rural development project in the farm. collaboration with ICARDA and its NARS partners, melding local knowledge with the best of modern agricultural and These are just a few examples of how ICARDA is helping environmental science. to ensure that global cooperation bears fruit in the form of improved nutrition and income for the rural poor, while In Yemen, for example, ICARDA is working with local part- enhancing the natural resource base. ner agencies and farmers, male and female, to promote C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) Headquarters: Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh, India | www.icrisat.org Partnerships Against Drought 21 The challenge for the CGIAR is fostering research for farmers in drought-prone areas of southern Africa. To development -- applying science to improve livelihoods date, these partnerships have led to the release of 49 at the local level. No single institution can manage this improved sorghum and pearl millet varieties in eight on its own, so the International Crops Research Institute countries. The new varieties occupy huge areas, ranging for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) adopts an R-for-D from 15 to 50 percent of the countries' total sorghum/ approach built on partnerships with a range of organiza- millet area. The varieties have been successful largely tions: national research and extension services, universities, because they address the farmer's biggest concern: regional bodies, government policymakers, nongovern- drought. By maturing 3 to 6 weeks earlier than traditional mental organizations, farmer organizations, development varieties, they escape end-of-season drought, which is investors, the private sector, and advanced research centers common throughout the region. There is usually a harvest inside and outside the CGIAR. -- and food for the family -- even in a year when other crops fail. > MAKING FAMILIES MORE FOOD SECURE REDUCED THE During the 1991/92 drought, when crops failed in most of FOOD-AID BURDEN ON GOVERNMENTS AND OTHER southern Africa, ICRISAT varieties gave twice the yield of AGENCIES ACROSS SOUTHERN AFRICA local varieties. Last season, same story. Early-maturing varieties developed by ICRISAT and its partners made tens of thousands of families more food secure and reduced Talks with national stakeholders set goals and targets. A the food-aid burden on governments and other agencies consultative process, in which each stakeholder group across the region. provides inputs, identifies priorities and develops project designs and budgets. Research is planned at stakeholder Food and health are beyond price, but can we estimate meetings and monitored by stakeholder representatives. how much the benefits of ICRISAT's research are worth? R&D networks involving many groups disseminate research Studies conducted jointly by ICRISAT and national part- results, ensuring that good technology spreads quickly. ners show the new sorghum and pearl millet varieties increasing household income across the region by at least The most important stakeholders are the farmers them- $10­15 million per year, with the most benefit accruing selves. That is why ICRISAT promotes farmer-participatory to the poorest families, which are the ones growing the research and extension. Farmer involvement enhances crops. Beneficiaries number over 1.5 million households, adoption rates and helps scientists better understand or close to 9 million people -- one-fourth of the popula- farmers' priorities and decision-making processes. This in tion of southern Africa's semi-arid tropics. turn ensures that the next generation of technologies is even more relevant to small-scale farmers. These accomplishments align with and support the emphasis on agriculture, put forward at the World Summit Do partnerships really work? Consider ICRISAT's sorghum on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, as an and millet research targeted specifically at small-scale essential step in achieving sustainable development. T H E F U T U R E H A R V E S T C E N T E R S O F T H E C G I A R International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) Headquarters: Washington, DC, United States of America | www.ifpri.org First Setting Summit Goals, Then Achieving Them 22 The international community met twice in 2002 to com- limited resources wisely. Its research on gender and nutri- mit itself to accelerating sustainable social and economic tion, for instance, has found that investing in and empow- development. Building on the work of earlier summits, ering women pays enormous dividends. If women and men signatories resolved to reduce hunger and poverty and had equal status in South Asia, the region would have improve the lives of poor people. 13.4 million fewer malnourished children under 3 years old. Raising women's status today is a powerful force for Research from the International Food Policy and Research improving the health, longevity, mental and physical Institute (IFPRI) influenced the setting of both summits' capacity, and productivity of the next generation. goals. Based on the Institute's projections showing con- tinued impoverishment and hunger if governments con- Findings in China and India show that resources devoted ducted business as usual, IFPRI's 2020 Vision Initiative to education, roads and agricultural research are the most asked for bold goal-setting at a time when complacency effective in reducing rural poverty. IFPRI researchers have prevailed. also found that public investments for farmers in areas with adverse soil or climatic conditions often make bigger > SCIENCE-BASED KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT WORKS HELPS dents in poverty and generate higher social returns than investments in fertile areas. IFPRI is analyzing successes POLICYMAKERS SET PRIORITIES AND INVEST LIMITED in African agriculture that countries in the region can RESOURCES WISELY build on, examining the reciprocal relationship between the AIDS epidemic and food security, and synthesizing IFPRI's groundbreaking model of international food and extensive research on actions southern African nations water markets, showing the future world food situation can take to recover from famine and prevent its recur- under various development scenarios, helped raise aware- rence. ness of the scope of hunger and poverty and pointed the way toward realizing summit resolutions. A report IFPRI By providing a road map out of poverty and recommend- published in 2002 with the International Water Management ing concrete actions to be taken at the local, regional, Institute projects that by 2025 water scarcity will likely national and international levels, IFPRI supports summit slash annual global food production by 350 million tons. goals and the actions needed to achieve them. IFPRI dis- This could cause prices to skyrocket and significantly seminates for free the knowledge its research creates and increase malnutrition. The analysis shows that the World builds capacity among researchers, policymakers, develop- Summit on Sustainable Development goal of halving the ment practitioners and opinion leaders in developing proportion of people without access to safe water and countries through collaboration, extensive training cours- sanitation by 2015 requires governments to redirect their es, policy networks, conferences and publications. water policies. From policy problem to science-based analysis to partici- What specific policies and actions will be most effective in patory solution to action, IFPRI offers expertise and achieving summit goals? IFPRI's science-based knowledge information to help the world keep its resolution to create of what works helps policymakers set priorities and invest a better life for all by 2015 -- and beyond. C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) Headquarters: Ibadan, Nigeria | www.iita.org A Decade of Progress Against Cassava Mosaic Disease 23 Food security is necessary for development, so when a These efforts were vitally important in helping researchers staple food source is almost totally destroyed by crop target control efforts and forecast the pattern of pandemic disease, hope for development dies as quickly as the food expansion. supply itself. That is what happened when a previously unknown virus caused a severe outbreak of cassava mosaic Control efforts were based on deploying host plant resist- disease (CMD) in East Africa not long before the first ance. A major breakthrough in IITA's breeding program Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. resulted from new sources of CMD resistance being identi- fied in Nigerian landraces and successfully combined with CMD has been a chronic constraint on cassava for more the resistance of earlier materials. Newly developed than a century. The virus group that causes the disease germplasm also broke what had been a yield plateau, and routinely reduced African cassava production by 15­25 in many cases virtual immunity to CMD went hand-in- percent. Then, in the late 1980s, farmers in central hand with improved postharvest qualities and excellent Uganda began to suffer total crop devastation from CMD. farmer acceptance. IITA encouraged the establishment of The disease was associated with the occurrence of a novel open quarantine sites in Burundi, eastern Democratic recombinant virus transmitted by the whitefly Bemisia Republic of Congo, western Kenya, Rwanda and north- tabaci, moving outward in an epidemic front. western Tanzania, which served as conduits for introduc- ing elite clones from the regional germplasm-development > VIRTUAL IMMUNITY TO THE VIRUS WENT HAND-IN-HAND program at Serere, Uganda. WITH IMPROVED POSTHARVEST QUALITIES AND EXCELLENT Getting these materials into farmers fields as quickly as FARMER ACCEPTANCE possible meant piloting a novel fast-track varietal testing approach in which new clones were evaluated for a year By the second half of the 1990s, the epidemic had spread in quarantine, rapidly multiplied on station, then directly to Kenya (1996), Sudan (1997) and Tanzania (1998). To offered for participatory evaluation in farmers' fields at address this regional pandemic, the International sites covering a diverse range of agroecologies. The Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) set up a regional results have been spectacular. In Uganda, cassava produc- program for managing the disease outbreak. The United tion hit a record high of almost 5 million tons in 2001, States Agency for International Development, Danish up from the low of just over 2 million tons at the worst International Development Agency, Department for of the epidemic in 1994. International Development (UK), Gatsby Charitable Foundation, and Rockefeller Foundation supported estab- IITA now has relief, control and prevention programs in lishing a network of partners and launching a multifac- other African countries under threat, using the same eted emergency program. Extensive surveys throughout approach that successfully turned around bleak prospects the Lake Victoria zone of East Africa established which for development in the cassava-growing areas of East areas were most affected, how quickly the disease was Africa in the decade between Rio and Johannesburg. spreading, and which areas were immediately threatened. T H E F U T U R E H A R V E S T C E N T E R S O F T H E C G I A R International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) Headquarters: Nairobi, Kenya; Addis Ababa, Ethiopia | www.cgiar.org/ilri Ridding Livestock of Disease to Protect People 24 Scientists from the Africa-based International Livestock In a country where basic medical care is out of reach of Research Institute (ILRI) joined forces in 1999 with millions, controlling sleeping sickness by testing and Uganda's Livestock Health Research Institute (LIRI) and treating everybody or by attempting to reduce fly popula- the University of Edinburgh's Centre for Tropical tions over large areas is out of the question. Treating the Veterinary Medicine (CTVM) to help stop an epidemic of disease in cattle, on the other hand, is relatively inexpen- human sleeping sickness that erupted in late 1998 in sive and straightforward. Research indicates that treating southeastern Uganda. The reasons livestock researchers all cattle for trypanosomosis before their transportation should be involved in this medical drama, and why their and sale may control the human disease. Mathematical research should be key to its resolution, point to the models indicate that treating infected cattle is an effec- complex nature of this disease and its control and to the tive way to break the transmission of the disease to central role livestock play in farming in poor countries. humans. The target of LIRI, CTVM and ILRI is trypanosomosis, a > THE MOST APPROPRIATE FOCAL GROUPS FOR BATTLING wasting disease of ruminant animals that also afflicts SLEEPING SICKNESS ARE THE FARMING COMMUNITIES IT people. The human disease is called sleeping sickness. AFFLICTS Untreated, it is always fatal. Approximately half of all those infected go undiagnosed and untreated; within Given the close links between livestock, health and the 6 months of infection, they lapse into a coma and die. environment, the most appropriate focal groups for bat- tling sleeping sickness are the farming communities it Over 500 reported cases, and an estimated 500 additional afflicts. Livestock researchers are working with them, with unreported cases, have occurred to date in Uganda's support from the Canadian International Development Soroti District, which was previously free of the disease. Research Centre and the CGIAR Collective Action and This is the first documented transmission of the disease Property Rights Initiative, to understand community prior- outside its established foci to the south. Unchecked, the ities and incentives for both households and communities outbreak could become a widespread medical emergency. to help implement disease control. The researchers are linking the concerns and capacities of the communities to Sleeping sickness spreads through the bite of tsetse flies large-scale programs such as Farming in Tsetse-Controlled infected with trypanosome parasites. Scientists at CTVM, Areas and the Coordinating Office for the Control of LIRI and ILRI joined forces with researchers at the Trypanosomosis in Uganda. Working directly with commu- Universities of Makerere (Uganda), Glasgow and Guelph, nities -- a new approach for the livestock researchers -- and with Uganda's Ministry of Agriculture, to conduct turns out to be the aspect of the project they find most studies that revealed that the trigger for the outbreak in exciting and gratifying. As capacities for household and Soroti was the importation of infected cattle from a collective action broaden in this endeavor, the benefits region to the south where sleeping sickness is endemic. for poor people and their communities broaden as well. C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI) Headquarters: Maccarese (Fiumicino), Rome, Italy | www.ipgri.org Getting a Grip on Genetic Resources 25 The 2001 Mid-Term Meeting of the CGIAR charged the had amply demonstrated their skills in adapting seeds to International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI) suit the different environments in which crops are grown. with coordinating the Systemwide taskforce established to Those skills and the diversity that farmers have engen- oversee participation in the two important summits of dered -- diversity that is the foundation of agricultural 2002. While almost all of IPGRI's activities make signifi- development -- must be protected for future generations. cant contributions to meeting the summits' goals directly "Farmers are the primary conservers of genetic diversity," or indirectly, two in particular are highlighted here. M.S. Swaminathan reminded listeners during his keynote speech for the event. "And their rights must be protected." During the World Summit on Sustainable Development, IPGRI's regional office for sub-Saharan Africa convened Another IPGRI activity directed at sustainable develop- a special symposium at the Ubuntu Village exhibition ment came to prominence during the year. The Genetic venue. The meeting, Genetic Resources for Africa's Resources Policy Initiative (GRPI) is currently funded by Renewal, gave summit-goers an opportunity to appreciate Canada (through the International Development Research the importance of genetic resources in the context of the Centre and the Canadian International Development strategy on agriculture of the New Partnership for Africa's Agency), Germany, the Netherlands and the Rockefeller Development. The need for action is urgent. Figures from Foundation. It aims to strengthen the capacity of national the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United policymakers in developing countries to elaborate genetic Nations indicate that Africa accounts for three-quarters resource policies, legislation and regulations adapted to of the world's 44 countries facing acute food shortages. their circumstances and needs. In part this helps coun- tries meet their responsibilities under international treaties, but more than that it enables them to build > THE DIVERSITY THAT FARMERS HAVE ENGENDERED -- strong national systems that effectively protect and pro- DIVERSITY THAT IS THE FOUNDATION OF AGRICULTURAL mote their interests. For example, GRPI will help countries DEVELOPMENT -- MUST BE PROTECTED FOR FUTURE to put in place mechanisms that allow them to partici- GENERATIONS pate fully in the multilateral sharing of genetic resources and benefits under the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. The meeting grew out of earlier discussions in Africa among national programs, regional and subregional organ- Initially, GRPI is working with six countries (Egypt, izations, and some CGIAR Centers active in the region. Ethiopia, Nepal, Peru, Vietnam and Zambia) and three Kwesi Atta-Krah, director of IPGRI's sub-Saharan regional regions (Andean Community, East Africa, and West and office, pointed out that farmers in Africa as elsewhere Central Africa). T H E F U T U R E H A R V E S T C E N T E R S O F T H E C G I A R International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) Headquarters: Los Baños, Laguna, Philippines | www.irri.org Beijing Puts Rice on the Table 26 In the Beijing Declaration on Rice, 13 ministerial December saw both the completion of a highly detailed representatives from the world's main rice-growing genome map by the publicly funded International Rice countries affirm the role of rice as the foundation of food Genome Sequencing Project and an agreement between security and social stability for almost half of humanity. IRRI and the project leader, Japan's National Institute of They recognize rice as the central economic and cultural Agrobiological Sciences, to cooperate in discovering gene feature that unites the peoples of Asia and sustains the function. The following month, IRRI and 17 other strong rural communities essential for national develop- research institutions in 12 countries launched the ment. They acknowledge that rice research and farmers' International Rice Functional Genomics Consortium to access to new technologies are essential to improving the accelerate gene discovery by facilitating the exchange of well-being of more than half the world's rural families. resources, data and ideas. Finally, they urge faithful support for publicly funded research institutes as they forge partnerships with the > THE FIRST INTERNATIONAL RICE CONGRESS ATTRACTED TO private sector to develop new rice technologies for poor BEIJING MORE THAN 1,000 DELEGATES FROM 20 COUNTRIES, farmers. FOSTERING A HEIGHTENED SPIRIT OF PARTNERSHIP The declaration emerged from the International Roundtable on Rice held in September 2002, on the These strides in genomic science and partnership-building eve of the opening, by Chinese President Jiang Zemin, are enabling IRRI to expand exponentially its capacity to of the first International Rice Congress. The congress -- mold and fire the clay of knowledge into the hardened co-organized by the International Rice Research Institute bricks of sustainable rural development -- the productive, (IRRI), State Development Planning Commission of the resilient and nutritious rice varieties with which Asian People's Republic of China, Chinese Academy of farmers will build a better tomorrow. Meanwhile, in the Engineering, and Chinese Academy of Agricultural run-up to the International Year of Rice 2004, the Sciences -- attracted to Beijing more than 1,000 dele- Institute is reinforcing its network of national research gates from 20 countries. Affirming the heightened spirit and extension partnerships assembled over the past 4 of partnership fostered by the congress, the Beijing decades. This will ensure that these knowledge conduits Genomics Institute pledged to make available to IRRI are more effective than ever at keeping IRRI appraised of microarrays of the tens of thousands of rice genes it conditions in the field and, in line with Millennium sequenced in the genome draft that it published in April Development Goals, delivering to poor rice farmers and in the journal Science, elucidating the genetic makeup of consumers the benefits of science. the indica subspecies of rice. PHOTO CAPTION Song Jian, IRRI board member and an honorary chair of the International Rice Congress organizing committee; Angeline Saziso Kamba, IRRI board chair; Jiang Zemin, president of China; and Ronald Cantrell, IRRI director general. C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR) Headquarters: The Hague, Netherlands | www.isnar.cgiar.org Poverty Alleviation Requires Institutional Innovation 27 The CGIAR has an enviable track record of fostering Vietnam and Indonesia new methods of planning and technological change in agriculture. However, development maintaining partnerships with farmers' organizations and depends as much on institutional as on technological others, both for governing and implementing research. change, since most technological innovations also require institutional innovation. To achieve impact, improved crop With support from the Canadian International varieties require functional seed markets, workable legisla- Development Agency, Department for International tion on plant variety rights, and convincing biosafety Development (UK), IDRC, Norwegian Ministry of regulations. More broadly, farmers need markets to sell International Cooperation, and United States Agency for surpluses and buy inputs. The current shift in agricultural International Development, ISNAR has joined forces with development from technological to institutional change many local sub-Saharan institutions able to address how has important implications for agricultural research. AIDS interacts with agricultural systems and rural liveli- hoods. ISNAR is facilitating coalitions of public, private In recent years, the International Service for National and civil organizations from across the agricultural sector Agricultural Research (ISNAR) has invested heavily in and promoting convergence with organizations working institutional change, helping countries in Latin America on AIDS and public health. Pioneering action research explore new modes of organizing agricultural research in funded by competitive grants is underway in Malawi and the public sector and of strengthening public­private Uganda, with other countries to follow suit. AIDS is not partnerships. With support from the German Federal just a medical challenge but is closely linked to farming Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development and systems, nutrition and collective action in rural societies. the Canadian International Development Research Centre If we are to assist in alleviating the new AIDS reality in (IDRC), ISNAR brought together a research team including sub-Saharan Africa and beyond, we require a new research collaborators from 11 Latin America countries, two inter- agenda driven by local needs and realities and under- national centers and several universities to analyze how pinned by credible evidence of what works. public­private partnerships contribute to equitable, sustainable development and to design appropriate mecha- > THE CURRENT SHIFT IN AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT FROM nisms for governance, finance, and sharing costs and bene- TECHNOLOGICAL TO INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE HAS IMPORTANT fits. With training modules, methodological frameworks, analytical studies, pilot projects, and a newsletter available IMPLICATIONS FOR AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH to a growing community of public and private partners, ISNAR is actively fostering public­private partnerships. Exploring new avenues for agricultural research in these settings may lead to research agendas and institutions Regarding good governance in agricultural research, very different from those that we have today. Fulfilling ISNAR's project on performance-based management sys- Millennium Development Goals requires new agricultural tems, funded by the Asian Development Bank, finalized a research agendas and new institutions able to support set of assessment guidelines that has since been used in technologies both new and old. ISNAR is working with its Sri Lanka and disseminated in Pakistan. ISNAR has intro- partners to foster renewal, in research agendas and insti- duced to research organizations in Pakistan, Sri Lanka, tutions alike, that responds to changing needs. T H E F U T U R E H A R V E S T C E N T E R S O F T H E C G I A R International Water Management Institute (IWMI) Headquarters: Battaramulla, Sri Lanka | www.iwmi.cgiar.org Putting Agricultural Water Productivity on the Sustainable Development Agenda 28 Taking up a recommendation from the International Water Agricultural research held a special place at the Management Institute (IWMI) that getting "more crop per WaterDome, well represented at the CGIAR Pavilion hosted drop" is the key to solving the water crisis, United by the Comprehensive Assessment of Water Management Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan called for a "blue in Agriculture (which is organized through the CGIAR revolution" in agriculture in the run-up to the World Systemwide Initiative on Water Management). A special Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD). Since then, CGIAR Water and Food Security Day stressed the issue of IWMI has worked with a number of CGIAR Centers and water productivity in agriculture, pointing out that agri- national agricultural research systems to turn productivity culture uses most of the developing world's water supplies of water in agriculture from an emerging issue into one -- up to 90 percent in some countries -- and so offers that sits squarely at the center of the sustainable devel- the greatest potential for applying better management to opment agenda. mitigate stiffening competition for water without compro- mising food security. > AGRICULTURE OFFERS THE GREATEST POTENTIAL FOR APPLYING Other key developments emerging from the WaterDome BETTER WATER MANAGEMENT TO MITIGATE COMPETITION FOR included the following: WATER WITHOUT COMPROMISING FOOD SECURITY Water was among the most frequently discussed issues at the summit and received more coverage in the inter- national media than any other sustainable development An important step toward this goal came in August 2002 topic. at the WaterDome, an official parallel event to the WSSD. The WSSD adopted the Millennium Development Goals Organized by IWMI for the Africa Water Task Force related to water: halving, by 2015, the proportion of (www.iwmi.org/AWTF), this was the first international con- people who do not have access to safe drinking water ference and exhibition focusing specifically on water and or sanitation. development issues. It was made possible through primary The African Ministers' Council on Water and the African funding from the government of the Netherlands, with Water Facility were launched. additional support from over 50 governments, international Two African transboundary water agreements were development organizations, water programs, nongovern- mapped out at the WaterDome, the IncoMaputo agree- mental organizations (NGOs) and private organizations. ment on water sharing among Swaziland, Mozambique and South Africa, and the Lake Malawi/Niassa/Nyasa The WaterDome brought together over 70 development agreement on biodiversity management linking Malawi, NGOs, governments and international organizations. A Mozambique and Tanzania. packed program of conferences and events included the A number of new initiatives, including the CGIAR launch of a number of international water initiatives and Challenge Program on Water and Food, were launched coalitions and a wide range of workshops, presentations at the WaterDome with strong pledges of support from and panel discussions. Some 15,000 people -- ranging key donors. from heads of state to South African school children -- attended the WaterDome. C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H West Africa Rice Development Association (WARDA) ­ The Africa Rice Center Headquarters: Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire | www.warda.org New Initiative for African Development 29 On 27 March 2002, the prime minister of Côte d'Ivoire improving market efficiency by reducing transaction costs; launched the African Rice Initiative (ARI), a major drive and increasing production efficiency to enable local rice to improve rice production throughout sub-Saharan Africa to compete with imported rice. The study was timely in on the platform of the new rice for Africa (NERICA) view of active stakeholder interest in rice-sector develop- varieties developed by the West Africa Rice Development ment, and initial reactions to the outcomes have been Association (WARDA) ­ The Africa Rice Center. At the positive. World Summit on Sustainable Development, the govern- ment of Japan, the United Nations Development > THE AFRICAN RICE INITIATIVE AIMS TO IMPROVE RICE Programme and the CGIAR held NERICA Day, which high- lighted the benefits of NERICA varieties along with the PRODUCTION THROUGHOUT SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA ON THE ARI. The event was a huge success that included the par- PLATFORM OF THE NEW RICE FOR AFRICA VARIETIES ticipation of Japanese Foreign Minister Yoriko Kawaguchi, CGIAR Chairman Ian Johnson and two farmers from Côte d'Ivoire. The latter part of the year proved to be tumultuous for WARDA. Activities at the Center's headquarters and main The ARI is in line with the New Partnership for Africa's research center in Bouaké, Côte d'Ivoire, were severely Development and is an important follow-up to the Tokyo disrupted after a failed coup d'etat and rebellion led to International Conference on African Development. The civil war in the host country in September 2002. After a initiative also provides a framework for significant contri- week behind rebel lines, WARDA senior staff evacuated butions to the Millennium Development Goals. under the protection of French troops to re-establish operations in the commercial capital, Abidjan. As it WARDA concluded a 2-year study begun in 2000, when became clear that the crisis would be protracted, WARDA the United States Agency for International Development management negotiated an agreement with the government asked the Center to formulate a strategy for developing of Mali, that country's Institute of Rural Economy (IER by the rice sector in Nigeria. The study included a literature its French acronym) and the International Crops Research review, expert consultation, stakeholder workshops and Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (a sister CGIAR Center) surveys. Despite a continually changing policy environ- to relocate most of WARDA's researchers to Bamako, Mali, ment in Nigeria and significant price increases, consumers in early 2003. This strategic move ensures the continuity have remained faithful to rice. The country has been the of the Center's research activities, as WARDA management world's second-largest rice importer for the past 5 years. continues to operate from its temporary headquarters in Some 80 percent of locally grown rice is marketed, and Abidjan. WARDA's network-based model of regional collab- producers are accustomed to using inputs. The study iden- oration has been invaluable in maintaining the Center's tified three strategic objectives: improving the quality of research-and-development activities outside Côte d'Ivoire. local rice, especially through postharvest technologies; T H E F U T U R E H A R V E S T C E N T E R S O F T H E C G I A R World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) Headquarters: Nairobi, Kenya | www.worldagroforestrycentre.org Reorganizing Delivery for Sustainable Development 30 Since its inception 25 years ago, the World Agroforestry Trees and Markets: Enhancing tree-based agricultural Centre (ICRAF) has adapted its program content and systems and facilitating the development of markets for structure in response to the changing needs of poor farm- agroforestry products; ers in the tropics. This evolutionary change accelerated Environmental Services: Achieving the potential of agro- over the last decade, as the Center became a global forestry systems and landscape mosaics to improve the leader in the science of agroforestry for sustainable devel- delivery of environmental services vital to sustainable opment. During this same period, the Center's scientists development; learned just how closely intertwined their research and Advancing Institutions: Strengthening the capacity of development activities are and that, if they are to see hundreds of institutions worldwide to generate and apply new knowledge about agroforestry lead to positive agroforestry innovations to achieve better and more changes in the lives of the rural poor, they must truly sustainable livelihoods. integrate their research and development efforts, both internally and with their many partners. This refocusing of the World Agroforestry Centre's activi- ties solidifies its commitment to addressing seven of the > WITH INTEGRATED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS, Millennium Development Goals in the following ways: Helping to eradicate hunger through pro-poor food- NEW KNOWLEDGE ABOUT AGROFORESTRY LEADS TO POSITIVE production systems in disadvantaged areas based on CHANGES IN THE LIVES OF THE RURAL POOR using agroforestry to improve soil fertility and regenerate the land; Reducing rural poverty through market-driven, locally To facilitate this, the World Agroforestry Centre has imple- led tree-cultivation systems that generate income and mented a structural transformation, eliminating the trap- build assets; pings of a traditional compartmentalized approach to Improving the health and nutrition of the rural poor research and development, and rearticulating its global through agroforestry systems; and regional agendas in the context of the major sustain- Conserving biodiversity through integrated conserva- able development challenges that emerged from the World tion and development solutions based on agroforestry Summit on Sustainable Development and the World Food technologies, innovative institutions and better Summit. The Center has reorganized its activities around policies; four major themes, all of which contribute directly to the Protecting watershed services through agroforestry- goals of the CGIAR and connect in tangible ways to the based solutions that allow smallholders to be rewarded sustainable development challenges of the 21st century. for providing these services; The themes are: Enabling the rural poor to adapt to climate change and to benefit from emerging carbon markets through tree Land and People: Improving land productivity to enable cultivation; and sustainable livelihoods; Building human and institutional capacity in agroforestry research and development. C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H WorldFish Center Headquarters: Penang, Malaysia | www.worldfishcenter.org Setting Fisheries Targets, the First Summit Breakthrough 31 Most of the world's natural fish stocks are depleted Agency for International Development, and World Wildlife beyond safe production levels, and many fish habitats are Fund International. in danger of irreversible damage. Yet sustainable develop- ment in Asia, Africa and the other developing regions "The Fish for All summit was the first meeting to take where most of the world's poor live depends on contribu- WSSD seriously," said Ian Johnson, World Bank vice presi- tions from all assets, including the protein and nutrients dent for environmentally and socially sustainable develop- provided by natural fisheries. ment and chair of the CGIAR, in his keynote address. He stressed how developments in the Bank's own long-term The World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in forecasts to 2050 -- including a tripling of gross domestic Johannesburg recognized this reality when participating product, the addition of another 2 billion people (mostly in countries agreed to fisheries targets as its first major developing countries), soaring water demand and climate breakthrough. The summit made a commitment to the change -- will pose environmental, social and economic historic target of restoring fish stocks to levels that can challenges to satisfying the world's fish needs. These are produce maximum sustainable yield -- and to do so challenges that the world must prepare to meet now. urgently, by no later than 2015. More commitments rele- vant to the sustainable use, management and conserva- Coordinating the Fish for All initiative is the WorldFish tion of fish and other living aquatic resources followed, Center under the guidance of its Global Steering including supporting small-scale aquaculture, stopping Committee composed of eminent personalities from all illegal fishing, protecting the marine environment from over the world and chaired by M.S. Swaminathan, winner land-based degradation, and bolstering the scientific and of the first World Food Prize, former director general of technological capacity necessary to accomplish this. the International Rice Research Institute, and Cousteau chair in ecotechnology of the United Nations Educational, Rectifying the dire world fisheries situation requires Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). urgent commitment from everyone who uses and manages these resources. Realizing this, the WorldFish Center "Governments have produced a large number of treaties launched the 10-year Fish for All initiative at a special and conventions, and coordination is needed among them," summit on 3 November 2002 in Penang, Malaysia. The Prof. Swaminathan cautioned attendees. "Often these Fish for All summit attracted 300 participants from 40 treaties and conventions are negotiated and managed by countries, including fisheries specialists, development officials from ministries without direct experience and assistance experts, fishers organizations and civil society knowledge of fisheries (e.g. development assistance, agri- representatives. Supporting the summit were the culture, health, trade, etc.) and so the implications for fish Australian Agency for International Development, are not directly included in these instruments of change." Bangladesh Rural Advancement Committee, Crawford Fund (Australia), Danish International Development Agency, An objective of the Fish for All initiative is to facilitate German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and collaborative action to bring fish squarely into the Development, University of Canberra, United States development picture. For details, see www.fishforall.org. T H E F U T U R E H A R V E S T C E N T E R S O F T H E C G I A R The Future Harvest Centers of the CGIAR > > > > 32 > > > > > > > > > > > > C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H 33 Expanding Partnerships in 2002 C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H Recovery From Conflict and Disaster: Partnerships for Rebuilding Agriculture 34 The CGIAR's outstanding achievements, including the the United States Agency for International Development Green Revolution of the 1960s and 1970s, are to launch in January 2002 the Future Harvest Consortium renowned for having rescued millions from starvation to Rebuild Agriculture in Afghanistan. The lack of seed in and poverty. In contrast, the alliance's role in rebuild- Afghanistan because of several years of drought and war ing agriculture in countries affected by war, civil con- was the immediate problem facing Afghan farming com- flict or natural disaster is much less known. Yet a munities. For the 2002 spring planting season, the recent study by the International Peace Research Consortium, in cooperation with nongovernmental organi- Institute in Oslo, Norway, found a close link between zations, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the agriculture and conflict. According to the study, most United Nations, and the government of Afghanistan, dis- conflicts between 1989 and 1997 took place in tributed 3,500 tons of high-quality wheat seed to 40,000 regions heavily dependent on agriculture -- South, farmers. This not only increased the farmers' production, Central and West Asia, Central Africa, and parts of it also permitted the start of local seed production, which Latin America. made available to farmers 4,583 tons of locally produced seed for the 2002 autumn season. Several CGIAR Centers have played key roles in rebuilding agriculture in areas affected by civil strife and war. In > MOST CONFLICTS TAKE PLACE IN REGIONS HEAVILY recent years, for example, the International Center for DEPENDENT ON AGRICULTURE Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA) has faced the task of rebuilding agriculture in Central and West Asia. A code of conduct for importing seeds into Afghanistan In Lebanon and areas under the Palestinian Authority, has been developed. ICARDA holds in its genebank some where agriculture has been greatly damaged by conflict, 2,200 accessions of landraces and improved local varieties ICARDA has been helping to develop the needed collected in Afghanistan. Several of them have been mul- resources, promote technology transfers and support tiplied and repatriated. The Consortium has also rehabili- human-capacity building. War and civil strife in tated agricultural research stations in Kabul, Baghlan, Afghanistan, and the economic sanctions on Iraq follow- Kunduz, Taghar and Jalalabad, allowing the start of ing the Gulf War of 1990­1991, have had great negative germplasm evaluation and the development of facilities impacts on agriculture in these countries. The new for processing and testing seed. Four needs-assessment nations of Central Asia and the Caucasus are struggling to studies have explored seed systems and crop improve- reform their agriculture following their transition to inde- ment; soil and water management; livestock, feed and pendence. ICARDA has taken the lead in paying special rangelands; and horticulture. These assessments guided attention to these countries. preparation of specific proposals for implementation. Reviving Afghanistan Diversifying Central Asia and the Caucasus With ICARDA in the coordinating role, 34 organizations In the Soviet era, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakstan, including 10 CGIAR Centers used financial support from Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan were C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H Challenge Programs: New Partnerships for Development Impact 35 essentially commodity-producing components of a larger The CGIAR Challenge Programs are high-impact, system. Following the breakup of the Soviet Union, each of scientific research programs that create solutions to these countries has faced the challenge of developing a the major global and regional development challenges stand-alone economy, a process that requires a major effort facing the human family. Grounded in participatory in diversifying agricultural production. research, Challenge Programs contribute to achieving the Millennium Development Goals. Ten CGIAR Centers have joined forces under ICARDA lead- ership to address the problems of agricultural research Two Challenge Programs received approval in 2002: and development through the CGIAR Collaborative Research Program for Sustainable Agricultural Production Water and Food aims to increase the productivity of in Central Asia and the Caucasus (CAC). This "one-stop water for food and livelihoods, while maintaining global shop" of the CGIAR pools the expertise of the Centers and diversions of water to agriculture at the levels of 2000. provides a single point of contact for the CAC region. The Participating under the leadership of the International research program includes crop improvement; managing Water Management Institute are four CGIAR Centers, the natural resources land, water and biodiversity; nutri- six national agricultural research organizations, four tion and managing livestock; and the rehabilitation of advanced research institutes, and three international rangelands and assessment of their role in carbon seques- nongovernmental organizations. The research-for-develop- tration and global climate change. ment effort will cover seven benchmark basins in Africa, Asia and Latin America. The joint research with national programs in CAC has resulted in the release of several new varieties of cereal Biofortified Crops for Improved Human Nutrition and food legume crops, thereby increasing food produc- seeks to breed and disseminate new crop varieties with tion. It has also developed new technologies for conserv- improved micronutrient content (vitamin A, iron and ing and managing land and water resources, including the zinc) for boosting human nutrition. The International use of marginal-quality water for forage production and Center for Tropical Agriculture and the International Food sustainable use of sloping lands. Regional genebanks, Policy Research Institute are leading the effort, which which suffered from neglect, have been restored and pro- includes six CGIAR Centers, four advanced research insti- vided with modern equipment. And, finally, many national tutes and 28 partner institutions. researchers have received training that allows them to use cutting-edge science in their research programs. These two Challenge Programs and a third one -- Unlocking Genetic Diversity for the Resource Poor > SEVERAL CGIAR CENTERS HAVE PLAYED KEY ROLES IN led by the International Maize and Wheat Improvement REBUILDING AGRICULTURE IN AREAS AFFECTED BY CIVIL Center, International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, STRIFE AND WAR and International Rice Research Institute -- are part of a pilot effort to accelerate the search for food and envi- ronmental solutions for the 21st century. C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H Global Conservation Trust: Taking Biodiversity to the Bank 36 Included on a slate of new Challenge Programs being Halfway through the World Summit on Sustainable developed is Improving Livelihoods and Natural Development, the CGIAR and the Food and Agriculture Resources Management in Sub-Saharan Africa -- Organization of the United Nations (FAO) announced Securing the Future for Africa's Children. When plans to establish the Global Conservation Trust, an approved, this will be the first Challenge Program devel- endowment to ensure the long-term security of diver- oped by a partner organization, the Forum for Agricultural sity in the world's most important food crops. Research in Africa. Other Challenge Programs in the Statements of commitment and support followed from pipeline address the challenges of climate change, reversing Egypt, Switzerland, the United States and the United coastal degradation, halting desertification, and conserving Nations Foundation. biodiversity and rainforests. The announcement came on the heels of a report entitled Crop Diversity at Risk: The Case for Sustaining Crop > IN KEEPING WITH CGIAR TRADITION, THE KNOWLEDGE, Collections, by Imperial College, London. The report drew TECHNOLOGIES AND BENEFITS GENERATED BY CHALLENGE on information gathered from about 100 countries by FAO PROGRAMS WILL BE IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN, AVAILABLE in 2000. Its findings were alarming; not only is crop TO ALL diversity disappearing from the field, a large proportion of the crop genetic resources safeguarded in genebanks Recognizing that new knowledge drives agricultural devel- around the world, including those maintained by the opment and that partnerships are key to success, the CGIAR Centers, is under threat due to lack of funding. Challenge Programs are helping to mobilize modern science to serve the development needs of poor farming commu- Although the initiative was timed to coincide with the nities worldwide. release of the Imperial College report, plans to support the long-term maintenance of crop-diversity collections For more information on the Challenge Programs, visit had been long in the making. The idea was mooted in www.cgiar.org. CGIAR fora -- including the Systemwide Genetic Resources Program (SGRP) and the Finance Committee's Task Force on Resource Mobilization -- starting in the mid-1990s. A feasibility study carried out in 2001 found that the notion of an endowment for national and inter- national collections was no mere pipe dream. It suggested $260 million as a feasible initial target. The fundraising campaign has attracted widespread interest, with commitments coming from governments North and South. The CGIAR and its Centers have provided generous C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H Awarding Excellence: Nothing Succeeds Like Success 37 support to the campaign, as have the SGRP and Future Scientific innovation directed toward the development Harvest Foundation. Conceived from the outset as a public­ needs of poor farming communities is a strong CGIAR private partnership, the Trust has already captured the tradition. So is celebrating success. The 2002 CGIAR imaginations of foundations and corporations around the Science Awards recognized significant contributions by globe. By late 2002, the progress made along the road CGIAR scientists and their partners, continuing the toward the funding goal warranted taking steps to estab- tradition of scientific excellence. With a view toward lish the Global Conservation Trust organization. further promoting science in the broader community, as well as recognizing the significance of communica- tions in research and development work, the CGIAR > A LARGE PROPORTION OF THE CROP GENETIC initiated in 2002 two new awards for outstanding RESOURCES SAFEGUARDED IN GENEBANKS AROUND THE journalism and communications in science. WORLD IS UNDER THREAT DUE TO LACK OF FUNDING 2002 CGIAR Science Awards The Global Conservation Trust initiative was presented to the Ninth Regular Session of the FAO Commission on CGIAR KING BAUDOUIN AWARD Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture in October Jointly awarded to the International Center for 2002. The Commission concluded that the initiative was Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA) and "universally appreciated and supported" and appealed to International Crops Research Institute for the Semi- donors "to assist in the establishment of the Trust." Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), for developing new chickpea vari- eties resilient to drought, heat, pests and diseases and so Options for the governance and legal status of the Trust able to provide stable, profitable yields. Chickpea (Cicer underwent extensive discussion and testing in focus arietinum L.) is an important, protein-rice food legume groups involving donors of funds and germplasm and civil grown on 11 million hectares by poor farmers in North society organizations. At the request of these groups, the Africa and West, South and Southeast Asia. This research International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI), collaboration brought together scientists and farmers in representing the CGIAR, and FAO appointed an interim more than 30 countries and is yielding positive results in panel to establish the Trust. The Interim Panel of Eminent the rainfed areas of (among other countries) Bangladesh, Experts held its first meeting in February 2003 and concluded Ethiopia, India, Myanmar, Nepal and Syria. that the Trust should be an international organization with an independent legal character. Geoffrey Hawtin, out- OUTSTANDING SCIENTIST going director general of IPGRI and secretary of the SGRP, Awarded to Tushaar Shah, principal scientist in the was slated to head up the Interim Executive Secretariat, International Water Management Institute (IWMI), for to be based at FAO, beginning on 1 September 2003. his exceptional work in improving water policies, especially regarding the sustainable management and use of ground- For more information, visit www.startwithaseed.org. water resources. His research has looked at a broad range C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H PHOTO CAPTION Fred Pierce, Christopher Barr, Bruce Campbell, Imelda Revilla, Jagdish Kumar, Marilyn Louise Warburton, Tushaar Shah and Ruth Meinzen-Dick 38 of issues including energy subsidies in the water sector, contributed to developing coherent frameworks, research strengthening and reform of water institutions, and irriga- methodologies and cross-comparable case studies that tion management. enable the development of locally relevant policies and institutions. PROMISING YOUNG SCIENTIST Awarded to Marilyn Louise Warburton, molecular geneticist OUTSTANDING SCIENTIFIC ARTICLE in the Applied Biotechnology Center of the International Jointly awarded to Bruce Campbell of the Center for Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) and Jeffrey developing a fast, inexpensive and replicable methodology Sayer of World Wildlife Fund, for their paper Research to for accurately analyzing genetic diversity in maize and Integrate Productivity Enhancement, Environmental wheat seeds using molecular characterization techniques. Protection and Human Development published in Conservation Ecology. The paper succinctly shows why OUTSTANDING SCIENTIFIC SUPPORT TEAM integrated natural resource management research is nec- Awarded to the project Exploiting Biodiversity for essary to meet the challenges of poverty and environmen- Sustainable Pest Management, led by the International tal sustainability. Jeffrey Sayer led CIFOR prior to joining Rice Research Institute (IRRI). By planting different the World Wildlife Fund. types of rice alongside each other, the research team -- consisting of Florencio Balenson, Maximino Banasihan, 2002 Awards for Outstanding Journalism Marietta Baraoidan, Alicia Bordeos, Nancy Castilla, and Communications Crisanta Culala, Flavio Maghirang, Isabelita Oña, Imelda Revilla and Veritas Salazar -- was able to OUTSTANDING JOURNALISM achieve near total control of rice blast disease. The New Awarded to Fred Pearce, freelance journalist, for his York Times described the research in China, where the articles Desert Harvest published in New Scientist (27 project has successfully curbed the spread of blast, as a October 2001) and The King of Cowpea published in "stunning success." Geographical Magazine (January 2002). Mr. Pearce's writings have highlighted the successes of science-for- OUTSTANDING PARTNERSHIP development efforts in Africa. Awarded to the Collective Action and Property Rights (CAPRi) program led by Ruth Meinzen-Dick of the OUTSTANDING COMMUNICATIONS International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). A Awarded to Christopher Barr of CIFOR, for his research CGIAR Systemwide initiative involving all the Centers and on Indonesian forest policies and the role of financial 400 national research institutes, universities, advanced institutions in funding large-scale investments in forest- research institutes and nongovernmental organizations, based industries. This research examined the factors driving CAPRi has contributed to building a greater understanding the rapid expansion of Indonesia's pulp and paper sector, of the important role of institutions in promoting collec- highlighting the financial risks associated with the fiber- tive action and property rights. The CAPRi partnership has supply strategies of the sector's major producers. C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H 39 Executive Summary of the 2002 CGIAR Financial Results The 2002 financial results reported here are based on the audited financial statements of the 16 Centers supported by the CGIAR. Consolidated analyses and reports, including this summary, were produced on behalf of the CGIAR Secretariat by the WorldFish Center team (Su Ching Tan, Rainelda Ampil and Karina Ho) led by Edward Sayegh, associate director general of corporate services. A more detailed financial report includ- ing time series tables and charts is contained in the enclosed compact disc and posted on the CGIAR Web site (www.cgiar.org). Executive Summary of the 2002 CGIAR Financial Results: On Target Overall CGIAR Members support Centers and programs of their choice, and each Center receives and spends funds. Thus, the CGIAR financial outcome discussed here is a consolidation of the financial results of the 16 autonomous 40 CGIAR Centers. The results are reported in US dollars. CGIAR's 2002 Financial Goals CGIAR Contributions As in past years, the CGIAR's financial goals in 2002 were The year 2002 showed a further increase in aggregate to attract sufficient resources to enable it to implement financing for the 16 Centers supported by the CGIAR. its work program for the year and to maintain its strong CGIAR contributions totaled $357 million in 2002 com- financial position. The financial targets for 2002 approved pared with $3421 million in 2001, an increase of $15 at the CGIAR Annual General Meeting 2001 were: million, or 4 percent. Of the total contributions of $357 million for 2002, $346 million was allocated to Center to implement an approved work program costing $366 programs, and the balance of $11 million was allocated million, of which $347 million would be funding from to Centers as advance 2003 support ($5 million), to the Members and $12 million would be Center income, System Office ($5 million) and to Committees/Special with the planned deficit of $7 million financed by Programs ($1 million). Center reserves; to maintain at least the same levels of financial posi- > THE 2002 RESULTS CONFIRM THE CONTINUED STABILITY tion and operating ratios as in the previous year. OF CGIAR FINANCES IN THE AGGREGATE BUT SHOW WIDE VARIABILITY IN FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE AMONG THE Overall Financial Outcome at the Centers The overall 2002 result confirms that the CGIAR was suc- 16 CENTERS cessful in achieving its financial targets. Total expendi- tures for the 16 Centers were $369 million, virtually on Fifty-five of the 58 CGIAR Members2 contributed $331 target. Resource targets were also met: Member funding million (up from $319 million in 2001), and the remain- for Center programs totaled $346 million, and Center ing $26 million came from a broad range of sources income was $13 million, resulting in a deficit of approxi- including multi-donor projects and non-member founda- mately $10 million. Net assets for the System declined by tions and developing countries. Table 2 lists contributions $14 million to $175 million in 2002, the result of the $10 for 1998-2002 by contributor. million deficit and $4 million in asset write-downs. Overall, however, the CGIAR's financial position remained As shown in Figure 1, the increase in contributions in strong at the end of the year as such liquidity indicators 2002 came mainly from two Member groups: Europe as cash, working capital and current ratio remained increased by $16.1 million (12 percent) and North healthy. Highlights of the System's 2002 financial per- America by $8.6 million (15 percent). In addition, multi- formance are shown in Table 1, with comparative informa- donors and non-CGIAR members increased their contribu- tion for the previous 4 years. tions by $3 million (13 percent). These increases were C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H Table 1 CGIAR Program and Resource Highlights | 1998­2002 ACTUAL 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Center income (millions of US dollars) Agenda funding 338 330 331 337 357 (of which percent unrestricted) 61% 54% 50% 43% 42% Center earned income 13 13 14 16 13 Total revenue 351 342 345 353 370 Membership agenda support (millions of US dollars) Europe 148 126 128 131 147 Pacific Rim 44 48 44 37 25 North America 53 52 54 57 66 Developing countries 13 15 14 14 13 41 International and regional organizations1 64 68 66 67 72 Foundations 7 6 7 9 9 Non-members 12 15 19 23 26 Total 340 330 331 337 357 Top three contributors World Bank World Bank World Bank United States United States United States Japan United States World Bank World Bank Japan United States Japan Japan United Kingdom Staffing (number) Internationally recruited staff 958 982 1,017 1,013 1,060 Support staff 7,560 7,712 7,649 7,477 6,699 Agenda program expenditures (percent) Increasing productivity 37% 34% 36% 35% 34% (of which germplasm enhancement/breeding) 18% 18% 18% 18% 18% Protecting the environment 19% 20% 18% 19% 18% Saving biodiversity 11% 10% 10% 10% 10% Improving policies 12% 13% 14% 14% 15% Strengthening NARS 21% 23% 22% 23% 23% (of which training) 8% 9% 9% 9% 9% Total (millions of US dollars) 337 349 339 355 369 Object expenditures (percent) Personnel 50% 50% 49% 49% 49% Supplies/services 37% 38% 39% 40% 40% Travel 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% Depreciation 6% 5% 5% 4% 4% Regional expenditures (percent) Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) 41% 42% 42% 43% 43% Asia 32% 32% 32% 31% 33% Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) 18% 17% 17% 16% 15% Central and West Asia and North Africa (CWANA) 10% 9% 9% 9% 9% Result of operations (System level) 13.6 (6.4) 6.6 (1.7) 1.72 Center financial information Net assets 323 263 203 189 175 Annual Center cost change (percent) 1.0% 0.2% 0.3% 2.0% 2.0% Short-term liquidity indicator Working capital (days expenditure) 127 122 112 129 125 Current ratio 1.8 1.6 1.7 1.9 1.8 Longer-term sustainability indicator Operating fund/revenue (percent) 15% 13% 18% 22% 21% 1 Until 2002, excluded $5 million annually to support the System Office and other System initiatives. 2 At the Center level the 2002 result of operations was a deficit of $9.6 million (Table 3). This was more than offset by that portion of CGIAR funding ($11 million) not included in Center income, resulting in a System level surplus of $1.7 million. E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y O F T H E 2 0 0 2 C G I A R F I N A N C I A L R E S U L T S Table 2 CGIAR Contributions to the Research Agenda by Member Group | 1998­2002 (millions of US dollars) MEMBERS 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 1998-2002 Europe Austria 2.3 2.3 1.8 2.1 0.2 8.7 Belgium 6.0 6.8 4.7 4.5 4.9 26.9 Denmark 17.7 14.0 11.0 10.6 10.2 63.5 European Commission 24.9 6.0 22.3 21.7 24.5 99.4 Finland 2.1 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 8.1 France 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.0 7.8 31.6 Germany 16.3 15.5 10.2 12.3 10.5 64.8 Ireland 1.0 0.9 0.8 1.5 2.1 6.3 Italy 3.0 3.2 3.2 3.7 4.2 17.3 42 Luxembourg 0.7 0.7 1.3 0.8 0.8 4.3 Netherlands 14.7 11.6 13.7 12.2 17.0 69.2 Norway 8.3 8.9 7.7 8.3 10.4 43.6 Portugal 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 1.8 Spain 1.1 0.9 1.2 1.2 1.3 5.7 Sweden 9.3 10.3 9.4 9.2 10.7 48.9 Switzerland 22.7 22.8 18.3 15.7 16.0 95.5 United Kingdom 11.5 13.9 14.9 19.2 24.8 84.3 Subtotal 147.8 125.8 128.4 130.8 146.9 679.6 North America Canada 12.3 12.3 11.4 11.6 10.7 58.3 United States 40.5 39.4 42.1 45.4 54.9 222.3 Subtotal 52.8 51.7 53.5 57.0 65.6 280.6 Pacific Rim Australia 7.8 8.1 8.5 7.2 7.3 38.9 Japan 35.3 39.9 34.6 29.2 17.1 156.1 New Zealand 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.7 2.7 Subtotal 43.5 48.4 43.6 37.1 25.1 197.7 Developing countries Bangladesh 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.9 Brazil 0.7 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.9 2.8 China 0.5 0.7 1.0 0.9 1.0 4.1 Colombia 2.5 2.7 2.3 2.5 2.5 12.5 Côte d'Ivoire 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.4 Egypt, Arab Republic of 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 0.8 6.3 India 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.8 1.0 4.1 Indonesia 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.2 1.2 Iran, Islamic Republic of 2.0 1.8 1.7 1.7 0.9 8.1 Kenya 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.3 0.2 1.5 Korea, Republic of 0.9 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.1 4.8 Mexico 0.6 1.7 1.8 1.3 0.9 6.3 Nigeria 1.0 1.6 1.0 3.6 Pakistan 0.2 0.2 0.6 1.0 Peru 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.6 0.9 2.4 Philippines 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.2 1.8 South Africa 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.8 3.0 Syrian Arab Republic 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 Thailand 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.7 Uganda 0.3 0.3 0.6 1.2 Subtotal 13.4 14.7 13.8 13.7 12.7 68.3 Foundations Ford Foundation 3.1 2.6 2.6 2.7 1.3 12.3 Kellogg Foundation 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.9 Rockefeller Foundation 3.4 3.5 4.0 6.3 7.5 24.7 Subtotal 6.8 6.2 6.6 9.2 9.1 37.9 International and regional organizations ADB 3.8 4.4 6.0 6.9 6.5 27.6 AFDB 0.8 2.3 1.2 0.3 0.6 5.2 Arab Fund 1.5 1.9 1.7 1.6 1.0 7.7 FAO 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.4 1.8 3.2 IDB 2.1 1.5 1.4 0.5 0.5 6.0 IDRC 2.4 3.0 2.3 2.5 2.4 12.6 IFAD 4.0 6.9 5.8 6.6 5.8 29.1 OPEC Fund 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.2 1.2 UNDP 3.2 2.1 1.8 1.6 1.5 10.2 UNEP 0.1 0.2 0.7 0.7 1.4 3.1 World Bank* 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 50.0 230.0 Subtotal 63.7 67.7 66.3 66.5 71.7 335.9 Multi-donor and non-members 11.9 15.0 19.2 23.1 26.1 95.3 Total 340 330 331 337 357 1,695 *Until 2002, excluded $5 million annually to support the System Office and other System initiatives. C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H Figure 1 CGIAR Contributions | Millions of US dollars 150 120 2002 2001 90 60 43 30 0 Europe International North Pacific Developing Foundations Multi-donor and regional America Rim countries and organizations non-members partly offset by decreases in support from the Pacific Rim contributing $54.9 million, was the single largest contrib- of $12 million (32 percent) and a smaller reduction from utor, followed by the World Bank ($50.0 million) and the the developing countries. United Kingdom ($24.8 million). To compare with 2001, the United States and World Bank held the same rankings The increase in contributions from Europe came from the in that year, but the United Kingdom ranked only fifth. United Kingdom ($5.6 million, or 29 percent), Netherlands ($4.8 million, or 39 percent), European Resource Allocation Commission ($2.8 million, or 13 percent) and Norway In overall terms, total Center expenditures in 2002 ($2.1 million, or 25 percent). These more than offset amounted to $369 million, 4 percent higher than in 2001. decreases from Germany ($1.8 million, or 15 percent) and Resource allocation at the Centers is largely made at the Austria ($1.9 million, or 90 percent). In North America project level established in the context of a logical frame- the increase came from the United States ($9.6 million, work. The following paragraphs summarize, at the System or 21 percent), which more than offset a small reduction and Center levels, resource allocations by object of from Canada. The decrease in contributions from the expenditure, activity and region. Pacific Rim was due largely to a cut of about 50 percent (totaling approximately $12 million) in the Japanese con- Distribution among Centers: Figure 2 shows the distribu- tribution. Contributions by Australia and New Zealand tion of expenditures by Center in 2002. were stable at their 2001 levels. Expenditures by Object: Overall personnel costs continued Contributions from the 22 developing-country Members to stabilize at 49 percent of total expenditures in 2002, decreased from $13.7 million in 2001 to $12.7 million in compared to an average of 55 percent for the years prior 2002, representing a reduction of 8 percent. Colombia to 2000. However, there are still large variations among maintained its position as the largest contributor among the Centers in personnel costs. The total number of staff developing countries with $2.5 million in support. continued to decline from 8,4903 in 2001 to 7,759 in 2002, an overall reduction of 9 percent. All of the reduc- The top 13 contributors to the CGIAR in 2002 provided tion was in the category of non-internationally recruited about three-quarters of the funding for the research agen- staff. Numbers of internationally recruited staff (IRS) da, the same proportion as in 2001. The United States, increased by 47, mainly because of recruitment at the E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y O F T H E 2 0 0 2 C G I A R F I N A N C I A L R E S U L T S Figure 2 Expenditures by Center | Millions of US dollars 40 30 20 44 10 0 A T T A A IRRI IIT CIA ILRI IPGRI SAIR CIP CIMMYT IC ARDCI IFPRI rldo Westryr IWMI CIFOR ARD orldFish W NARSI rofo W Ag IWMI and smaller increases at the CIAT, CIMMYT, ICRISAT Figure 3 Expenditures by Object | 2002 and IFPRI. Expenditures by object appear in Figure 3. Activities: Illustrative allocations by the five principal CGIAR activities -- increasing productivity, protecting the environment, saving biodiversity, improving policies and strengthening national agricultural research systems (NARS) -- for 2002 are shown in Figure 4. These ratios are not significantly different from the 2001 ratios. Allocation by Region: Illustrative allocations by region appear in Figure 5. Expenditures in sub-Saharan Africa remained stable at 43 percent of total CGIAR expendi- tures. Allocations in Asia increased from 32 percent to Personel 49% 33 percent. Allocations targeted to Latin America and the Caribbean decreased from 16 percent to 15 percent. Supplies/service 40% Expenditures in Central and West Asia and North Africa remained at 9 percent of the CGIAR total. Travel 7% Center Perspectives Depreciation 4% The stability noted at the System level reflects a range of outcomes at the individual Centers. Funding increased for nine Centers. Compared with their 2001 levels, one of the C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H Figure 4 Expenditures by Activity | 2002 Figure 5 Allocations by Developing Region | 2002 45 Increasing productivity 34% Sub-Saharan Africa 43% Strengthening NARS 23% Asia 33% Protecting the environment 18% Latin America and Caribbean 15% Improving policies 15% Central and West Asia and North Africa 9% Saving biodiversity 10% increases, CIFOR, was less that 5 percent, five -- incurred significant deficits. In the case of CIAT, CIP, ILRI WorldFish, IFPRI, ICARDA, ILRI, and WARDA­The Africa and ISNAR, the deficits ranged from $0.6 to $0.9 million. Rice Center ranged from 5­10 percent. Two, CIAT and The deficits were much higher at ICRISAT ($4 million) and IPGRI were within 10­15 percent. One, IWMI, exceeded 90 CIMMYT ($5 million). The remaining seven Centers (ICAR- percent. DA, World Agroforestry, IITA, IPGRI, IRRI, IWMI and WARDA) broke even or incurred a marginal surplus or On the other hand, funding for the other seven Centers deficit in their operations. remained unchanged or contracted. Funding for four of these -- World Agroforestry, IITA, ISNAR and ICRISAT -- Table 3 provides 2002 and 2001 results of operations by contracted by less than 5 percent. Funding for two -- IRRI Center. and CIP -- fell by 5­10 percent, and for one, CIMMYT, fell by more than 10 percent. It should be noted here that Most Centers have built up their reserves by budgeting an part of the World Bank's contribution ($7 million) was appropriate amount in their unrestricted budgets. In the allocated4 to Centers to partly cushion the effect of the last few years, they have also increased their efforts to reduction in the Japanese contribution noted earlier. address long-term financial health through full cost budgeting on their restricted projects. Operational results (expenditures matched against funding and Center income) shows that three Centers (CIFOR, Table 4 provides an overview of Centers' finances (funding WorldFish and IFPRI) ended the year with healthy surplus- sources and allocation) for 2002, and Table 5 summarizes es that contributed to their reserves. On the other hand, the System's overall financial position for the years 1998 six Centers (CIAT, CIP, ILRI, ISNAR, ICRISAT and CIMMYT) to 2002. E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y O F T H E 2 0 0 2 C G I A R F I N A N C I A L R E S U L T S Table 3 Results of Operation by Center | 2001­2002 (millions of US dollars) 2002 2001 Member Center Total Expenditure Result* Member Center Total Expenditure Result* support income revenue support income revenue 46 CIAT 31.0 0.7 31.7 32.3 (0.6) 27.5 2.3 29.8 29.7 0.1 CIFOR 12.5 0.0 12.5 11.7 0.8 12.3 0.4 12.7 12.6 0.1 CIMMYT 35.2 1.2 36.4 41.3 (4.9) 39.3 1.1 40.4 40.7 (0.3) CIP 18.0 0.6 18.5 19.2 (0.6) 18.7 0.0 18.7 19.7 (1.0) ICARDA 23.1 1.2 24.3 24.3 0.0 21.1 0.4 21.5 21.3 0.2 ICRISAT 19.8 1.0 20.8 24.8 (4.0) 20.4 1.4 21.8 23.9 (2.1) IFPRI 22.9 0.4 23.3 22.7 0.6 21.7 0.7 22.5 22.5 0.0 IITA 31.4 1.0 32.5 32.6 (0.2) 31.6 2.2 33.8 35.3 (1.5) ILRI 26.4 0.4 26.8 27.5 (0.7) 24.3 1.9 26.2 28.2 (2.0) IPGRI 25.3 0.4 25.7 25.6 0.1 22.3 0.8 23.1 23.1 0.0 IRRI 28.5 4.6 33.2 33.4 (0.2) 30.3 1.7 32.0 32.6 (0.6) ISNAR 7.9 0.0 7.9 8.9 (0.9) 7.9 0.1 8.1 8.1 0.0 IWMI 20.3 0.7 20.9 20.7 0.2 10.8 0.7 11.5 11.4 0.1 WARDA 9.7 0.5 10.1 9.8 0.3 8.8 1.0 9.7 9.4 0.3 World Agroforestry1 21.3 0.6 21.9 21.8 0.2 21.6 0.6 22.2 22.9 (0.7) WorldFish2 12.7 0.0 12.7 12.3 0.4 12.1 0.4 12.5 13.1 (0.6) TOTAL 346 13 359 369 (9.6) 331 16 346 355 (8.0) * Deficits were financed by reserves. 1 Formerly International Center for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF). 2 Formerly International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management (ICLARM). C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H Table 4 Center Finances | 2002 (millions of US dollars) Allocations Funding source Increasing Protecting Saving Improving Strengthening Total Pacific North Developing Intl & Regnl Non Total Center Reserves productivity the biodiversity policies NARS expenditures Europe Rim America countries organizations Foundations members funding income addition/ environment draw( ) 47 CIAT 14.1 6.4 4.9 1.5 5.4 32.3 10.4 2.3 6.7 2.8 5.7 1.4 1.7 31.0 0.7 (0.6) CIFOR 2.0 3.5 2.0 2.6 1.5 11.7 7.0 0.9 1.4 0.2 2.0 0.2 0.8 12.5 0.8 CIMMYT 15.4 7.9 5.8 1.7 10.6 41.3 9.6 3.3 6.9 2.0 5.2 2.4 5.8 35.2 1.2 (4.9) CIP 8.8 4.5 1.2 1.0 3.6 19.2 10.2 1.1 2.7 0.8 2.6 0.3 0.3 18.0 0.6 (0.6) ICARDA 10.3 5.5 3.7 1.1 3.7 24.3 7.0 0.9 7.9 1.3 5.4 0.8 23.1 1.2 (0.0) ICRISAT 9.9 3.1 2.9 4.4 4.4 24.7 7.6 1.6 4.9 0.4 4.1 0.3 1.0 19.8 0.9 (4.1) IFPRI 1.8 13.7 7.3 22.8 8.8 1.4 4.0 0.9 3.9 1.2 2.7 22.9 0.4 0.5 IITA 17.7 4.1 1.3 2.6 6.8 32.6 10.5 1.7 10.9 0.1 5.1 0.5 2.6 31.4 1.0 (0.2) ILRI 15.5 3.3 1.9 2.7 4.1 27.5 14.2 1.1 4.2 0.5 4.3 0.3 1.8 26.4 0.4 (0.7) IPGRI 5.5 2.2 7.5 2.6 7.8 25.6 12.7 1.3 1.6 1.2 5.1 0.1 3.4 25.3 0.4 0.1 IRRI 14.8 5.7 2.6 4.2 6.0 33.4 12.5 4.5 4.6 1.1 4.6 1.1 0.2 28.5 4.6 (0.3) ISNAR 2.0 6.9 8.9 4.1 0.4 0.9 0.3 1.4 0.2 0.7 7.9 0.0 (1.0) IWMI 8.2 7.2 5.2 20.7 10.9 0.8 1.5 0.5 4.7 0.0 1.9 20.3 0.7 0.3 WARDA 2.8 1.9 0.9 1.2 3.0 9.8 3.9 2.2 1.1 0.0 1.9 0.2 0.4 9.7 0.5 0.4 World Agroforestry1 6.4 4.7 1.0 3.1 6.6 21.8 11.1 0.7 4.0 0.3 3.1 0.8 1.2 21.3 0.6 0.2 WorldFish2 2.4 4.0 0.1 3.8 1.9 12.2 6.3 0.9 2.4 0.4 1.8 0.9 12.7 0.5 Total 126 67 36 55 85 369 147 25 66 13 61 9 26 346 13 (9.6) 1 Formerly International Center for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF). 2 Formerly International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management (ICLARM). E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y O F T H E 2 0 0 2 C G I A R F I N A N C I A L R E S U L T S Table 5 CGIAR System Financial Position | 1998­2002 (thousands of US dollars) 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Assets Current assets Cash and cash equivalents 171,110 212,347 151,327 142,339 149,076 Accounts receivable: Donors 65,965 54,062 60,823 63,346 72,864 Employees 2,699 2,591 3,499 2,498 3,078 48 Others 13,154 12,656 13,576 13,342 14,864 Inventories 7,257 6,653 6,506 6,040 4,447 Pre-paid expenses 2,786 3,398 3,069 3,265 3,673 Other current assets 3,247 4,549 5,248 3,515 3,327 Total current assets 266,218 296,256 244,048 234,345 251,329 Fixed Assets Property, plant and equipment 475,861 399,398 289,339 274,451 261,394 Less: accumulated depreciation 248,819 225,702 191,265 185,392 184,222 Total fixed assets (net) 227,042 173,696 98,074 89,058 77,172 Other assets 25,728 33,495 41,828 Total assets 493,260 469,952 367,850 356,898 370,329 Liabilities and net assets Current liabilities Accounts payable: Donors 67,200 100,576 56,658 54,078 78,749 Employees 8,971 9,876 5,369 12,020 11,877 Others 19,268 25,520 25,966 26,687 31,877 In-trust accounts 1,732 3,457 3,838 2,505 2,300 Accruals and provisions 50,054 43,855 48,259 47,223 42,377 Total current liabilities 147,225 183,284 140,090 142,513 167,180 Long-term liabilities 23,105 23,453 24,899 25,814 27,906 Long-term loan 190 Others 22,915 23,453 24,899 25,814 27,906 Total long-term liabilities 23,105 23,453 24,899 25,814 27,906 Total liabilities 170,330 206,737 164,989 168,328 195,086 Net assets 322,930 263,215 202,861 188,570 175,243 Total liabilities and net assets 493,260 469,952 367,850 356,898 370,329 C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H Conclusion As part of the annual review of the substantive financial The 2002 results confirm the continued stability of CGIAR performance, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) will review finances in the aggregate. As in the last several years, the 2002 externally audited financial statements of the however, there is wide variability in financial performance Centers to ensure their compliance with CGIAR accounting among the 16 Centers, suggesting a need for continued policy and reporting guidelines. The PwC report will vigilance at both the Center and System levels. include a compliance report to each of the 16 Centers. 49 Compliance with Financial Guidelines In view of recent developments in accounting and corporate The Centers are autonomous institutions governed by governance worldwide, the CGIAR finance professionals their respective boards of trustees. To ensure transparency and the CGIAR Secretariat have launched a major review and consistency in financial practices and the presenta- of the CGIAR Accounting Guidelines. Another mechanism to tion of financial information, the Centers are required to strengthen accountability within the CGIAR is an initia- follow financial guidelines issued by the CGIAR tive to strengthen internal audit within the System by Secretariat. Developed with the input of Center financial providing strategic internal audit advice and services to personnel and external financial experts, these guidelines the Centers. The Internal Audit initiative is now part of aim to bring the CGIAR's financial practices into conform- the System Office. In 2002, five Centers participated in ity with those generally accepted worldwide. this initiative, with four more joining in 2003. 1 Included in this amount is $5 million of the World Bank's contribution for the System Office, which was not included in the 2001 CGIAR funding total. For comparability, the World Bank's total contribution of $50 million each in 2001 and 2002 is used in this analysis. 2 For presentation purposes, the Members are divided into four distinct groups: industrialized countries (21), developing countries (22), foundations (3), and international and regional organizations (12). Industrialized countries are further divided along geographical lines into three subgroups: Europe, North America and Pacific Rim. 3 Revised from 8,485 published in the 2001 Executive Summary, based on Center updates. 4 Allocation was based on half of the total reduction by Japan to each Center. E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y O F T H E 2 0 0 2 C G I A R F I N A N C I A L R E S U L T S 50 Who's Who in the CGIAR in 2002 C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H CGIAR Members as of December 31, 2002 COUNTRY KEY REPRESENTATIVE KEY COOPERATING INSTITUTION Australia Peter Core Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research Austria Walter Rill Federal Ministry of Finance Bangladesh M.A. Hamid Miah Ministry of Agriculture Belgium Luc Sas Ministry of Foreign Affairs Brazil Alberto Portugal Ministry of Agriculture and Food Supply, EMBRAPA 51 Canada Christine Campbell Canadian International Development Agency China Dongyu Qu Ministry of Agriculture Colombia Luis Arango-Nieto Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Côte d'Ivoire Kassoum Traore Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources Denmark Klaus Winkel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, DANIDA Egypt, Arab Republic of Mohamed Khalifa Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reclamation Finland Anna-Liisa Korhonen Ministry of Foreign Affairs France Gilles Saint-Martin Ministry of Foreign Affairs Germany Hans-Jochen de Haas Federal Ministry of Economic Cooperation and Development India Mangala Rai Ministry of Agriculture, ICAR Indonesia Abdul Fattah Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Iran, Islamic Republic of Behzad Ghareyazie Ministry of Agriculture Ireland Brendan Rogers Department of Foreign Affairs Israel Nachman Paster Ministry of Agriculture Italy Gioacchino Carabba Ministry of Foreign Affairs Japan Toshinori Mitsunaga Ministry of Foreign Affairs Kenya Wilfred Mwangi Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Korea, Republic of Kyung-Han Ryu Ministry of Agriculture Luxembourg Georges Heinen Ministry of Finance Malaysia Saharan Anang Malaysian Agricultural Research and Development Institute Mexico Jesús Moncada de la Fuente Ministry of Agriculture Morocco Hamid Narjisse Ministry of Agriculture, INRA Netherlands Adrian Koekoek Ministry of Foreign Affairs New Zealand Keneti Faulalo Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade Nigeria Oloche Edache Ministry of Agriculture and Natural Resources Norway Aslak Brun Ministry of Foreign Affairs Pakistan Zafar Altaf Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock Peru Ricardo Sevilla Panizo Ministry of Agriculture Philippines William Medrano Department of Agriculture Portugal Joao Borges Ministry of Finance Romania Ilie Sarbu Ministry of Agriculture and Food Russian Federation Viktor Dragavtsev Russian Academy of Agricultural Sciences W H O ' S W H O I N T H E C G I A R I N 2 0 0 2 COUNTRY KEY REPRESENTATIVE KEY COOPERATING INSTITUTION South Africa Bongiwe Njobe Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs Spain Adolfo Cazorla Ministry of Agriculture Sweden Eva Ohlsson Ministry of Foreign Affairs, SIDA Switzerland Dora Rapold Swiss Development Cooperation Syrian Arab Republic Noureddin Mona Ministry of Agriculture and Agricultural Reform Thailand Somsak Singholka Department of Agriculture 52 Uganda Joseph Mukiibi Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries United Kingdom Roland Fox Department for International Development United States of America Emmy M. Simmons United States Agency for International Development FOUNDATIONS REPRESENTATIVES Ford Foundation Michael E. Conroy Kellogg Foundation Rick Foster Rockefeller Foundation Robert W. Herdt Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture Andrew J. Bennett INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS REPRESENTATIVES African Development Bank Akililu A. Afework Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development Mervat Wehba Badawi Asian Development Bank Bradford Philips Commission of the European Community Uwe Werblow Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Officer-in-charge, Sustainable Development Department Inter-American Development Bank Ruben Echeverria International Development Research Centre Peter Cooper International Fund for Agricultural Development Rodney Cooke OPEC Fund for International Development Y. Seyyid Abdulai United Nations Development Programme Alvaro Umaña United Nations Environment Programme Shafqat Kakakhel World Bank Kevin Cleaver CGIAR REGIONS REPRESENTATIVES Africa (Ethiopia) Seyfu Ketema Asia (Sri Lanka) S.D.G. Jayawardene Pacific (Fiji) Samison Ulitu Eastern Europe (Hungary) Ervin Balazs Latin America and Caribbean (Dominica) Compton Lawrence Paul Middle East Northa Africa (Sudan) Osman A.A. Ageeb C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H The CGIAR as of December 31, 2002 CGIAR Chairman: Ian Johnson, Vice President, Environmentally and Socially Sustainable Development, The World Bank CGIAR Director: Francisco J. Reifschneider Cosponsors and Their Representatives: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Officer-in-charge, Sustainable Development Department International Fund for Agricultural Development, Rodney Cooke United Nations Development Programme, Alvaro Umaña 53 The World Bank, Kevin Cleaver Executive Council Advisory Committees Partnership Committees Chairman: Ian Johnson Interim Science Council (formerly TAC): NGO Committee (through AGM02) Cosponsors: Emil Q. Javier, Chair Monica Kapiriri, Cochair Officer-in-charge, Sustainable Shellemiah O. Keya, Executive Patrick Mulvany, Cochair Development Department (FAO) Secretary Juan Sanchez Barba Kevin Cleaver (World Bank) Michael Cernea Mutizwa Mukute Rodney Cooke (IFAD) Elias Fereres Peter Rosset CBC Chair: Adel El-Beltagy Hans Gregersen (ex-officio) CDC Chair: John Vercoe Richard R. Harwood Private Sector Committee TAC/iSC Chair: Emil Javier Alain de Janvry R.N. Sam Dryden, Chair GFAR Chair: Mohamad Roozitalab Maria Antonia Fernandez Martinez Claudio Barriga OECD/DAC: Oumar Niangado Badrinarayan Barwale Jonathan Conly (US) Hirofumi Uchimiya Wallace Beversdorf Toshinori Mitsunaga (Japan) Vo-Tong Xuan Robert Horsch Klaas Tamminga (Norway) Seizo Sumida Hans-Jochen de Haas (Germany) iSC Standing Panel on Impact Barry Thomas Klaus Winkel (Denmark) Assessment: Florence Wambugu Developing Countries: Hans Gregersen, Chair Luis Arango Nieto (Colombia) Reuben Echeverria Bongiwe Njobe (S. Africa) Hermann Waibel CGIAR System Office Dongyu Qu (China) Noureddin Mona (Syria) Genetic Resources Policy Committee: Central Advisory Service for Abed Al-Nabi Fardous (AARINENA) M.S. Swaminathan, Chair Intellectual Property: Foundations: Robert Bertram Victoria Henson-Apollonio, Senior Robert Herdt (Rockefeller) Ronald P. Cantrell Research Officer Partners: José T. Esquinas-Alcazar Sam Dryden (PSC Chair) Geoffrey C. Hawtin Chief Information Officer: Civil Society (temporarily vacant) Bernard Le Buanec Enrica M. Porcari Executive Secretary, ExCo: Godwin Y. Mkamanga Francisco Reifschneider Renato Salazar CGIAR Secretariat CGIAR Secretariat: Selçuk Özgediz Carl-Gustaf Thornström Francisco J. B. Reifschneider, Director Usha Barwale Zehr Feroza Vatcha, Administrative Officer W H O ' S W H O I N T H E C G I A R I N 2 0 0 2 Josephine Hernandez, Executive Interim Science Council Secretariat: Geoffrey C. Hawtin, IPGRI Assistant Shellemiah O. Keya, Executive Masaru Iwanaga, CIMMYT Secretary David Kaimowitz, CIFOR Governance and Partnerships: Timothy Kelley, Senior Agricultural Kanayo F. Nwanze, WARDA Selçuk Özgediz, Management Adviser Research Officer Frank Rijsberman, IWMI Manuel Lantin, Science Adviser Sirkka Immonen, Senior Agricultural Carlos Sere, ILRI Jason Yauney, Program Assistant Research Officer Joachim von Braun, IFPRI Barbara Eckberg, Program Assistant Amir Kassam, Senior Agricultural Joachim Voss, CIAT Research Officer Meryl Williams, ICLARM Investor Relations and Finance: Hubert Zandstra, CIP Ravi Tadvalkar, Lead Finance Officer Internal Audit: Shey Tata, Senior Finance Officer John Fitzsimmon Public Awareness and Resource 54 Salah Brahimi, Senior Cofinancing Mobilization Committee Officer William D. Dar, Chair Zewdnesh Abegaz, Program Assistant Center Committees Kevin Cleaver Geoffrey C. Hawtin Information and Corporate Committee of Board Chairs Klaus Leisinger Communications: John E. Vercoe, ILRI, Chair Iain MacGillivray Fionna Douglas, Communications Lucie Edwards, ICRAF Alex McCalla Advisor Benchaphun Shinawatra Ekasingh, Kanayo Nwanze Sarwat Hussain, Senior IPGRI Ruth Raymond Communications Officer Remo Gautschi, IWMI Francisco Reifschneider Danielle Lucca, Information Officer Robert D. Havener, ICARDA John Riggan Johannes Woelcke, Junior Lauritz Broder Holm-Nielsen, CIAT Ebbe Schioler Professional Officer Norman Lindsay Innes, WARDA Joachim Voss M. Caryl Jones-Swahn, Program Angeline Kamba, IRRI Meryl Williams Assistant Robert Kearney, ICLARM Hubert Zandstra Elizabeth Charles, Program Assistant Kang-Kwun Kim, CIP Jagmohan S. Maini, CIFOR Executive Secretary, Center Directors Alex McCalla, CIMMYT Association of Committee: Moise C. Mensah, ISNAR International Agricultural Kerri Wright Platais Geoff Miller, IFPRI Research Centers Martha Stone, ICRISAT Maria G. Guerrera, Executive Director Future Harvest Foundation Mortimer Neufville, IITA Judith Symonds, Executive Director Jason Wettstein, Communications Center Directors Committee Officer Adel El-Beltagy, ICARDA, Chair Sara J. Scherr, Director, Stein W. Bie, ISNAR Ecoagriculture Partners Ronald P. Cantrell, IRRI William D. Dar, ICRISAT Gender and Diversity: Dennis Garrity, ICRAF Vicki Wilde, Program Leader Peter Hartmann, IITA C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H CGIAR Chairmen, 1971­2002 Ian Johnson, 2000­ Ismail Serageldin, 1994­2000 V. Rajagopalan, 1991­1993 Wilfried Thalwitz, 1990­1991 W. David Hopper, 1987­1990 S. Shahid Hussain, 1984­1987 Warren Baum, 1974­1983 Richard H. Demuth, 1971­1974 CGIAR Directors, 2001­ Francisco J.B. Reifschneider, 2001­ 55 CGIAR Executive Secretaries, 1972­2001 Alexander von der Osten, 1989­2001 Curtis Farrar, 1982­1989 Michael Lejeune, 1975­1982 Harold Graves, 1972­1975 TAC Chairs, 1971­2001 Emil Q. Javier, 2000­2001 Donald Winkelmann, 1994­1999 Alex McCalla, 1988­1994 Guy Camus, 1982­1987 Ralph Cummings, 1977­1982 Sir John Crawford, 1971­1976 TAC Executive Secretaries, 1971­2001 Shellemiah O. Keya, 1996­2001 Guido Gryseels, 1995­1996 John Monyo, 1985­1994 Alexander von der Osten, 1982­1985 Philippe Mahler, 1976­1982 Peter Oram, 1971­1976 Interim Science Council Chair, 2002­ Emil Q. Javier, 2002­ iSC Executive Secretary, 2002­ Shellemiah O. Keya, 2002­ W H O ' S W H O I N T H E C G I A R I N 2 0 0 2 Acronyms and Abbreviations AARINENA Association of Agricultural Research Institutions INRA Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique in the Near East and North Africa (National Agricultural Research Institute), ADB Asian Development Bank Morocco AFDB African Development Bank IPGRI International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, AGM02 2002 Annual General Meeting of the CGIAR Italy AIDS Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome IPR intellectual property rights ARI African Rice Initiative IRRI International Rice Research Institute, Philippines CAC Central Asia and the Caucasus region IRS internationally recruited staff CAPRi Collective Action and Property Rights iSC Interim Science Council of the CGIAR (replacing program of the CGIAR TAC) CBC Committee of Board Chairs of the CGIAR ISNAR International Service for National Agricultural 56 CDC Center Directors Committee of the CGIAR Research, Netherlands CGIAR Consultative Group on International IWMI International Water Management Institute, Agricultural Research Sri Lanka CIAT Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical LAC Latin America and Caribbean (International Center for Tropical Agriculture), LIRI Livestock Health Research Institute, Uganda Colombia NARS national agricultural research systems CIFOR Center for International Forestry Research, NERICA new rices for Africa Indonesia NGO nongovernmental organization CIMMYT Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maiz OECD/DAC Organization for Economic Co-operation and y Trigo (International Maize and Wheat Development/Development Assistance Improvement Center), Mexico Committee CIP Centro Internacional de la Papa (International OPEC Organization of Petroleum-Exporting Countries Potato Center), Peru PRAPACE Programme Régional d'Amélioration de la CMD cassava mosaic disease Culture de la Pomme de Terre en Afrique CTVM Centre for Tropical Veterinary Medicine, Centrale et de l'Est (Regional Potato and University of Edinburgh Sweet Potato Improvement Network for East CWANA Central and West Asia and North Africa and Central Africa) DANIDA Danish International Development Agency PSC Private Sector Committee of the CGIAR EMBRAPA Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation PwC PricewaterhouseCoopers ExCo Executive Council of the CGIAR SGRP Systemwide Genetic Resources Program FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the of the CGIAR United Nations SIDA Swedish International Development Cooperation GFAR Global Forum on Agricultural Research Agency GIS geographic information systems SoilFertNet Soil Fertility Management and Policy Network for GRPI Genetic Resources Policy Initiative of IPGRI Maize-Based Farming Systems in Southern ICAR Indian Council of Agricultural Research Africa ICARDA International Center for Agricultural Research TAC Technical Advisory Committee of the CGIAR in the Dry Areas, Syrian Arab Republic (replaced by interim Science Council) ICRAF World Agroforestry Center, Kenya USAID United States Agency for International ICRISAT International Crops Research Institute for the Development Semi-Arid Tropics, India UNDP United Nations Development Programme IDB Inter-American Development Bank UNEP United Nations Environment Programme IDRC International Development Research Centre, UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Canada Cultural Organization IER Institut d'Economie Rurale (Institute of Rural VITAA Vitamin A for Africa Economy), Mali WARDA West Africa Rice Development Association ­ IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development The Africa Rice Center, Côte d'Ivoire IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute, WEHAB United Nations initiative for integrated action United States on water, energy, health, agriculture and IITA International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, biodiversity Nigeria WFS:fyl World Food Summit: five years later ILRI International Livestock Research Institute, WSSD World Summit on Sustainable Development Kenya and Ethiopia WTO World Trade Organization C O N S U L T A T I V E G R O U P O N I N T E R N A T I O N A L A G R I C U L T U R A L R E S E A R C H Photo Credits > Cover: GettyOne > page 2: IRRI > page 5: CGIAR > page 6: CGIAR > page 8: CIP > page 10: IRRI > page 11: ICRISAT > Page 15: IRRI > page 16: CIAT > page 17: World Bank > page 18: CIMMYT > page 19: CIP > page 20: ICARDA > page 21: ICRISAT > page 22: WARDA > page 23: IITA > page 24: ILRI > page 25: IITA > page 26: IRRI > page 27: CIP > page 28: World Bank > page 29: WARDA > page 30: Photo Disk > page 31: WorldFish > page 33: CIMMYT > page 34: ICARDA > page 38: IRRI > page 39: IRRI > page 50: IRRI > page 55: Photo Disk. Design > Patricia Hord.Graphik Design Printed by > Jarboe Edited by > Peter Fredenburg, IRRI, with special thanks CGIAR Secretariat A Unit of the CGIAR System Office 1818 H Street, NW Washington, DC 20433, USA CGIAR t 1 202 473 8951 f 1 202 473 8110 e cgiar@cgiar.org www.cgiar.org July 2003 Printed on environmentally friendly paper