Special Edition Special Edition Special Edition Special Edition

August 2003

Editorial

Pre-GFAR 2003 CSO Workshop

Keynote Addresses

• Chairman's Opening Speech
• Ian Johnson's Speech
• Wiseman Nkulhu's
  Speech

From Dresden to Dakar

Roundtable Discussions

Poster Session

Side Events

• CGIAR Regional Priority-setting Report
• Towards a Global Agenda for ICM
• International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources / Global Conservation Trust

Sub-plenary Session on GPPs

• Rural Knowledge
  Systems & Innovation Processes
• Agrobased SMEs & Markets
• Agriculture–Livestock Integration
• Organizational Partnerships for Agricultural Research
• Innovative Policy Directions & Approaches for Sustainable Agricultural Development

Stakeholder Consultations

• NARS
• Farmers' Organizations
• NGOs
• ARIs
• IARCs
• Donor Community
• Private Sector

GFAR 2003 Conference Evaluation

Back to CONTENTS

List of Acronyms 

From Dresden to Dakar

From Dresden to Dakar: Achievements,
Gaps and the Way Forward

The Global Forum on Agricultural Research was founded in October 1996 by representatives of several institutions including National Agricultural Research Systems that share a common view of the important contribution agriculture could make to sustainable development. They also shared the view that in order for agriculture to meet the legitimate expectations placed on it, it must rely rather heavily on research and that for research to deliver, stakeholders needed to pool their knowledge, expertise, human and financial resources together by forming partnerships and alliances charged with carrying out the required agricultural research for development activities. They concluded that it is only in this way that they could obtain the much sought after positive impact on the livelihoods of people as well as their environment, because of the benefits of the economies of scale that come from working together in cost-effective partnerships.

All of us here today represent one or the other group of the stakeholders who got together on that historic occasion to found GFAR, and I believe that we all still share that vision of agricultural research contributing meaningfully to sustainable development.

Although GFAR was founded seven years ago, it was only three years ago, at the Dresden meeting in 2000, that you firmly put the GFAR initiative on the global agenda, when you elaborated and shared your vision of a knowledge-driven agriculture, in addition to developing a formal business plan that identified thematic areas of research within which the group would initially confine its activities.

Dresden, therefore, constitutes a valid and important starting point from where we look forward in order to identify important lessons learned over that period of time, build on our achievements and correct our shortcomings, so that we can move forward in a more focused way and more effectively than we were able to do a few years ago. Hence the title of this presentation: From Dresden to Dakar: Achievements, Gaps and the Way Forward.

Another important landmark or point de repère from which we can look forward was the first GFAR external review, carried out in 2000. The reviewers made some important observations and recommendations, which we can examine to see how well we responded and what still needs to be done. These two elements - the business plan formulated in Dresden in 2000, and the outputs of the first external review of GFAR made available in 2001 - constitute the baseline for the identification of achievements to build on, and gaps to fill.

The last business plan contained four elements on which GFAR was to focus: (1) promotion of research partnerships; (2) contribution to global knowledge pool on ARD; (3) strengthening and contributing to capacity-building of the weaker GFAR stakeholders; and (4) facilitating information exchange and knowledge flow amongst stakeholders and with the outside world.

The green light was given in Dresden during the GFAR 2000 conference to identify ongoing activities on which Global Partnership Programmes could be built, and/or to develop new ones if partners showed sufficient interest for such a collaborative endeavor. GPPs constitute the privileged instrument that GFAR uses to foster research partnerships around problems of critical importance to its goal of contributing to the development of a productive and sustainable agriculture. They are collaborative programs, projects or activities initiated, developed and implemented by recognized GFAR stakeholder groups, and which remain open to participation by other stakeholders as and when they find a suitable niche. They exploit the comparative advantages of participating stakeholders, do not reinvent the wheel and are implemented at the most effective level (local, regional or global). In other words, they must reflect and demonstrate the GFAR guiding principles of complementarity, additionality and subsidiarity respectively.

A number of such ongoing activities and new ideas were presented in Dresden out of which four were developed as GPPs: (1) Direct sowing, Mulch-based systems and Conservation agriculture (DMC); (2) Commodity Chains; (3) Underutilized Species; and (4) Promotion of Local Innovation (PROLINNOVA). Seven others are in various stages of development. Tables 2 and 3 provide details of the institutions involved in these GPPs.

Table 2. Ongoing GPPs

Table 3. GPPs under development

These may appear to be an acceptable number of activities in a three-year period, given the complexity of developing these partnership activities. Nevertheless, the rate of developing and implementing GPPs appears rather slow, especially as some effort has been put into identifying bottlenecks that may slow down the process during an IFAD-funded workshop on Methodologies, Organization and Management of Global Partnership Programmes held in October 2001. A low level of awareness amongst stakeholders may be one of several reasons for this slow pace, and we invite you to reflect and make recommendations on how to improve the pace of developing and implementing GPPs.

At another level of analysis, we examined the two groups of GPPs, both ongoing and under development, in terms of the sectoral focus and observed that over two-thirds or 60% of the GPPs are focused on crops, livestock and some form of crop-livestock integration, with the remaining one-third addressing crosscutting issues. No activity specifically targeted forestry, fisheries or their integration into crops and livestock research. Yet it is clearly stated in the GFAR global vision for ARD that GFAR stakeholders envision the development of an agriculture including crops, livestock, fisheries and forestry. In other words, there is a noticeable gap or shortcoming that needs to be examined and corrected.

We therefore flag the issue for discussion during roundtable and stakeholder consultations for feedback to the following question. Do we as GFAR stakeholders still accept and subscribe to the concept so clearly enunciated in the global vision that our agricultural development activities should include crops, livestock, forestry and fisheries sectors, while striving to address these components in an integrated manner? If positive, then what strategies can we put in place to ensure that we develop a balanced portfolio of projects? If negative, why, and what strategies can we suggest to address the two neglected sectors of forestry and fisheries?

As indicated earlier, the thematic areas of inquiries in which GFAR would confine its activities were identified and defined in Dresden and comprise: Genetic Resources Management and Biotechnology, Natural Resource Management and Agro-Ecology, Commodity Chains/Underutilized Species, and Policies and Institutional Development. We cross-matched our portfolio of GPPs with these thematic areas to see how well we tackled the various themes (see Tables 4 and 5).

Table 4. Matrix of ongoing GPPs and thematic areas

Table 5. Matrix of GPPs under development and thematic areas

The older GPPs seemed to have neglected policy issues, while the ones currently under development move away from the management of genetic resources and biotechnology, and concentrated on policies and institutional development. Overall, we may conclude that the observed spread is acceptable, and that given the dynamic nature of contemporary global issues, the apparent imbalance may correct itself over a period of time. Nonetheless, in view of the pressing issues of sustainable development raised by the keynote speakers and which may become critical in the near future, we ask you to reflect on whether we should privilege one or the other of these thematic areas in the near future.

We believe that GFAR is in a good position to contribute to the global knowledge pool in ARD, in order to influence people and policies. The external review recommended that GFAR identify issues of critical importance to ARD and organize and facilitate discussion around such issues.

The goal of course is to take advantage of the collective wisdom, knowledge and expertise in the group and elsewhere, to tackle topical issues and provide information and knowledge that clarify these issues where they are unclear or controversial. The expectation is that ordinary people, researchers, decision-makers at all levels and governments become better enlightened and could then make informed decisions, take or change a position, adopt new approaches, methods and ways of doing things, improve, formulate and implement policies and so on. In order to achieve these outputs, however, not only do we have to carefully select the topical issues, debate, discuss and work on them, but also share the outcomes with targeted audiences. We believe there is a gap in this regard, because as a group we have not effectively addressed this recommendation.

We could have tackled any one of a long list of issues such as: (1) essential elements for public-private collaboration in ARD; (2) the biotechnology revolution in the service of ARD - responding to opportunities and managing risks; (3) mainstreaming gender in different cultural settings - the way forward; (4) the doubly green revolution - myths or realities; (5) bridging the biotechnology divide; (6) essential elements for organizational partnerships in ARD; (7) access to genetic resources and benefit-sharing under the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture; and (8) good versus right research - responding to farmers' demands.

The challenge for us therefore is to map out how we should address this element in the next business plan. We urge you to suggest a list of issues and suggest mechanisms that could be used to stimulate fruitful exchange of ideas on them, followed by effective and targeted dissemination of the outputs in order to have some impact on the global agenda for ARD.

The seven-stakeholder strong GFAR chain has three weak links: the NARS represented by their RF/SRF, NGOs and FOs. Aware of the truism that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, we as a group decided that strengthening the weak links in the interest of the chain is an important issue, and incorporated the idea into our last business plan. The idea was endorsed by the external review panel with strong recommendations that special attention be paid to providing institutional support to these stakeholders. Evidently, organized farmer groups or common-interest NGOs would have a much higher bargaining power that could be used in a variety of ways, leading to improved production and better access to markets, and to decision-making processes, where they can further influence policies that affect their lives, livelihoods and natural resource endowments. By the same token, stronger RF and SRF are better able to identify regional priorities and coordinate responses to them at the NARS level, so that large numbers of countries sharing similar problems could benefit from the outputs of collective regional endeavors.

Over the last three years, as a group we have addressed this issue mainly through inter-stakeholder collaboration supplemented now and then by input from the Secretariat through some of its facilitating activities such as regional priority-setting exercises.

Table 6 provides some examples of inter-stakeholder activities from the various regions, but I will only elaborate on two of them: the FORAGRO-FONTAGRO-PROCIs connection, and capacity-building at the Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa.

Table 6. Interstakeholder collaboration in the regions

The first example of an inter-stakeholder collaboration comes from Latin America, and amply demonstrates the power of partnership between a donor consortium and RF/SRF. FONTAGRO, the regional fund for agricultural technology in the Latin America and the Caribbean region, was set up by several stakeholders in the region as a sustainable funding mechanism of agricultural research of cross-country interest to the LAC region. The sub-regional programs for cooperative agricultural research (PROCIs), and the regional forum for agricultural research and development (FORAGRO), benefit from this initiative as they participate in and facilitate the participation of several NARS in the competitive funding mechanism set up by the fund for priority research areas jointly identified by the beneficiaries (NARS, PROCIs, FORAGRO). Some of the outputs of this exemplary inter-stakeholder collaboration are: (1) a steady flow of resources for regional agricultural research activities, (2) increased ability of the region to meet research challenges especially where the necessary scale of operations and skills are not available in any single country; and (3) strengthening the regional forum in decision-making processes within the context of the global agricultural research system.

A second interesting example of inter-stakeholder collaboration comes from Africa. In 2001, the fledgling organization FARA decided to compete with other proposers and submitted its own Challenge Program (CP) for CGIAR funding. The exercise promised to be a rather difficult one because FARA did not at that time have adequate financial and human resources required to carry this out in a timely manner. The International Agricultural Research Centres and some donors came to the rescue, and together the three groups of stakeholders, they were able to meet the very high standards and tight deadlines set for various stages of the competitive exercise, with some measure of success. The FARA African CP is now in the final stages of the competition, and if it clears the last hurdle, will constitute the first major program that would enable FARA to put action behind Africa's vision for agricultural research, and will doubtless contribute to FARA's ability to effectively carry out its coordination role and facilitation mandate for ARD in Sub-Saharan Africa.

At about the same time and at the sub-regional level, CORAF decided to establish and fill two positions for CSO representatives on its Executive Committee. The CSOs in the sub-region responded to the gesture, and organized a consultative process where they selected their representatives who now sit on the CORAF Executive Committee. This institutionalization of CSO representation at the decision-making level will provide the CSOs an opportunity to influence ARD in the sub-region and make the voice of the less vocal heard. It will also enhance the capacity of the selected organizations, which now have to go through a reorganization process so that they are in a better position to fully reflect and articulate the views and needs of their constituent base. This exemplary case should be replicated in other RF and SRF that have not yet taken this important step.

The second strategy that GFAR has used over the last several years to address the second component of its business plan is regional priority-setting. The rationale for setting ARD priorities at the regional level is so that under the guidance of RF/SRF, problems common to a large number of countries in the region can be identified and addressed collectively, especially for those issues where the required skills and human resources are not available in any one particular country. The outputs of such joint endeavors would benefit a large number of countries from the region and perhaps beyond. The GFAR Secretariat in collaboration with the Technical Advisory Committee of the CGIAR facilitated priority-setting exercises in all five Regional Fora, and a synthesis of the output provided the European Forum for Agricultural Research (EFARD) with some ideas and potential areas of collaboration with the Regional Fora as it prepared to respond to calls for expression of interest by the European Commission's 6th Framework Program. These types of activities will not only contribute to the capacity-building efforts of participating RF/SRF, but will also provide information that potential donors and funding institutions could use to develop funding mechanisms that respond to the real issues of concern of RF/SRF and NARS.

All of the above examples, and many more that time will not permit me to describe, have in some way contributed to strengthening RF/SRF and CSOs. Are we doing enough? The response from our perspective is equivocal, perhaps yes, perhaps no. But what is clear and unequivocal is that we can do better, and we suggest the following approaches which, if implemented with vigor and dispatch, will improve our performance in this respect.

Reflecting identified priorities in GPPs. As indicated earlier, regional priority-setting exercises were carried out in all of the five southern Regional Fora, and we believe there is a need to ensure that some of these priorities are reflected in the next sets of GPPs to be developed. In addition to responding to some identified needs, this process will also contribute to capacity-building. We suggest that the NARS Steering Committee should play an important role in this respect, and the Secretariat will welcome suggestions and guidance from stakeholder groups, particularly the Regional Fora, on how to proceed with this idea.

Inter-regional collaboration. Each of the Regional Fora and Sub-Regional Fora has some well-recognized strengths, which could be shared with others for mutual benefits. We have observed that preoccupied with their own day-to-day activities, Regional Fora and Sub-Regional Fora alike are rarely aware of what is going on in other fora, and thus fail to take advantage of existing expertise in those fora or lend a helping hand to those in need. They necessarily focus on their own activities, and it takes a detached observer like the GFAR Secretariat or other stakeholders to see the bigger picture. We therefore suggest that, in collaboration with other actors, the Secretariat should facilitate a SWOT (Strength-Weakness-Opportunities-Threats) analysis of the various Regional Fora, with the main objectives of highlighting their relative strengths and weaknesses, cross-match the outputs as appropriate and then encourage inter-regional collaboration, linkages, and information and knowledge exchanges. We believe that such activities will not only enhance south-south and north-south collaboration, but they will also contribute to our goal of strengthening the weaker links, so that NARS, FOs and NGOs can effectively contribute to current efforts to improve ARD, at the local, regional or global levels.

Increased advocacy. We may need to step up advocacy vis-�-vis the RF/SRF, to encourage them to work more consistently with other stakeholders, particularly FOs, NGOs and the private sector. Such an overture towards other stakeholders should include statutory representation of CSOs on the governing bodies of the RF/SRF so that they can influence policy formulation and implementation. We believe this will address the letter and spirit of GFAR, and lead more rapidly to the much sought after positive impact of the agricultural sector on sustainable development.

Organizational strengthening of NGOs/FOs. Finally we strongly believe that we need to find some formula for strengthening the NGOs and FOs from an organizational standpoint. We have specifically requested CSOs to examine this question and come up with recommendations, but complementary inputs from other stakeholder groups can only help. The task therefore is how to achieve the organizational strengthening of CSOs.

GFAR stakeholders are many and span the globe, hence the need for a communication platform that enables the stakeholders to exchange information and share experiences and knowledge amongst themselves. This need was identified early in the life of GFAR and was strongly endorsed with specific recommendations at various fora. First, at the Rome consultation meeting on Enhancing Global Cooperation in ARD Information in 1999, the GFAR Secretariat was asked to: (1) promote the process of developing an enabling environment for a Global Knowledge System for ARD; (2) support the development of Regional Agricultural Information Systems in cooperation with RF/SRF; and (3) manage EGFAR as a stakeholder-led decentralized information system. Second, in Dresden, a meeting was held to discuss the emergence of Regional Agricultural Information Systems (RAIS). One of the outputs of that meeting was the establishment by the RAIS of a website based in EGFAR, the electronic Global Forum, and accessible through the gateway function of EGFAR. Finally, the need for a strong communication and information exchange platform was once again reinforced by the GFAR external review of 2000, which recommended that the GFAR Secretariat be strengthened so that it can effectively address the issue.

In response to these endorsements, directives and recommendations, the GFAR Secretariat developed a three-part program of work for the triennium of 2001-2003, which has transformed a static Electronic GFAR (EGFAR) into a dynamic, user-friendly, searchable, regularly updated and interactive communication and information platform for GFAR stakeholders. The range of services that are now available on EGFAR include:

• Information tools such as: events, spotlights, document repository, search engine, access to information on the four themes of GFAR, i.e. a portal function
• Communication tools such as: a quarterly newsletter featuring news and articles from the Secretariat, RF/SRF and other stakeholders; the CSO e-conference on the development of an institutional strengthening proposal, and the AGRIS e-discussion on investigating ways of making AGRIS more compatible with the developing a global information system within the framework of the Global Alliance of the Regional Agricultural Information Systems (GLOBAL.RAIS).

Two new exciting developments that address the subsidiarity and decentralized information management concept, and the support to needy stakeholders, are the EGFAR Back Office (EBO) and the GLOBAL.RAIS initiative respectively.

EBO. The EBO is a decentralized input process that allows stakeholders from the regions to manage the EGFAR database and information system as well as its page contents. Two levels of authorized input processes have been developed. The first level is a free insertion of data, events, institutional links and links to e-discussion hosted by a variety of other sites. The second level, which gives a page modification access, is restricted to coordinators of stakeholder groups, of facilitating units of GPPs and RAIS managers who would have access to stakeholder and research partnership sections of EGFAR as appropriate. The EBO can be accessed on the EGFAR site.

GLOBAL.RAIS. The Regional Fora are in different stages of developing their RAIS, and the Secretariat is facilitating this process. The GLOBAL.RAIS initiative takes the process one step further by developing synergies among the RAIS. The goal is to develop compatible systems so that regional and global information systems can collaborate, work together on crosscutting activities, and share technical information via the XML technology.

One can conclude that the response to the universally expressed need for the development of an efficient system of information exchange and knowledge-sharing amongst GFAR stakeholders has been appropriately addressed. Given the dynamic and rapidly changing nature of information communication technologies and their management, there are still some challenges ahead, and we solicit your collective wisdom in answering the following questions: How can we further improve horizontal communication amongst different GFAR stakeholders? How can we enhance the decentralized and subsidiarity aspects of EGFAR, the GLOBAL.RAIS being the first step? What other services can EGFAR offer to further improve access to information and knowledge?

At the end of the Dresden meeting, all stakeholder groups prepared and presented statements in which some specific recommendations and demands were made. Table 7 summarizes how well we have responded to some of those recommendations.

Table 7. Responses to stakeholders’ requests at Dresden

As part of our concluding remarks, we would like to use a well-known evaluation tool to summarize our analysis of achievements and gaps over the last three years and the way forward (see Table 8).

Table 8. GFAR score sheet

Issues	Outcomes
Research Partnerships
Contribution to global knowledge
CSO strengthening
RF/SRF strengthening
Information flows
Responding to stakeholders
"Bilan"
Future

Our task now is to move that bilan to the right in the near future, through our joint collaborative effort, starting with inputs and suggestions from you during roundtable discussions and stakeholder consultations. Inputs and suggestions that should address some of the challenges and questions we raised are summarized below.

• We invite you to reflect and make recommendations on how to improve the pace of developing and implementing GPPs
• Do we as GFAR stakeholders still accept and subscribe to the concept so clearly enunciated in the global vision that our agricultural development activities should include crops, livestock, forestry and fisheries sectors, while striving to address these components in an integrated manner? If positive, then what strategies can we put in place to ensure that we develop a balanced portfolio of projects? If negative, why, and what strategies can we suggest to address these two currently neglected sectors of forestry and fisheries?
• We ask you to reflect on whether we should focus on one or more of these thematic areas in the near future
• We urge you to suggest a list of issues and suggest mechanisms that could be used to stimulate fruitful exchange of ideas on them, followed by effective and targeted dissemination of the outputs in order to have some impact on the global agenda for ARD
• In terms of our efforts to build capacity of RF/SRF and CSOs are we doing enough? If not, what strategies, approaches and mechanisms can we as a group implement to improve our performance?
• What strategies and approaches can we use to achieve the organizational strengthening of the CSOs?
• What other strategies can we adopt to further improve horizontal communication amongst GFAR stakeholders, and how can we further enhance the decentralized and subsidiarity aspects of EGFAR? Finally, what other services can EGFAR offer to further improve access to information and knowledge?

Finally, Mr. Chairman, since I arrived at the GFAR Secretariat a little over five months ago, I have come to realize the tremendous amount of responsibility placed on the Secretariat, which serves as the glue that holds the different parts of GFAR together. It monitors its activities, maintains an institutional memory, and ensures that the neutral consultative platform provided by GFAR to its constituent parts is not only available to all, but also functions in an effective and efficient manner. Moreover, it ensures that the various geographically dispersed partners are linked amongst themselves, as well as to the outside knowledge pool. In addition, the Secretariat has been mandated to take a leading role in identifying emerging issues of importance to the global agricultural research systems and to organize brainstorming and discussion sessions around such issues in order to prepare stakeholders to respond to them.

Mr. Chairman, the GFAR initiative is designed to promote and facilitate strategic partnerships amongst stakeholders involved in ARD in order to take advantage of economies of scale resulting from a pooling together of expertise, knowledge, human and financial resources. This initiative is working, and the concept is being concretized slowly but surely. The approach is rapidly gaining acceptance, as the GFAR value-added contribution to the global agricultural research system becomes clearer, and we at the Secretariat are the first to know this as awareness and acceptance come with more requests for services and additional responsibilities. The Secretariat therefore appeals to all GFAR stakeholder groups for your continued support and commitment. Each stakeholder group has a role to play in strengthening the Secretariat for the common good, and we shall be approaching each group with specific and targeted requests for sustainable support.

Thank you.

Olanrewaju B. Smith
GFAR Executive Secretary

Print version

GFAR Secretariat
c/o FAO, SDR, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla - 00100 Rome, Italy
Tel. +39.06.5705.3413 Fax +39.06.5705.3898
E-mail: