Rationale for a Regional Approach to Agricultural Research for NARS and the CGIAR

1. Rationale for a Regional Approach to Agricultural Research for NARS and the CGIAR Toward a Central America Experiment A TAC perspective

2. Outline of Presentation I. The CGIAR’s new Vision and Strategy II. Advantages for the NARS of going from a national to a regional approach III. Advantages for the CGIAR of going from a global to a regional approach IV. Current practice of regional priority setting V. Potential risks of regional approach for the CGIAR VI. The task ahead to make a regional approach into a reality: five key questions to be addressed

3. I. The CGIAR’s new Vision and Strategy • CGIAR’s new Vision and Strategy (MTM-2000 in Dresden) • Confirm stress on sustainable poverty reduction: place agricultural research as a component of comprehensive development approach, rural development strategy. • Confirm role as producer of international public goods through strategic research: remain above the national level; global and regional public goods. • Confirm impact orientation: seek greater effectiveness where not achieved ("hard" areas).

4. CGIAR proposes new modalities to achieve these results: • two-pronged approach • (in addition to other center activities) • Regional approach to research planning, priority-setting, and implementation. • Priority projects implemented through task forces (Global Challenge Programs) • Observe: Rapid favorable responses to regional approach in Latin America, Asia, and Africa. Role of GFAR and ISNAR in assisting the initiative.

5. II. Advantages for the NARS of going from a national to a regional approach A regional approach allows: 1. Economies of scale in research: regional division of labor and networks to make more efficient use of installed capacity. 2. Regional internalization of positive externalities: increase rate of return for investors, with potential of attracting new investments. 3. Elevate the game above political cycles: regional approach as a commitment device for continuity. (Continued)

6. 4. Give coherence to donor-driven projectswithin a regional development strategy: regional approach as a coordination device 5. Give greater accountability and resistance to capture: greater visibility and more impartial audits. 6. Increase the visibility of research results to mobilize political and economic support: e.g., link to Puebla to Panama presidential initiative, role of Foragro.

7. III. Advantages for the CGIAR of going from a global to a regional approach • CGIAR approach principally global (commodities, themes, ecoregional): adequate for "easy" areas where conditions for adoption are in place. • Regional approach for the "hard" areas where the conditions (context) for adoption by/for the poor are not in place: • Market failures, particularly for smallholders: credit, insurance, information, high transactions costs on markets. • Institutional gaps: financial services, producers organizations, etc. • Public goods deficits: weak NARIs, health, education, infrastructure. • Policy biases: anti-agriculture and anti-rural areas.

8. Fundamentals of a regional approach 1. Coordination with development agents: allows to change the context to enhance adoption and impact. 2. Participation of stakeholders: bottom-up approach to priority setting to mobilize local information and customize products to heterogeneity of demands; create local ownership. 3. Partnerships between NARS and CGIAR for win-win initiatives (NARS objectives and CGIAR objectives): seek complementarities and division of labor.

9. IV. Current practice of regional priority setting • Important coordination and promotion of partnerships by regional and subregional organizations: FORAGRO and PROCIs. • But note limitations of the current approach: • Participation largely limited to NARIs: need extend to NARS at large (universities, private sector, NGOs) and to development partners (international organizations, bilaterals). • Priorities need to be more sharply focuses to lead to research projects that address emerging issues. • Need more pro-active follow-up on priority-setting: budgets, research teams, and impact.

10. V. Potential risks and limitations of a regional approach for the CGIAR • Lack of experience with the process: need develop new modalities • To link agricultural research with non-agriculture development agents. • To coordinate centers acting in the region among each others. • Weakness of NARS and RO (SICTA Central America) in the "hard" regions: How to find partners? How to consolidate NARS and RO? Need initial consolidation phase. • Legitimacy of regional representation of non-NARS regional interests. (Continued)

11. Potential risks (continued) • Lack of information for priority setting (e.g., on poverty, farming systems, comparative advantages for the region) • High transactions costs in coordinating: role of GFAR and RO. • Lack of donor support: need involve donors as partners, need to generate effective demand for research products by national and international investors.

12. VI. The task ahead to make a regional approach into a reality: five key questions to be addressed • 1. Develop the informational basis for priority setting • Poverty mapping and determinants of poverty; identify pathways out of poverty and the potential role of technology in each pathway. • (Role of CIAT in poverty mapping for the CGIAR and of IFPRI in establishing the link between technology and poverty). • Farming systems in the region. Technological opportunities for productivity growth. • Question: Who will do it? Need observatory to identify trends, constraints, and opportunities. Roles of Foragro and CIAT.

13. 2. Develop the methodology and the process for priority setting for the region • Roles of Foragro, Fontagro, SICTA, GFAR in priority setting for the region. • Define the CGIAR priorities for the region and areas of coincidence with NARS and RO regional priorities. • (Role of CIAT as convening center for the CGIAR in Central America) • Question: What forum for broader consultations and coordination with development agents and with stakeholders in the region? New Foragro-CGIAR-led committee for regional priority setting (beyond validation)?

14. 3. Define the processes of allocation of competitive grant funds and of clearing house for partnerships and coordination. • Develop an agricultural knowledge information system for the region: who does what in the region. • Identify sources of funding, both national and international. • Question: Responsive (proposals) or pro-active (contracts) approach? How to avoid the dispersion of priorities and projects? Role of Fontagro

15. 4. Define the process for monitoring and impact assessment Question: Who will do credible audits? 5. Prepare a TAC/GFAR/Foragro presentation and budget request for Durban Report on progress with the regional approach in Central America as a pilot experiment. Question: Budget request to launch the initiative? End