CGIAR Systemwide Program Reviews

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://hdl.handle.net/10947/24

Browse

Now showing 1 - 17 of 17

Collective Action for the Rehabilitation of Global Public Goods in the CGIAR Genetic Resources System: Phase 2 (GPG2): External Midterm Review Report July 2007 - September 2008
(Internal Document, 2008-11-01) CGIAR Systemwide Genetic Resources Programme
The External Evaluation Report was prepared byHenry Shands (chair), Leonor Castiñeiras, and Theo van Hintum. Other contributors for the project were: Brigitte Laliberté (GPG2 Project Coordinator) and David Williams (SGRP Coordinator) SGRP Coordinator: David Williams. The Panel Review report starts with general observations of the Review Team during its review, and continues with findings for each of the six elements specified in the Terms of Reference: ? Progress since the completion of the GPG1 Project (2003-2007) and the impact of GPG2 ? Efficiency and Effectiveness of Collective Actions ? Sustainability Plan - Relevance and Implementability ? Project Coordination ? Financial Management ? Recommendations to the Project‘s Final Review
Meta-Review of CGIAR Systemwide and Ecoregional Programs : Main Report
(Internal Document, 2006-11-01) Bevege, Ian; Egger, Paul; Debela, Seme
This meta-review was commissioned by the Science Council under the title Meta- Review of CGIAR Systemwide and Ecoregional Programs (SWEPs). The objective of the meta-review is “to review the status of the currently existing 17 SWEPs as appropriate research instruments for implementing CGIAR System Priorities (SPs) for research” (see Annex I for Terms of Reference). The SWEPs comprise eight (8) ecoregional and nine (9) systemwide programs. They were established by the CGIAR during a nine period from 1993 to 2001. The annexes to this report are catalogued as a separate volume due to its size.
Report of the First External Review of the Systemwide Program on Alternatives to Slash and Burn (ASB)
(Report, 2005-10-01) CGIAR Science Council
The review was commissioned in 2004 by the Science Council as an evaluation and impact assessment of ASB. The review was carried out between late 2004 and mid 2005, by a panel chaired by Dr. William Clark, Harvard University. The panel concluded the following: a) the ASB Programme has played a significant role in transforming the way that decision makers think about the factors shaping land use at forest-agriculture interfaces in the humid tropics. In so doing, it has created the world’s pre-eminent system for use-driven, comparative scientific investigation of human-environment interactions at the forest margin across the pan tropic domain. b) ASB has worked effectively and efficiently in pursuit of its core mission to “raise productivity and income of rural households in the humid tropics without increasing deforestation or undermining essential environmental services, c) ASB has developed a governance and management structure that has been generally effective and efficient in promoting innovative research that successfully integrates capabilities and concerns across CGIAR Centers, tropical regions, scales and disciplines, d) ASB System Wide Programme has been highly relevant to theCGIAR’s core mission and is pursuing work well aligned with the Science Council’s recently articulated System Research Priorities for 2005-2015. The capacity created by ASB can make a unique contribution to achieving CGIAR and SC emerging goals on integrated land, water and forest management at landscape level. That capacity should be sustained and strengthened. The Report is accompanied by two attachments. The first contains the Science Council commentary, which summarizes the Science Council’s views on the Panel Report and on the joint response of the ASB program coordinator, ASB global steering group, and the World Agroforestry Center. The second is the joint response from the ASB program. This report was discussed at the Business Meeting at AGM2005.
External Review of the CGIAR Gender & Diversity Program 1999 - 2003
(Report, 2004-03-01) Fogelberg, Teresa; Castillo, Gelia
The CGIAR created a Gender and Diversity (G&D) Program in 1998, to succeed and replace the CGIAR Gender Staffing Program. The CGIAR Gender Staffing Program was never reviewed during its existence. The Center Directors Committee (CDC) and the Committee of Board Chairs (CBC) therefore decided to launch an external review of the G&D program, as it approached its fifth year run. The CGIAR Secretariat was also engaged in planning this exercise.The task of the external review was to assess the outputs, outcomes, impact of the program, its strategy and priorities, and its program structure and governance. In addition, it had to determine any changes and new dimensions required by the Program to ensure its effectiveness in the future.These suggestions and recommendations reflect the belief that the Gender and Diversity Program clearly merits continuation into a second phase. It is the hope of the Review Team that the following observations help strengthens the Program in its new phase. These recommendations for future action are summarized in the third section of the report, on page 7.The G&D Program has made rapid and excellent progress towards accomplishing its goals and purposes. In its report, the Review Panel identifies a number of areas and accomplishments of the program making it one of the most innovative system-wide activities within the CGIAR.
Response to Report of the First External Review of the CGIAR Systemwide Program on Gender and Diversity
(Internal Document, 2004-03-01) CGIAR Gender and Diversity Advisory Board
tbd
Report of the First External Review of the Systemwide Programme on Integrated Pest Management (SP-IPM)
(Report, 2003-08-01) CGIAR Interim Science Council
This is the first external review of the systemwide programme on Integrated Pest Management. The two members of the review panel were Dr. Andrew Gutierrez and Hermann Waibel. The first part of the report sets the scence for the SP-IPM. Major trends in pests with a world-wide dimension are studied as well as results of studies of crop losses on the global level and overall trends in pesticide use and at the institutional and policy situation as it affects IPM. Part 2 answers the questions as formulated in the TORs. Part 3 goes beyond the TORs and the panel argues for a future structure of SP- IPM as a programme with a technical and a policy dimension on the global level. This report was discussed at the 82nd meeting of TAC in Lima, Peru.
Report of the First External Review of the Systemwide Programme on Collective Action and Property Rights (CAPRI)
(Report, 2003-08-01) CGIAR Interim Science Council
This is the first review on the Systemwide Programme on Collective Action and Property Rights (CAPRI) convened at IFPRI. The review was commissioned by the Interim Science Council and was chaired by John Bruce from the World Bank. CAPRI was established in 1996 and is funded by Sweden, Norway, Italy and the Ford Foundation. The review found that : a) CAPRI's thematic foci are highly relevant to the CGIAR's goals of sustainably increasing food production through technology adoption, b) CAPRI has been effective in knowledge generation through commissioned papers and workshops, c) CAPRI has increased awareness by centres and NARS of the role of CA and PR research in natural resource management and technology adoption and d) CAPRI's governance and mode of operations have been successful.This report was discussed at the 83rd meeting of the interim Science Council held at IPGRI in August 2002.
The Rice-Wheat Consortium: an Institutional Innovation in International Agricultural Research on the Rice-Wheat Cropping Systems of the Indo-Gangetic Plains (IGP) : The Review Panel Report
(Internal Document, 2003-06-01) Rice-Wheat Consortium; Seth, Ashok
The present review was commissioned by CIMMYT at the request of the Regional Steering Committee (RSC) of the Rice-Wheat Consortium (RWC). The goal of the review was todetermine the changes in research priorities, organization and methods that will be required for the RWC to continue to make a significant impact on the livelihoods of those employed in agriculture, especially the poor, on the sustainable management of natural resources in the IGP, and on regional food security. (RSC) of the RWC. Findings of the review show that the RWC has emerged as an innovative model for regional and international collaboration, which is now beginning to develop a credible record of achievements. It is operating as an inter-institutional and inter-center, multidisciplinary network facilitating systems based farmer participatory research in the rice-wheat ecology of the IGP. The main source of strength of RWC is the commitment of its key stakeholders to the founding principles and ownership of its work program spanning strategic, applied, and adaptive research and knowledge dissemination activities.
Report of the First External Review of the System-Wide Programme on Integrated Pest Management (SP-IPM)
(Report, 2002-10-01) CGIAR Interim Science Council
The First Review of the Systemwide Programme on Integrated Pest Management (SP-IPM) was undertaken by a two-member panel chaired by Dr. Andrew Gutierrez, USA. He conducted the Review over the course of the year 2001. The Panel Report was considered by the interim Science Council (iSC) at its 82nd Meeting held at CIP, in Lima, Peru, in April 2002. The report has two attachments. The first contains the iSC commentary, which summarizes iSC's views on the Panel Report and on the joint response from the convening centre, IITA, and the SP-IPM Steering Committee. The second attachment is the joint response of IITA and the SP-IPM Steering Committee to the Panel Report.Five recommendations are underlined:1. There is a strong need and a high relevance for SP-IPM in the future. The Panel recommends that in order to be successful in the future SP-IPM should go beyond its present focus of improving co-operation among centres and should widen its scope and take a more outward-looking approach in seeking international assistance and co-operation.2) SP-IPM should more thoroughly analyse its taskforces with regards to scope and extended problem definition in order to expand their potential global relevance.3) SP-IPM should more seriously explore the complementarity among sytemwide programmes4) Socio-economic and policy research should be added as a major component of SP-IPM5) SP-IPM should be upgraded to a "virtual center" beyond its current system-wide programme status.
Systemwide Review of Plant Breeding Methodologies in the CGIAR
(Report, 2001-10-01) CGIAR Technical Advisory Committee; Duvick, Donald N.
Report of the systemwide review of plant breeding methodologies in the CGIAR conducted in 2000 by a panel chaired by Donald N. Duvick. The document includes an excerpt from the summary of CGIAR International Centers Week 2000, a transmittal letter from TAC Chair Emil Javier, TAC's commentary, and a transmittal letter from the panel chair.The study was based on sub-reports for nine centers, which were made available through the CGIAR website. There were six main findings:1. centers are using traditional techniques effectively and efficiently;2. new tools are used effectively, but will not replace traditional methods in the short term;3. biotechnology will increase efficiency and effectiveness but cost more;4. centers are outsourcing biotechnology effectively but should do it more;5. more financial support is needed for germplasm research and mechanisms that hinder intercenter collaboration should be changed;6. better intercenter collaboration, consolidation, and even centralization could increase effectiveness.The Group endorsed these recommendations.There are nine annexes covering among other things: breeding methods for CGIAR commodities, biotechnology methods used at centers, resource commitments, and CGIAR-NARS interactions in plant breeding and biotechnology.
ILRI Centre-Commissioned Review of the Systemwide Livestock Programme
(Internal Document, 2001-10-01) CGIAR Technical Advisory Committee; Anderson, Jock R.; Smith, Olanrewaju B.; Vera, Raúl R.
Report of the first review of the Systemwide Livestock Program conducted between April and May 2001 by a panel chaired by Jock Anderson. The document contains a transmittal letter from TAC Chair Emil Javier, TAC comments, a response by ILRI and other participating Centers, in addition to the report itself. The report evaluated the Program's effectiveness in fostering linkages for integrated crop-livestock research with plant-oriented CGIAR Centers. The panel found strong evidence suggesting the Program had been highly effective in fostering such collaboration, in promoting awareness of the significance of livestock issues among CGIAR crop scientists, and in expanding interdisciplinary contacts between scientists working at different Centers. It also found indications of value added to other CGIAR research, and evidence that the Program was contributing to the knowledge base of smallholder crop-livestock systems. Evaluating the Program's governance, the panel examined the oversight and management role of ILRI as the convening Center of the Program, and the importantdifferentiation between ILRI's global livestock mandate and the Program's agenda. Based on its findings, the Panel recommended continued support to the Systemwide Livestock Program into a second five year period. The report was presented at the business meeting of the 2001 CGIAR Annual General Meeting.
CGIAR Program on Participatory Research and Gender Analysis : internally commissioned external review
(Internal Document, 2000-12-01) Prain, Gordon; Hambly Odame, Helen; Jones, Monty
The review was carried out during the PRGA III International Seminar and Small Grants Workshop, held in Nairobi from 6 to 11 November, 2000. The Review was based on published materials made available during the week, presentations by and interviews with the PRGA staff and informal interviews with different Program stakeholders. In addition, a simple questionnaire was used with liaison scientists to gain a better, semiquantified, insight into the state of participatory research and gender analysis in the different CGIAR Centers. The Review Report has been organized in two parts. The first part consists of a review of the achievements of the Program, based primarily on comparing current achievements (after three years of the Program) against the Indicators and Milestones associated with the Goal, Purpose and Outputs of the five-year Program. The main part of the Report consists of suggestions and recommendations for changes in different parts of the Program, which may help to achieve even greater success than has been already achieved in the past three years.
Systemwide Reviews in the CGIAR: Concepts, Options, and Recommendations
(Internal Document, 2000-10-01) Piñeiro, Martin; Stern, Elliot; Dalrymple, Dana
Study commissioned by the Oversight Committee of system-wide reviews in the CGIAR, conducted by a team headed by Martin Piñeiro and including Elliott Stern, and Dana Dalrymple. The study was considered by the Oversight Committee at CGIAR International Centers Week 2000, and circulated to CGIAR members. The Committee said it would implement the 15 recommendations of the study, and invited comments.Originally conceived as a retrospective review of the third system review of the CGIAR, the study was expanded to cover the first two system reviews, and system-level review processes in general. The study found that in contrast to the first two, the third review of the System suffered from the combination of a largely external review panel whose members were unfamiliar with the CGIAR, and the lack of preparatory work to define the issues. It considered various options for future reviews from the point of view of objectives, structure, and procedure, and made recommendations for each.There are two annexes with detailed information on the CGIAR review system, and the third System Review.
Report of the First External Review of the Systemwide Genetic Resources Programme
(Report, 1999-12-01) CGIAR Technical Advisory Committee
Report of the first external review of the Systemwide Genetic Resources Programme (SGRP) conducted between January and August 1998 by a panel chaired by Jaap Hardon. The document contains an extract from the report of the CGIAR meeting of October 1998, a letter of transmittal from the TAC Chairman and the Executive Secretary of the CGIAR, TAC's comments, responses from the Intercenter Working Group on Genetic Resources (ICWG-GR) and IPGRI, and a transmittal from the panel chair.The report described the fast changing environment influencing CGIAR policies. It summarized the outcomes of numerous previous reviews in the field. Performance of the SGRP was discussed, particularly areas in need of strengthening. Finally, the panel presented its view of the future of the SGRP, offering various options for consideration. A postscript noted that the CGIAR structure did not favor strong systemwide programs in controversial areas, and urged the System Review to address the issue of what should be done in case there was an absence of consensus.The report was written, and commentaries prepared, before the System Review recommendations on genetic resources were available. After extensive discussion it was decided that the CGIAR Consultative Council should take account of the review recommendations in following up the System Review recommendations. The CGIAR should address creation of an operational structure for cooperation among genebank managers. Two keystone conferences should be convened, and TAC should work with centers to develop a program for investment in improving genebank facilities.
Report on the Inter-Centre Review of Root and Tuber Crops Research in the CGIAR
(Evaluation Report, 1997-06-01) CGIAR Technical Advisory Committee
Report of the Inter Center Review of Root and Tuber Crops Research in the CGIAR, by a panel chaired by David R. MacKenzie. The document also contains an extract from the summary of proceedings of the CGIAR meeting of May 1996, a transmittal from the TAC Chairman, TAC's commentary, and a transmittal from the panel chair.The report was commissioned as an input to the TAC priority exercise. It was based in part on recent external program and management reviews of CIP, CIAT, and IITA. The panel examined the efficiency of CGIAR investment in root and tuber research, priority setting, systemwide planning and coordination in the area. It proposed the establishment of an Inter-Center Committee on Root and Tuber Crops Research involving CIP, CIAT, and IITA, the three IARCs directly engaged- a proposal the IARCs promptly adopted. A primary purpose of the collaboration would be what the report called "pre-extension technology transfer" activities intended to target the factors constraining the introduction of improved cultivars. The panel suggested, but TAC did not endorse, devolution of the CIP sweet potato program to a strong NARS.The report was considered at TAC 67 and 68, and was a agenda document at the CGIAR Mid Term Meeting, May 1996.
Stripe Study of Genetic Resources in the CGIAR
(Internal Document, 1994-04-01) CGIAR Technical Advisory Committee
Study of genetic resources activities and policies in the CGIAR, commissioned by TAC and conducted by a panel chaired by Henry L. Shands, completed March 1, 1994. The document also contains a transmittal from the TAC Chairman with TAC's commentary, and a transmittal from the panel chair. The study discussed the changing policy environment, the roles of various actors, and legal matters of concern to the CGIAR. It recommended the scope of future CGIAR activities, covering species of plants, as well as animals and trees, to be conserved, in situ conservation, applications of molecular biology, ecoregional research, databases and networks, training, and links between IARCs, NARS and NGOs. The panel argued that genetic resources conservation and related research was the most important activity of the CGIAR in the long term, and stressed the imperative of providing adequate and continuous funding.The panel proposed the establishment of a systemwide program on genetic resources. It suggested three possible modes of implementation: 1) management by the Inter-Center Working Group on Genetic Resources; 2) management by a reformulated IPGRI; or 3) management by a new board, responsible for both the program and IPGRI. TAC preferred a fourth alternative proposed by the IARCs at a joint meeting of TAC and center directors, with the cosponsors present. This was for the program to be managed through the Inter-Center Working Group, but with IPGRI playing a lead center role.Annexes describe the germplasm collections of IARCs, staff and budgets involved, and the safety duplications of the collections. This study was planned at TAC 62. The report was an agenda document at TAC 63 and the CGIAR meeting in May 1994.
Investment in Rice Research in the CGIAR: A Global Perspective. Report of the Inter-Centre Review of Rice
(Report, 1993-10-01) CGIAR Technical Advisory Committee
Cross-center review on rice research in the CGIAR conducted in 1992 and completed early in 1993 by a panel under the chairmanship of Grant Scobie. The document also contains a summary of the discussion of this review, together with external reviews of IRRI and WARDA, at the CGIAR meeting in May 1993, a transmittal from the TAC Chairman with a draft strategy statement on rice research in the CGIAR, and a transmittal from the panel chair.The panel appraised the present and future role of rice in the diet of developed country populations. It said that rice production would have to double by 2030. This increase would need to come from increased productivity, which was the challenge to research. The panel believed CGIAR funds for rice research were misallocated in favor of Africa. They saw insufficient justification for the growing research emphasis on less favored, upland environments, as irrigated rice was of overriding importance. To enable WARDA to continue with reduced funds, the panel proposed collaboration with IITA. Rice related programs at CIAT, IBPGR, IFPRI, IITA and ISNAR were also discussed.For its part, considering the political decision about WARDA funding taken by the CGIAR in 1986, TAC found no compelling reason to adjust its allocation to WARDA for the period 1994-1998. WARDA's contribution to CGIAR priorities could be further explored before decisions on later allocations were made. Agenda document at TAC 60, and the CGIAR meeting in May 1993.

Browse

Recent Submissions