The International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) provided the perfect backdrop for the Change Retreat. As one of the four Centers that formed the CGIAR in 1971, IRRI reminded stakeholders of the System’s origins and, with high rice prices imposing a heavy burden on people in the Philippines, of the urgency for reform to meet the new challenges of the 21 st century. With the aim of having a synergistic process with the Independent Review of the CGIAR, the Change Management and Review stakeholder consultations were back-to-back in Los Baños. Stakeholders represented included Center Director Generals and Board Chairs, Members, co-sponsors, representatives from national agricultural research systems, and from civil society organizations.
The Independent Review Consultations took place on Sunday, September 7. The Review Panel’s overarching assessment confirmed that the CGIAR is very much worth preserving, but that “an improved variety” is needed. Moreover, it affirmed that the CGIAR is an important independent system for scientific advice and research for development, a unique partnership between “donors” and “doers”, with vast accumulated expertise and resources. On balance, the Review determined that recent global, regional, and local assessments of CGIAR research reveal very high returns on investment, with total investments paying for themselves by a wide margin.
However, the Review suggested that the CGIAR is not having the collective impact that it could have, and must define new roles and priorities in a fast-changing context. Factors undermining the CGIAR’s impact include fragmentation of research, the absence of a common voice, the lack of a collective strategy and no “single entry point” for partners. In addition, funding has stagnated in real terms over the past decade. In broad terms, the Review confirmed that change is needed and that past efforts at reform demonstrate that an evolutionary approach will not work. It recommended reform through a “balanced partnership” model.
On Monday and Tuesday, September 8-9, the Change Management Consultations provided stakeholders with a platform to discuss the latest thinking on change options related to partnerships, governance, and funding mechanisms as outlined in draft papers prepared by the respective Working Groups. The Alliance of CGIAR Centers (Board Chairs and DGs) also met with CGIAR Chair Katherine Sierra for a frank discussion of the options under consideration.
In the partnership group, stakeholders discussed how best to promote partnerships essential for producing and delivering international public goods in agriculture. There was agreement on the need for a mechanism to create a stronger culture of partnership for innovation and to position the CGIAR within the wider development goals and activities of other actors, notably countries, the international and regional organizations that support their development efforts, advanced research institutes (ARIs), and the private sector. A clear area of consensus was that closer partnership with a revitalized GFAR could help provide a platform for collaboration with partners.
The governance group considered the models on the table, including the performance contracting model favoured by the working group, the balanced partnership model of the External Review, and the model put forward by the Alliance characterized by a partnership board and donor council. (See the August Change Update for further description of each model). Discussions centered on roles and lines of accountability within each model. In the end, stakeholders agreed to take the best elements from each model and these were reflected in the CST’s Foundation Pieces outlined below.
Discussion on the funding mechanisms centered on the establishment of a new Fund, with consideration of whether the fund should be a legal entity, if it should operate on a replenishment basis, how partners could access the funds and approaches for institutional funding in addition to programmatic funding. Agreement emerged that the fund should promote unrestricted financial contributions and predictable multi-year funding, but need not be a legal entity or operate on replenishment basis. It would have a window for institutional support in addition to windows aligned with the strategic objectives.
After hearing the stakeholders’ discussions and feedback, the Change Steering Team identified the common areas or “foundation pieces” for building a new system and presented them as they way forward from Los Banos:
- A new “Fund” that will provide multi-year financing
- A new “Consortium” of Centers as a legal entity with a Board & CEO
- Program financing with some institutional financing
- Development of a Strategy and Results Framework to deliver the Strategic Objectives
- Implementation on the basis of Program Performance Contracts between the Fund and the Consortium
- A new partnership framework
- An Independent Science Council
- An independent evaluation arrangement at the System level
- The recasting of the key founding principles of Center autonomy, donor sovereignty, and consensus decision making
The dialogue in Los Baños also informed the final versions of the Working Groups’ papers, which are now available at the Change Management website.
|
