Overview

The CGIAR grew out of the initial international response to widespread concern in the 1950s, 60s, and early years of the ‘70s that many developing countries would succumb to famine. A pessimistic forecast of the time predicted vast famines between 1970 and 1985, with “hundreds of millions” starving to death. Such grim predictions were proved wrong by a combination of connected trends: reorientation of domestic policies in developing countries that were considered particularly vulnerable, sharply focused research by developing country scientists, a great effort by developing country farmers, and the impact of international agricultural research on tropical agriculture.

Unprecedented harvests were recorded in parts of Asia and Latin America, from new varieties of rice, wheat, and maize based on international research. In India, for instance, the impact of these developments bordered on the spectacular. The average yield increase for cereals between 1961 and 2000 was 146 percent. Between 1973 and1974, the average real income of small farmers in southern India rose by 90 percent. During the same period, the income of landless laborers rose by 125 percent. Similar results were experienced in other countries, and predictions of “gloom and doom” began to recede. They were replaced by hope and optimism that the scope of agricultural transformation could be extended worldwide. In an effort to make this happen, a series of high-level consultations were held in Bellagio, Italy and elsewhere. Wherever they were held, they were all known generically as Bellagio Conferences. The purpose of these meetings was to explore how best the international community could:

• Consolidate and spread the benefits of agricultural research and agricultural transformation globally;
• Respond to the urging of the “Pearson Commission on International Development” for an "intensive international effort" to support "research specializing in food supplies and tropical agriculture;"
• Protect and strengthen the four international agricultural research centers established with the support of the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations and their partners -- CIAT (headquartered in Colombia, for tropical agriculture), CIMMYT (Mexico, maize and wheat), IITA (Nigeria, tropical agriculture), and IRRI (the Philippines, rice).

Participants in these meetings invited the World Bank, which had already created "consultative groups" to coordinate and support development in individual countries, to set up a consultative group for international agricultural research. The World Bank accepted the challenge, and led the effort to create the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). FAO and UNDP worked with the World Bank as cosponsors. IFAD has since joined the group of cosponsors. (UNEP joined the group of cosponsors in 1995 but subsequently withdrew. It remains a member of the CGIAR.)

Click here to read "The Origins of the CGIAR"

Inauguration

The inaugural meeting of the CGIAR was held on May 19, 1971 at the World Bank. Richard H. Demuth, director of the World Bank’s Development Services Department, presided. Nineteen governments (all representing industrialized countries) and organizations attended as members; 10 as observers.

The founding meeting:

• Adopted a resolution setting out the Objectives, Composition and Organizational Structure of the CGIAR;
• Decided to support the four existing international centers;
• Established a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to provide the CGIAR with independent scientific advice;
• Invited FAO to arrange a rotational system for a maximum of five governments to represent developing regions/countries on the CGIAR for two years at a time; and
• Received pledges of financial support from founding members, with the World Bank and the US taking the lead.

Since then, membership of the Group has increased from 18 to 64, the number of CGIAR centers grew to 18 and then dropped to 15, and the research interests of the centers have been diversified.

From the inception of the CGIAR, the World Bank has provided the CGIAR with its Chairman, who is the primary source of System leadership; the CGIAR Executive Secretary, a position subsequently transformed to Director, the System’s de facto Chief Executive Officer; the CGIAR Secretariat; and funding. The TAC Secretariat and its successor, the Science Council Secretariat, have throughout been housed at FAO. CGIAR Chairs have been (in chronological order): Richard H. Demuth, Warren C. Baum, S. Shahid Husain, W. David Hopper, Wilfried P. Thalwitz, V. Rajagopalan, Ismail Serageldin, and Ian Johnson (current, 2005).

The relevance of CGIAR-supported research, and the quality of science at the centers, were ensured initially by TAC which has been replaced by a Science Council, and by periodic external reviews of CGIAR centers. The CGIAR System as a whole has been reviewed four times. The first System Review took place in 1976, and the second in 1981. The CGIAR Chair (Warren C. Baum) headed these review panels, assisted by an external team of technical experts. The third System Review in 1998 was chaired by the well known international figure Maurice Strong, who was among the founders of the CGIAR. In 2002, a team of experts headed by Uma Lele of the World Bank’s Operation Evaluations Department conducted a meta-evaluation of the CGIAR as part of a broader review of the Bank’s global programs.

The First Decade (1971-1980)

Forrest Hill, a CGIAR pioneer, said that the impact of the CGIAR would be judged by the ability of the centers it supported financially to increase the pile of food in tropical countries that faced serious scarcity. In that context, the CGIAR gave highest priority in its early years to research on cereals. Soon, however, the research portfolio was broadened to include rice, wheat, maize, cassava, chickpea, sorghum, potato, millets, pastures, and other food crops. The emphasis on "increasing the pile of food" brought great benefits to developing countries, but other aspects of agricultural development were not neglected.

The founding resolution of the CGIAR had declared that in supporting agricultural research "account will be taken not only of technical, but also of ecological, economic and social factors." The same resolution urged that national and international research centers should work together. In keeping with these sentiments, the CGIAR branched out into several new areas of activity such as livestock research, farming systems, conservation of genetic resources, plant nutrition, water management, policy research, and services to national agricultural research centers in developing countries. As the scope of research widened, the number of international centers in the CGIAR family grew from 4 to 13.

The Second Decade (1981-1990)

The objective of research was defined as increasing sustainable food production in the developing countries in such a way that the nutritional level and general economic well-being of the poor are improved. This approach called for a more direct focus on poverty, as well as greater emphasis on protecting biodiversity, land, and water.

Four major program thrusts were identified:

• Enhancing sustainability through resource conservation and management;
• Increasing the productivity of commodity production systems;
• Improving the policy environment; and
• Strengthening national research capabilities.

Centers were encouraged to use multidisciplinary approaches, to increase inter-center cooperation, to support national research systems, and to collaborate with others in an emerging global agricultural research system.   Towards the end of the decade, largely at the initiative of CGIAR Chair David Hopper, the CGIAR launched an inquiry into the need for further expansion of the number of centers, so as to strengthen the CGIAR system’s capacity for sustainability-related research. The expansion inquiry and changes based on its findings signaled a new trend in CGIAR-supported research which has since been further developed.

The inquiry was entrusted to TAC, which had already drawn the Group’s attention to the implications of sustainability in agricultural development. Even before the "expansion inquiry" was completed, however, the Group decided that agroforestry and forestry should be included in the CGIAR research portfolio. See the Canberra Declaration of 1989 . The TAC report on "expansion" confirmed this view.

The Third Decade (1991-1999)

In 1991, when the "expansion inquiry" was completed, the research interests of the CGIAR included agroforestry, forestry, fisheries, water management and banana/plantain. The number of centers rose to 18. Subsequently, two existing livestock centers were merged into one, the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), and research on banana and plantain was folded into the agenda of the International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI). The number of centers then dropped to 16.

The CGIAR mission statement was reformulated to read as follows:

Through international research and related activities, and in partnership with national research systems, to contribute to sustainable improvements in the productivity of agriculture, forestry and fisheries in developing countries in ways that enhance nutrition and well-being, especially of low-income people.

While these developments took place, and the CGIAR expanded its horizons, doubts and concerns were expressed within the CGIAR about the adequacy of governance, resource mobilization, and financial management to meet new challenges and changing needs. Other issues raised by members included the impact of research, and linkages with national agricultural research systems in developing countries (NARS) as well as with civil society organizations. Formal and informal consultations tried to come to grips with these problems. Consequently, CGIAR Chair V. Rajagopalan persuaded the Group to establish Oversight and Finance Committees, and new ways of increasing financial support were explored.

A crisis emerged, however, when some major donors reduced their CGIAR contributions due to domestic budgetary problems. The possibility of "restructuring" the CGIAR system – in effect, reducing the number of centers – was considered, and TAC was asked to propose options for restructuring, based on different levels of financial support.

However, in May 1994, the CGIAR endorsed a proposal from its new Chair, Ismail Serageldin, that the Group should undertake an eight-month renewal program to restore the CGIAR to full vigor. The short-term financial crisis was overcome, with strong “emergency” support from the World Bank and other donors. Measures were set in place to ensure greater transparency in the CGIAR System. Impact assessment was emphasized. Steps were taken towards refocusing the research agenda on the nexus of agriculture, poverty, and the environment.

The high-point of the renewal program was a Ministerial-level Meeting held in Lucerne, Switzerland (February 1995), which reaffirmed the critical importance of agriculture as both a catalyst and an integral part of development, with agricultural research serving as an indispensable component of agricultural development. The meeting adopted a Declaration and Action Plan that would enable the CGIAR to serve the world’s poor and disadvantaged, and help protect the environment, well into the future. The mission statement of the CGIAR was amended by the Lucerne Declaration and Action Program to read as follows:

To contribute, through its research, to promoting sustainable agriculture for food security in the developing countries.

Ten Southern countries joined the CGIAR during and after the renewal program. (The practice of selecting “regional representatives” through the FAO was ended.) In 2005, 25 CGIAR members are from the South and 22 from the North. Productivity and natural resource management are the twin pillars of research on aquatic resources, conservation of genetic resources (biodiversity), food crops, forestry/agroforestry, livestock, soil and water nutrients, water management, and policy research; and in its endeavors to strengthen scientific capacity in developing countries. A Global Forum for Agricultural Research linked the CGIAR with partners in the global agricultural research system. The CGIAR also established partnership committees with the NGO community and the private sector. The Private Sector Committee remains active. The NGO Committee, however, became dormant, and new avenues were found for nurturing collaboration with civil society.

Following the conclusion of the reform program, the CGIAR undertook a visioning exercise in 1991 to define future directions of CGIAR research, and the type of organization required to increase effectiveness. The CGIAR mission statement was revised to read:

To achieve sustainable food security and reduce poverty in developing countries through scientific research and research-related activities in the fields of agriculture, forestry, fisheries, policy, and environment

 Despite the great effort that went into the visioning exercise and its attendant activities, final agreement was not reached on the directions of change.

The Fourth Decade (2000- the present)

In October 2000, incoming CGIAR Chair Ian Johnson urged the Group to confront six challenges so that it could fully equip itself to remain a leader in the field of agricultural research for development: (1) maintain science and research at the highest levels (2) ensure that the CGIAR is characterized by the assets of a “new age” institution – lightness, agility, responsiveness, and cost-efficiency (3) Strengthen the role of the CGIAR as a producer of global public goods (4) Create a new framework for partnerships.(5) Provide the centers with stable and secure funding (6) Devise the most effective means of linking CGIAR-supported research with the development programs of countries in the South.

Taking note of the challenges faced by the CGIAR, and the need for strong institutional instruments to guide the CGIAR response, the World Bank and other CGIAR cosponsors felt that the post of CGIAR Executive Secretary should be elevated to that of CGIAR Director, and CGIAR members agreed. The expectation was that the CGIAR Director would serve as defacto CEO of the CGIAR. Following an international search, Francisco Reifschneider, head of the Secretariat for International Cooperation at Brazil’s Agricultural Research Corporation (EMBRAPA) was appointed as the first CGIAR Director.

Maintaining the spirit of change, the CGIAR established a Change Design and Management Team (CDMT), consisting of CGIAR and non-CGIAR members and chaired by Margaret Catley-Carlson (former President of the Canadian International Development Agency), supported by a stakeholder Steering Group, to propose measures by which the challenges could be met.

The CDMT report, published in April 2001, contained seven clusters of recommendations. The CGIAR Chair and Director held a wide range of consultations with regional groupings, individual CGIAR members, Center Board Chairs and Center Directors, and with stakeholders, on the main features of the CDMT report. These consultations involved a full airing of views including, in some instances, concerns. That process of inclusive and intensive consultation resulted in broad consensus on the following four “first order” issues:

• Adoption of a programmatic approach to CGIAR research, and endorsement of Challenge Programs;
• Approval of an Annual General Meeting, down from two meetings a year, and creation of an Executive Council;
• Transformation of TAC into a Science Council;
• Establishment of a System Office with an integrated communications strategy.

In light of the concerns expressed, four working groups considered the proposals outlined by the CGIAR Chair, with each group guided by a chair and represented in plenary by its own rapporteur. The working groups suggested substantial adjustments to the CDMT proposals. Based on the consensus that emerged from the working groups, four “pillars of reform” were identified and adopted at the CGIAR Mid-Term Meeting (the last of its kind, held at Durban, in May 2001:

(1) Decision Making -- One CGIAR meeting a year. An Executive Council (ExCo) would be created to act on behalf of the Group between Annual General Meetings (AGM). An interim ExCo would function until the 2001 AGM, when the new ExCo would be inaugurated.

(2) Programs -- The CGIAR would initiate the formulation and implementation of high-impact, focused, time-bound Challenge Programs.

(3) Science Advisory Body -- TAC would be replaced by a Science Council, refocusing the work of the science advisory body, enabling it to harness cutting edge science that would help developing countries meet the Millennium Development Goals adopted by the international development community;

(4) Common Services -- The CGIAR will establish a System Office and an integrated communication strategy, improving the coherence, efficiency, and cost-effectiveness of services provided to the CGIAR System.

Decision making has become more nimble, with full use of information technology for both sharing information and reaching decisions. The ExCo consisting of shareholders and stakeholders has streamlined the Group’s decision making by reviewing major policy decisions and submitting recommendations for consideration by the AGM. After over 30 years, the CGIAR System now has a Charter (short form: The Charter) that was adopted virtually, and endorsed at the 2004 Annual General Meeting. The Charter is expected to support consistency and efficiency.

Challenge Programs respond directly to the major concerns of the global development agenda. They creatively mobilize resources (human, financial, knowledge, and technologies) to address major global or regional issues. They have encouraged broad-based partnerships which harness cutting-edge science within and outside the CGIAR System to benefit the poor, protect the environment, and strengthen the social network. International interest in and support for Challenge Programs, and thereby in the CGIAR, have grown, from both the private and public sector. Four Challenge Programs are being implemented as of 2005:

• “Water and Food” for improving water productivity in nine river basins, involving over 20 institutions ;
• “Harvest Plus” for breeding crops with improved micronutrient content in six staple crops involving over 40 institutions;
• “Generation” for unlocking crop genetic diversity through the application of comparative biological knowledge, in a partnership of 14 institutions; and
• “Securing the Future for Africa’s Children,” developed and implemented by a CGIAR partner, the Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA).

The TAC was transformed into a new, smaller Science Council consisting of six members and a Chair. The Science Council works through Standing Panels covering Strategies and Priorities, Monitoring and Evaluation, Mobilizing Science, and Impact Assessment (SPIA). Each Standing Panel other than SPIA is chaired by a member of the Council and two additional, external members. The SPIA Chair and members are drawn from outside the Council but the SPIA Chair serves as an ex officio Council member. The Council proposes priorities and strategies for the centers, and helps to strengthen mutually reinforcing linkages between the CGIAR and the global science community. Impact assessment has broadened, with new methodologies and increased output.

The CGIAR System Office is composed of and integrates activities carried out by the following entities that provide common services to the CGIAR System: Central Advisory Service—Intellectual Property (CAS-IP), CGIAR Secretariat, Chief Information Officer’s Unit, Future Harvest Alliance Office, Gender and Diversity Program, Internal Audit Unit, Science Council Secretariat, Strategic Advisory Service on Human Resources. Components of the System Office work collaboratively, with an integrated Business Plan and an integrated Communications and Resource Mobilization strategy.

The CGIAR Secretariat (as defined by The Charter) serves as the hub of the CGIAR System, and plays a significant integration and facilitation role to ensure that collective action by many independent but inter-dependent entities is directed towards achievement of the CGIAR’s mission. The Secretariat supports the Group and its Executive Council, and bears primary responsibility for ensuring that CGIAR decisions are carried out.

With the first phase of reform completed, the CGIAR was well situated to be a full and effective partner in contributing to sustainable development. The UN Millennium Summit adopted the Millennium Development Goals for halving extreme poverty in the world by 2015. It focused on income; hunger, access to services; and the environment; among other issues. The World Food Summit and the World Food Summit: five years later affirmed the Plan of Action to reduce hunger by half by 2015. The World Summit on Sustainable Development, at which the CGIAR was actively represented, set targets and timetables for action on a number of fronts including reducing biodiversity loss by 2010, restoring depleted fisheries by 2015, halving the proportion of people who lack access to clean water or sanitation by 2015 and, by 2020, using and producing chemicals that do not harm human health and the environment.

The centrality of agriculture was reaffirmed at numerous forums, and the “Group of 8” (G-8) industrialized countries, among others, reaffirmed the relevance and impact of the CGIAR. Several Southern national agricultural research systems were by now much stronger than when the CGIAR was established, and wanted more creative collaboration with CGIAR centers, particularly in Africa where the need for enhanced agricultural research and new science-based technologies appeared to be the greatest. The public and private not-for-private sector was similarly ready for full engagement.

The CGIAR responded in many ways. Several activities were undertaken to maintain CGIAR operations at peak levels of efficiency. The Annual General Meeting was restructured, making it more compact, providing a greater emphasis on science, and providing maximum opportunities for interaction with civil society. The use of the new information technology was expanded to improve transparency and to simplify decision making. A Performance Measurement System was launched across the CGIAR System. The Harvard Business School developed a CGIAR Case Study, and inaugurated a Leadership Training Program for senior managers in the CGIAR. Leadership training was launched for first-level managers as well.

The CGIAR began to think in practical terms, without a sense of crisis, about restructuring the arrangement of research activities. A pragmatic and programmatic assessment by the CGIAR System transformed ISNAR into a new, focused program at IFPRI. Several centers are exploring the means by which they could pool resources of knowledge, and might benefit from streamlined arrangements for management. This process is expected to be accelerated on the basis of reports expected in 2005 from two Task Forces established at AGM03 to deal with programmatic alignment (Task Force 1) and with structural options and organizational elements (Task Force 2).