Special Program for African Agricultural Research (SPAAR) Learnt From Implementation of the Frame For Action (FFAs) Consultants' Report V. tJi'.tf,M SIWAAR Secretarii at The Worl d Bink WVaishington, ).(., U.S.A. Special Program for African Agricultural Research (SPAAR) Lessons Learnt from Implementation of the Frameworks For Action (FFAs) Consultants' Report March 1995 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY viii 1. INTRODUCTION I 1.1 Request for Review of Lessons Learnt 1 1.2 Terms of Reference 1 1.3 Composition of the Review Team 1 1.4 Activities of the Review Team 2 2. SPAAR AND THE FRAMEWORKS FOR ACTION 3 2.1 Chronology and Philosophy of SPAAR Actions 3 2.2 The Frameworks for Action (FFAs) 4 3. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FFAs: PROGRESS IN PLANNING 7 3.1 Drawing up the Masterplans -- Some Country Examples 7 3.2 Common Elements of Masterplanning 10 3.3 Priorities in the Masterplans__ 11 4. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FFAs: REORGANIZATION OF THE NARSs 13 4.1 Legal Status of the NARSs 13 4.2 Decentralization 14 4.3 Rationalization of Staffing 15 4.3.1 Down-sizing_ 16 4.3.2 Staff Evaluation 17 4.4 Staff Conditions 17 4.5 Accounting Systems 18 4.6 Financial Management 19 4.7 Consolidated Funding Mechanisms (CFMs) 19 4.8 Funding for Agricultural Research 22 4.8.1 Funding for Infrastructure 22 4.8.2 Government Funding 22 4.8.3 Donor Funding 23 4.8.4 Other Funding Sources 24 5. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FFAs: IMPROVING LINKAGES 26 5.1 Research - Extension - Farmer Linkages 26 5.2 Linkages with NGOs 30 5.3 Linkages with the Private Sector 31 5.4 Linkages with IARCs and Other Advanced Research Organizations 32 5.5 Regionalization of Research 35 5.6 Donor Coordination 37 6. OVERVIEW OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 38 6.1 Significant Findings and Comments 38 6.2 Recommendations 41 iii APPENDIX 1 - TERMS OF REFERENCE 44 APPENDIX 2 - ITINERARY OF REVIEW TEAM 47 APPENDIX 3 - PERSONS MET 48 APPENDIX 4 - PARTIAL LIST OF DOCUMENTS CONSULTED 54 iv ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS USED AB/DLO Research Institute for Agrobiology and Soil Fertility (Netherlands) ACIAR Australian Center for Intemational Agricultural Research ADAB Australian Development Assistance Bureau ADB African Development Bank ARF Agricultural Research Fund ARTP Agricultural Research and Training Project ASARECA Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastem and Central Africa CADEF Comite d'appui au developpement des fonts CFM Consolidated Funding Mechanisms CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research CILSS Comite permanent inter-Etats de lutte contre la secheresse dans le Sahel/Permanent Inter-State Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel CMINYT International Center for Maize and Wheat Improvement CIRAD Centre de cooperation intemationale en recherche agronomique pour le developpement (France) CMAAOC Conference des ministres d'agriculture de l'Afrique de l'Ouest et du centre CMAWCA Conference of Ministers of Agriculture of West and Central Africa CMDT Compagnie malienne de developpement des textiles CNCR Comite national de concertation des ruraux CNRA Comite national de la recherche agronomique (Mali) COCOBOD Cocoa Development Board (Ghana) CORAF Conference des responsables de recherche agronomique africains CRIG Cocoa Research Institute of Ghana CSIR Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (Ghana) CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization DGIS Directorate General for International Cooperation (Netherlands) DRT Department of Research and Training, Ministry of Agriculture (Tanzania) EAAFRO East African Agricultural and Forestry Research Organization EAC East African Community ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States EPA Etablissement public a caractere administratif EPCST Etablissement public a caractere scientifique et technique EPIC Etablissement public a caractere industriel et commercial EPMR External Program and Management Review EU European Union FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations FFA Framework for Action FSR Farming Systems Research GDP Gross Domestic Product GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft ftir technische Zusammenarbeit (German Agency for Technical Cooperation) IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency IARC International Agricultural Research Center ICRISAT International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics IDRC International Development Research Centre (Canada) IER Institut d'economie rurale (Mali) IITA International Institute of Tropical Agriculture ILCA International Livestock Centre for Africa INSAH Institut du Sahel ISNAR International Service for National Agricultural Research (Netherlands) ISRA Institut s6n6galais de recherches agricoles KARI Kenya Agricultural Research Institute KIT Koninglijk Instituut voor de Tropen (Royal Tropical Institute) (Netherlands) MIAC Mid-America International Agriculture Consortium NALRM National Agricultural and Livestock Research Masterplan NALRP National Agricultural and Livestock Research Project (Tanzania) NARC National Agricultural Research Council NARO National Agricultural Research Organization (Uganda) NARP National Agricultural Research Project NARS National Agricultural Research System NCU National Coordinating Unit NGO Non-governmental organization NRI Natural Resources Institute (UK) OAU Organization of African Unity ODA Overseas Development Administration (UK) R+D Research & Development ROCARS Reseau ouest et centre africain de recherche sur le sorgho (Mali) SACCAR Southern African Centre for Cooperation in Agricultural Research & Training SADC Southern African Development Community SAFGRAD Semi-Arid Food Grain Research and Development SIS SPAAR Information System SODEFITEX Societe de developpement de fibres et textiles (Senegal) SONAGRAINE Societe nationale de graine SPAAR Special Program for African Agricultural Research STRC Scientific, Technical and Research Commission of the Organization of African Unity vi SUN SunSystems Accounting Software UK United Kingdom UNCST Uganda National Council for Science and Technology UNDP United Nations Development Program USAID United States Agency for International Development WARDA West Africa Rice Development Association WASIP West African Sorghum Improvement Program WCASRN West and Central Africa Sorghum Research Network (Mali) vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY As resolved at the fourteenth Special Program for African Agricultural Research (SPAAR) plenary session held in Paris, France in January 1994, a team of independent consultants led by Dr. Dunstan S.C. Spencer, supported by Drs. Paul Kleene and John C. Davies, visited six countries in East and West Africa. The countries included the two pilot countries, Tanzania and Mali, which had agreed to implement the principles of the Frameworks for Action.(FFAs) The team met a cross-section of National Agricultural Research System (NARS) research administrators, "in country" donor representatives, World Bank, African Development Bank (ADB) and Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) personnel and Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) staff. The team was charged with specifically reviewing the lessons learnt from implementation of the FFAs. Overall, the team found that considerable changes had been brought about in the management and organization of National Agricultural Research Systems (NARSs) through application of the basic principles of the FFAs in East, West and Southern Africa. Such principles are now institutionalized. Of particular note is the progress made in the development of strategies for NARSs and determination of priorities for research. The wide acceptance of these principles has provided a foundation for the introduction of improved systems of accountability, staff deployment and programming. These were widely debated by stakeholders and particularly by national scientists in NARSs, resulting in a genuine sense of ownership of the projected activities which augurs well for the future strengthening of NARSs and the improvement of outputs and impact. The process of formulation and reorganization under Masterplanning drew attention to the potential benefits arising from regional research activities and its utility in strengthening inter-country exchange of information, conduct of mutually beneficial research and possible resource savings. Opportunities and problems are discussed in the report also important issues requiring further in-depth consideration to ensure that workable guidelines for such activity are developed. Important advances are apparent in the installation of both hardware and software to manage existing NARS resources more effectively. These are important in the context of the need to shift resources to meet the new priorities set in the Masterplans. However, despite the significant improvements in management and organizational culture, a universal and recurring problem is the shortage of operational funding. This persists despite the serious attempts by managements to reduce staff levels and research sites to meet the requirements of the new priorities and agenda. difl FFA Lessons Learnt - Executive Summary The creation of fora for exchange of information between NARSs and their donors is a marked achievement of the implementation of the FFAs. The desirability of involving the private sector in this information exchange and priority-setting is creating avenues for possible additional funding. Modes of tapping into these sources are being actively explored by NARSs. Among the options being considered are cess funding and contract research. A major success of the SPAAR/FFA activity has been the progressively higher profile taken by NARSs in planning their activities with full donor involvement. This has resulted in increased credibility within their own administrations and the creation of more demand-led research agendas. Difficulties still remain in achieving the much-sought-after farmer perspectives on research agendas. However, interesting mechanisms are being tried and require further evaluation to ascertain whether they have wider applicability. The report draws attention to the complex and numerous organizations involved in research coordination and networking. There is a particular need to define the relationships between these organizations now, and to ensure that duplication of effort and dissipation of scarce staff and funding resource are minimized. The time is particularly opportune to examine the relationships between NARSs and International Agricultural Research Centers (IARCs) in view of the moves towards ecoregional research in the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) system. Implementation of the FFAs is unlikely to be the solution since every NARS has its own political, historical and national perspective. Many of the concepts, however, are sound and their wider application will lead to the significant strengthening of NARS capability, output and credibility. The following is a full list of the lessons that have been learnt from implementation of the FFAs. Detailed justifications are in Chapters 3-5 of the report. Masterplan Strategies and Priorities (Ch. 3.3) Lesson 1: The Masterplanning process has had an important and significant effect in institutionalizing priority-setting mechanisms in NARSs and in aligning agricultural research with national development objectives. The cost of the operation in staff involvement and time is high, but it is difficult to see how ownership of strategy and plans can be established without the use of internal scientific know-how and experience. The process has had a marked value in capacity building for planning in NARSs. Lesson 2: Complicated methods of priority-setting proved difficult to implement in the formulation of NARS Masterplans. Generally, national systems adopted weighted check list systems, which enabled modifiers and local value judgments to be incorporated in priorities set. Priority-setting needs to be well-supported by the timely provision of hardware, generally by donors. FFA Lessons Learnt - Executive Summary ix Lesson 3: Use of carefully selected key consultants from within the country and external sources was justified. Consultants need to have considerable experience of the development process and the countries/national research systems. The final selection of consultants should be a national system responsibility. The role of the International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR), in the provision of important know-how, techniques and backstopping in assisting in the Masterplanning exercise, was invaluable. It is questionable whether the published strategy documentation could have been achieved in the absence of this input. Lesson 4: Additional consideration needs to be given to the realities of collaborative regional research. NARS management, while appreciating the potential benefits of such activity, is conscious of the necessity to create stable, well-funded and self-confident national systems as a first priority, and to avoid the dissipation of scarce national capacity and funding. The regional research agenda therefore needs to be very carefully identified and relative comparative advantages fully exploited to mutual advantage. Lesson 5: While there has been a marked improvement in aligning national priorities with demand- led perspectives through the Masterplanning exercise, further efforts are required to develop adequate techniques to ensure that farm-level issues are fully incorporated into research agendas at the national level. While techniques exist for the incorporation of farmers' views at the local level, there are still difficulties in involving farmers in priority-setting at the national level. Lesson 6: In spite of the emphasis on policy research in the FFAs, the Masterplans developed have hardly addressed the topic. This is a reflection of the weakness of NARS staffing in this area. Lesson 7: The strategies and priorities set have, in general, been endorsed by both national governments and donors. Donors, however, are still committed to long-standing research projects. Care is therefore needed to ensure that donor perspectives are not at variance with priorities agreed in national strategies. NARS: Legal Status (Ch. 4.1) Lesson 8: Reform of the legal status of the NARSs is a long-term process. It needs firm support from national and international organizations. Lesson 9: The moves toward setting-up of independent semi-autonomous NARSs have had a positive effect on their operations by increasing the flexibility and discretionary authority of research managers, and should continue to be encouraged. Lesson 10: In the move to achieve other objectives, (e.g. removal of duplication between research organizations, reduction of costs to the government budget, etc.), care should be taken not to compromise the existing independence, however limited, of the NARSs. NARS: Decentralization (Ch. 4.2) Lesson 11: The general move towards more decentralized decision-making in the NARSs is facilitating, and is reinforced by, moves to have more client- or user-oriented research programs. The moves have been universally welcomed by the clients and partners of the NARS and their collaborators. x FFA Lessons Learnt - Executive Summary Lesson 12: Having a decentralized system does not in itself reduce the management problems of the NARSs. In fact, the creation of a coordinated research program, and financial management, might be rendered more difficult. There might be a temptation to solve these problems in the short run through centralization of management. This should be avoided. Instead, efforts should be directed towards making the decentralized system function better, e.g. by providing adequate incentives for administrative staff, training of staff based in the regions/zones, and setting up of consultative bodies such as Advisory Committees. NARS: Staff Rationalization (Ch. 4.3) Lesson 13: Significant down-sizing of NARS in order to free resources for recurrent expenditure is now possible and has occurred in the NARS. Lesson 14: In the down-sizing exercise, care must be taken to ensure that cuts are made proportionally, in order not to end up with unbalanced staffing profiles that may result in management problems. Lesson 15: Down-sizing must be accompanied by a significant increase in salaries and conditions of service, if the low staff morale in the NARSs is not to suffer even more as a result of the uncertainty and insecurity introduced by the exercise. Such uncertainty was manifest in many of the reforming NARS visited. NARS: Staff Evaluation and Conditions (Ch. 4.3.2 & 4.4) Lesson 16: One-time evaluation of the researchers in the NARSs, using panels that include external evaluators, has resulted in the appropriate grading of staff, and has helped legitimize the staff of the NARSs internationally. Appropriate periodic staff evaluation systems still need to be put in place in some cases to ensure that the desired quality and quantity of output are obtained. Lesson 17: Improvement of the conditions of service of NARS staff is only possible if the NARSs have a semi-autonomous legal status, and other steps are taken towards the preparation of new schemes of service, are taken. Lesson 18: The much desired improvement in conditions of staff service, and hence of morale in the short run in the NARSs will be possible only if donors are willing to be innovative in allowing their funds to be used to improve the conditions of service of researchers. There is of course the question of the sustainability of such support, i.e. the ability of governments to take over such funding when donors withdraw. In any case, it is clear that such support should not be on a project basis as was done by individual donors in the past, but should be on a system-wide basis, as in Uganda. NARS: Accounting Systems and Financial Management (Ch. 4.5 & 4.6) Lesson 19: With the hardware and software available commercially, it is possible to install and operate appropriate decentralized accounting systems in the NARSs. Adequate progress has been made by the NARSs. In this respect, the SunSystems Accounting Software (SUN) and similar systems provide the degree of transparency that is normally required by donors. Lesson 20: Computerized program accounting systems in the NARSs now provide the opportunity for effective financial management. However, NARSs need continued training and assistance to make effective use of the systems. FFA Lessons Learnt - Executive Summary xi Consolidated Funding Mechanisms (CFMs) (Ch. 4.7) Lesson 21: Agreement by donors with the principle of the CFM, and pronouncements at SPAAR meetings does not necessarily mean operational support at the field or country desk level. Expectations in the FFA about donor support for the Agricultural Research Fund (ARE) seem over- optimistic. Lesson 22: When new and innovative concepts, such as the CFM, are agreed to by donors, they should take steps to ensure that the legal framework is in place so that implementation can proceed as soon as their partners in the NARSs have fulfilled the conditionalities. Otherwise disappointment and disillusionment among the NARSs will hamper collaboration in the future. Lesson 23: One donor can lead the pack in experimenting with new ways of funding NARSs. The example of United States Agency for International Development (USAID ) in Kenya is illuminating. Donors agreed to create an ARF in Kenya in 1989, and USAID got it started in 1992. There has been only a token contribution from one other donor (about $30,000 from Overseas Development Administration (ODA). It now seems that the idea is gradually catching on. For example, the ODA field official is now apparently working on convincing headquarters to agree to a more substantial contribution, and the World Bank is working on setting up a "Secondary Special Account" that would allow it to contribute to an ARF. Lesson 24: An innovative NARS can devise ways of getting around donor reticence in contributing to an ARF. The experience of Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) in parceling out its program to different donors, and in devising ways of getting around reluctance of donors to put their monies in a CFM is evident (see Chapter 8.3). Fundingfrom Governments, Donors and Other Sources (Ch. 4. 81-5) Lesson 25: Focus only on the "software" of NARS in the reform process is unjustified. Equal attention must be paid to the "hardware." Lesson 26: The discussions surrounding the FFAs and the preparation of Masterplans in the NARSs has increased the awareness of, and commitment to, agricultural research in the countries visited by the Review Team. The experience has shown that it is possible to get national governments to make regular commitments to agricultural research in partnership with donors. Lesson 27: Progress in getting donor support for agreed priority programs in the Masterplans has been much faster where the NARSs can divide their program into projects which bilateral donors can fund using their traditional project financing mode. Donors are still very reluctant to move to program financing and CFMs. Lesson 28: There is potential for increasing the direct support for agricultural research from the private sector and parastatal organizations. Once the NARSs have established a Masterplan, they have been pursuing such opportunities vigorously. Success in getting support from the private sector depends on the creation of the necessary legal frameworks, and the provision of adequate incentives, bearing in mind the profit motive of private enterprises. Research-Extension-Farmer Linkages (Ch. 5.1) Lesson 29: The FFA process, with its emphasis on zonal priority setting, has increased the level of awareness of the importance of improved participation of extension agents and farmers in setting of research agendas and priorities. xii FFA Lessons Learnt - Executive Summary Lesson 30: Practical difficulties exist in fully integating farmers into the research planning process, especially at the national level. Appropriate methodology still needs to be developed and institutionalized in the NARSs. The selection of farmer representatives for User Committees is greatly facilitated where farmer organizations exist. The effectiveness of Farmer-Research linkages could be increased considerably if the long-term partnership arrangements that exist in some zones, for example, the farmer-researcher groups could be extended more widely. Lesson 31: Research-Extension linkages can be strengthened by taking such steps as making sure that extension agencies are fully represented in research planning committees at the regional and national levels, that they participate in on-farm trials conducted by NARSs or are responsible for such trials, and that NARSs are involved in the training of extension personnel. NGO and Private Sector Linkages (Ch. 5.2 & 5.3) Lesson 32: Linkages with NGOs and farmers' organizations are a very efficient way for narrowing the gap between research and practice. Written agreements which set out the rules for such collaboration, including financial and administrative procedures, help to ensure the smooth operation of such partnerships over time. Lesson 33: NGOs are a prominent feature of the countries visited and significant numbers are involved in natural resource management at village and farmer levels. They are a useful medium through which farmer perceptions of research outputs can be obtained and problems identified. The involvement of NGOs in research commnittees has improved the research planning process by bringing in the view from the field. Lesson 34: The existence of a national NGO coordinating body within a country greatly facilitates the identification of relevant partners for NARSs at the farm level. Lesson 35: Important direct financial contributions from NGOs to the NARSs cannot be expected. However, it is likely that close linkages and sustainable partnerships will enhance the prospects of obtaining continued donor support for the NARSs and ensure thus the rapid and effective dissemnination of proven research findings. Lesson 36: The move towards closer involvement of the private sector in research has been beneficial in terms of improving the responsiveness of the NARSs to the needs of their users, and in opening up a potential avenue for the increased funding of agricultural activities. L4RC Linkages (Ch. 5.4) Lesson 37: Improvements in research programmiing, priority-setting and functioning of the NARSs has allowed them to become more effective partners with IARCs and developed country institutions. They are better able to identify priority areas for collaborative research. Lesson 38: Recent improvements in the IARC - NARS relationship have still not modified the top- down priority-setting approach of some IARCs. Efforts are still needed to put in place formal mechanisms that would allow NARSs to contribute better to research priority-setting in the IARCs. FFA Lessons Learnt - Executive Summary xill 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Request for Review of Lessons Learnt At the Fourteenth Plenary Session of SPAAR in Paris, France, in January 1994, it was decided to undertake a review of progress made in the implementation of the two completed FFAs in Agricultural Research in the Sahel and Southern Africa. The general feeling was that there could be useful "lessons to be learnt" from FFA implementation in Mali and Tanzania, the respective pilot countries of the Sahel and Southern Africa. The FFA principles have been incorporated into the design of new research projects and in the re-design of existing ones, e.g. in Burkina Faso, The Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Rwanda, Senegal, Uganda, and Zambia. It was felt that these countries may have useful lessons to impart in the way the FFA principles are being utilized. 1.2 Terms of Reference The SPAAR Secretariat prepared detailed Terms of Reference for a team of consultants that would conduct the review of Lessons Learnt (see Appendix l). The team was required to examine the experience of the NARSs in preparing their broad medium- to long- term strategic plans -- the so-called Masterplans, and their shorter term zonal/program plans -- the so-called Action Plans. Progress in putting in place appropriate and transparent financial mechanisms for agricultural research, and improvements in institutional and management capacity, were to be assessed. The success or otherwise of attempts to improve the linkages of the NARSs with their potential clients (farmers, extension systems, NGOs, the private sector, etc.), their regional and international collaborators, and their donors was also to be examined. The team was required to assess the main impacts or achievements of the FFA implementation process and to identify factors contributing to the outcomes observed. Areas where improvements to the FFA implementation process could be made were to be identified and the desirability of replicating the process in other countries indicated. 1.3 Composition of the Review Team The Review was carried out by a team of three consultants led by Dr. Dunstan Spencer, an agricultu.-al economist, and an independent consultant based in Sierra Leone. The other two members were Dr. Paul Kleene, a socio-economist from the Netherlands working with Centre de cooperation internationale en recherche agronomique (CIRAD) in Burkina Faso and Dr. John C. Davies, an entomologist and former Deputy Chief Natural Resources Adviser (Research) with the ODA in London, United Kingdom (UK). FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter I 1 1.4 Activities of the Review Team The team visited Tanzania, Uganda and Kenya (November 25 - December 11, 1994) and Mali, Senegal and Ghana (January 15 - 31, 1995). It spent the period February 1 - 17 at the SPAAR Secretariat in Washington, D.C.. A detailed itinerary of the mission is provided in Appendix 2. In each country visited, discussions were held with officials of the NARS, donor representatives, staff of extension agencies, NGOs, and representatives of farmer organizations. Appendix 3 has a list of persons met. The strategy adopted by each NARS in preparing its research Masterplan was reviewed, and the progress made and difficulties encountered in plan implementation were discussed. The financial and administrative management systems were examined, and linkages between the NARSs, extension agencies and farmers were explored. Particular attention was paid to exploring the functioning of donor coordinating mechanisms. The teamn received excellent cooperation from all concerned, and was able to collect enough information to distill important lessons from the implementation of the principles of the FFAs in the six countries. 2 FFA Leons Loarnt - COapter I 2. SPAAR AND THE FRAMEWORKS FOR ACTION 2.1 Chronology and Philosophy of SPAAR Actions SPAAR was initiated in the mid 1980s. Its development and shift of focus has been a process of steady evolution. The organization was initially and essentially a forum of donors, who had a common interest in sponsoring and funding agricultural research in Africa. Their perception was that in spite of donor inputs of funds and expertise, NARSs were failing to generate technology and information of value for national development plans. There was also an underlying concern that messages, materials and technologies which were emerging from the CGIAR system (funded by the same donors) were not passing to NARSs or gaining acceptance by them. There was concern that the NARS research agenda was largely supply- driven and that research programs were frequently academic and geared to the production of technical reports and papers and not outputs useful to users. The first few meetings of SPAAR were thus essentially annual and held on the fringes of the CGIAR International Centers Week. Arising from these meetings, a work agenda was proposed in which four activities were identified for SPAAR donor funding and activity. These addressed the assessment of existing research information ("on the shelf technology") in Senegal and Tanzania, sponsored by France, UK and Germany; a listing and characterization of research networks operational in Africa, sponsored by USAID; a small grants scheme for returning scientists managed by IFS and sponsored by several SPAAR donors; and the development of an information system to provide data on donor projects in SPAAR countries -- the SPAAR Information System (SIS). All these activities began to increasingly involve more and better contacts between donors and the NARSs. It soon became obvious that there was a requirement to involve national scientists and administrators far more intimately in SPAAR activities in order to underline the relevance and ensure the inclusion of national perspectives. The process also revealed that few national systems had strategies or mechanisms for setting priorities associated with governmental policies or the needs of their potential clients. To address this problem, a donor coordinating group for Tanzania was established. SPAAR, with considerable input from ISNAR and funding from Germany, the Netherlands and the UK, initiated an intensive Masterplanning exercise in Tanzania. A series of SPAAR-sponsored workshops enabled Masterplanning to proceed with the heavy involvement of national scientists, outside consultants and considerable donor assistance in organization and management. These activities led to significant improvements in the ability of the national system to set priorities and radically change strategies. These processes have become institutionalized and have led to the development of national capability in the updating of planning processes and a marked sense of ownership by the national systems themselves. Their relevance in other African systems is obvious and has gained acceptance. FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 2 3 In parallel with these Masterplanning exercises and in response to emerging perceptions of common problems and the utility of regional planning, SPAAR, in association with regional organizations such as Southern African Center for Cooperation in Agricultural Research and Training (SACCAR), Institut du Sahel (INSAH) and the World Bank, prepared FFAs. Progress was made through an intensive process of stakeholder interaction and iteration, which identified common actions and themes which were necessary for strengthening the NARSs. 2.2 The Frameworks for Action (FFAs) The FFAs assume, as a starting point, that science-based technology generation and dissemination should be in the forefront of sustainable agricultural development. They also seek to address the slow rate of technology generation in the African NARSs in the recent past, despite the considerable investment in research. The raison d'etre of the FFAs is the strengthening of the NARSs in their respective regions to provide the technology required to realize the national and regional potential for agricultural productivity and growth. As described in the introduction to the Review Team's Terms of Reference, the common elements or principles of the Frameworks include: 1. A Research Masterplan or Strategy. Each country should have a national Research Masterplan or Strategy that satisfies four necessary conditions: (i) the Research Strategy must be developed by the nationals themselves; (ii) the research that will be undertaken on the priority programs in the Research Strategy must be detailed in the Research Action Plans (sometimes referred to as Research Profiles); (iii) research projects (trials) must address the most important technical questions affecting the productivity of farmers; and (iv) the Action Plans must be in accord with the country's available human and financial resources. 2. Financing Mechanismfor Agricultural Research. Productive NARSs require a stable, sufficient and timely supply of funds for the agreed priority research programs included in the Research Strategy. A major constraint to effective research is the inadequacy of funding, especially the lack of provision for recurrent research operating costs. The inadequacy of local resources and the small proportion of the research budget allocated to operations and maintenance is exacerbated by the fact that donor support to specific activities does not usually extend to the local cost of non- incremental recurrent research expenditure of existing projects or programs. At the Tenth SPAAR Plenary Session in May 1990, there was agreement that this important issue of recurrent research operating costs will need to be addressed by SPAAR donors and their African partners together. The World Bank took the lead in designing a mechanism, the so-called CFM, that would treat the funding of agreed research programs as part of capital investment. The proposed CFM has been agreed to in principle by SPAAR donors and their African partners. Such a mechanism can only work where reliable and transparent accounting procedures are in place. Suitable accounting software is now available to make this possible. Agricultural Research 4 FFA Lessons Learmt - Chapter 2 Funds (ARFs), which can be regarded as simple prototypes of eventual full-fledged CFMs, have been established in Kenya, Tanzania, and Zimbabwe to foster collaborative and contract research. The ARFs will also pilot the pooling of research efforts (and funds). 3. Institutional and Management Capacity Building. Research management and team leaders must increasingly be empowered to make critical decisions on, and be held accountable for, their research budget and the management of their research personnel. To improve the scientific and management capacity of NARSs, the World Bank and other donors are increasingly requiring that, in the projects they fund, research managers be given more discretionary authority and flexibility. 4. In-country Advisory Group. A support or Advisory Group that is chaired by the Director of Agricultural Research and comprising representatives of public sector research institutions (including the academic research community), donor organizations, IARCs, the private sector and NGOs can play a critical role in the implementation of the Action Plans (the end-product of translating the priority research programs in the Research Strategy). Such an Advisory Group must be entrusted with the responsibility for: (i) policy formulation; (ii) research program review; (iii) resource allocation; and (iv) monitoring and auditing. An effective Group can contribute to research management capacity building. 5. Research-Extension-Farmer Linkages. Research that is not translated into results on the farm is of little value. It is, therefore, highly desirable that representatives of the extension service and farmers participate in the annual research planning process, as well as in the implementation and evaluation of results. It is of fundamental importance that research and extension be better integrated and are provided with equivalent measures of support. 6. Regionalization of Research. There are potential spillover benefits from the regionalization of research. In Africa, such potential gains from regional research remain largely untapped. NARSs and their research partners should be encouraged to support regional research -- to address technical problems that transcend national boundaries. The background against which each of the FFAs is set is very different, especially in the context of regional efforts. In the Sahel, there are several major regional coordinating bodies and networks, some of which are long-standing, e.g. Comite permanent inter-Etats de lutte contre la secheresse dans le Sahel (CILSS), INSAH, Semi-Arid Food and Grain Research and Development (SAFGRAD), and more recently, Conference des responsables de recherche agronomique Africains (CORAF). Here, the practicalities of regional cooperation have been exhaustively discussed for years. In Southern Africa, a strong regional coordinating body, SACCAR, exists as an organ of Southern Africa Development Community (SADC). The former body has clearly defined regional responsibilities in agriculture. In East and Central FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 2 5 Africa, until the recent formation of Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa (ASARECA), no coordinating body existed, though there previously had been a recognized body, East African Agricultural and Forestry Research Organization (EAAFRO), which collapsed with the demise of the East African Community.(EAC) In the coastal countries of West Africa, there is no effective regional coordinating body for agricultural research. Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) has a nominal role which it has not exercised. The IARC system has been involved in significant regional commodity networking in the different regions. The Sahel framework specifically suggests cross-cutting actions that can support revitalized national and regional effort. There is also reference to the need for a more demand- led research agenda. The East and Central Africa framework places considerable emphasis, in the context of institutional reform, on sensitizing policymakers to ensure adequate and stable funding, and timely fund delivery for recurrent expenditures. Farmer participation in setting both the research agenda and making results readily assimilable is targeted. The lead role of NARSs in setting the regional research agenda and their empowerment is stressed. The Southern Africa framework is more prescriptive in defining the elements of the FFA strategy. It proposes a consolidated programming and funding mechanism, development of a capacity for policy analysis, encouragement of private sector involvement in formulation of national and regional plans, improvement in the quality of science and technology, intensification of existing farming systems and diversification of the commodity base and specific targeting of the rural poor in arid and marginal areas through "on farm" research, application of biotechnology, wildlife management and utilization programs. The framework specifically focuses on people, those who create the technology (scientists) and the ultimate beneficiaries (producers and consumers). In some ways, Tanzania, a pilot FFA country, occupies a very interesting position as it currently "belongs" to the Southern Africa FFA, owing to political factors, while clearly, in ecoregional and geographic terms, it has more in common with the East and Central Africa FFA and is a member country of ASARECA. 6 FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 2 3. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FFAs: PROGRESS IN PLANNING Production of Masterplans in the countries visited by the team predated the development of the FFAs. Since the development of such plans is a cornerstone of any realistic effort to improve research output, resource allocation and research management, there is clearly a congruence of objectives between the development of national strategies, priority- setting and one major FFA objective. The exact mechanisms of priority-setting varied from country to country, but in all instances took as a basic premise the involvement of significant numbers of practicing scientists and national research leaders in working groups, assisted by external and internal consultants. Mont exercises also involved the commissioning of specific papers on various aspects of priority research with subsequent independent assessment of proposals made. The involvement of ISNAR in the mechanics and organization of priority-setting was a common and important feature of the Masterplanning exercises. In all instances, task groups comprehensively reviewed on-going research, past achievements and planned research against stated govemment policy objectives. The establishing of this linkage was an important and fundamental step in providing a sound and credible basis for the acceptance of agricultural research as an important feature of development plans of the countries visited. 3.1 Drawing up the Masterplans -- Some Country Examples The Masterplanning exercise in Tanzania was a long drawn out process, and a considerable challenge for the NARS system. It was stimulated by an appraisal carried out with World Bank assistance in 1987/88. The process itself was initiated in mid-1989 under the control of the Department of Research and Training (DRT). It was funded by a consortium of donors -- the Netherlands, Germany and UK -- who had traditionally been involved in research in Tanzania. Funding amounted to $1.5 million as grants. Some difficulties were caused by the different accountability "rules" of donors in mobilizing funds in a timely fashion. A total of 4 working groups involving 30 national scientists and managers were set up to cover research planning and management, resources, research linkages and information and documentation. A national coordinating unit (NCU) of 17 persons was created which included 7 planning officers who were assisted by subject matter specialists, key consultants and the working groups. The process of planning was estimated to take 8 months. In all, the groups reviewed 36 review papers prepared by national scientists and received representations in addition to reviewing literature and information obtained on program content, on-going research and available resources obtained from questionnaires. The summarized information was subsequently further reviewed in a national workshop, which involved 11 key consultants from overseas -- a useful device in bringing fresh perspectives to the final plan and avoiding/minimizing internal division within the NARSs. FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 3 7 Difficulties arose in the course of consideration of the organization and management studies associated with the planning exercise and a special team was commissioned to make recommendations on management, finance, personnel, and computing. In contrast to the planning process in many of the other countries visited (except possibly Ghana), there was a relatively high-profile donor involvement in the exercise. Based on the work of the NCU, a printed National Agricultural and Livestock Master Plan (NALRM) was produced and subsequently endorsed by both government and the donor community in 1992. The plan was formulated before the FFA for Southern Africa was produced and consequently does not spell out in great detail Tanzania's role in the FFA regional program. In the course of the team's visit, it was noted that mechanisms exist for updating the priority research programs and to adjust planned activities to available human and financial resources. Evidence was produced of recent reviews of profiles for rice, cotton, agroforestry, farming systems research, ruminant meat and milk and animal diseases programs. It was however, apparent that donors continue to support long-standing projects which are incorporated into the plan e.g. Germany -- coconut research, the Netherlands -- farming systems and ODA - cashew. The Masterplanning process in Mali was initiated in 1989 by IER in collaboration with ISNAR. Here again, there was a significant involvement of national scientists in setting the priorities which were set for 12 years with regard to both content and research allocations. Seven research programs were identified -- cereals and legumes, industrial crops, fruit and vegetables, annual production, forestry and fisheries agricultural production systems and natural resource management. Sub-programs by commodity and activity were identified. A significant decision in Mali was to decentralize and create regional centers for agroecological zones at the outset, making regional center directors responsible for programming and supervision. The completed strategy was presented to a donor Round Table in 1992. The exercise therefore ran in parallel with the INSAH/SPAAR exercise conducted with the national institutes of CILSS countries which also prepared the FFAs for revitalizing agricultural research. Using pre-project funding of $0.75 million, an extremely well-documented system of research programming has been designed with four operational mechanisms, including users and scientific committees at the regional and national levels which will enable strategies to be updated. There is also a program committee for LER, a regional committee and local working groups. The Uganda National Research system comprises two main elements working in close association: The National Agricultural Research Organization (NARO) and the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology (UNCST). The Council advises government on the formulation and management of explicit national policy and all fields of science and technology; promotes, develops, and integrates science and technology in the national development process and coordinates all scientific and technological activities geared to national needs and environmentally acceptable sustained economic development. 8 FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 3 It rationalizes the use of foreign science and technology, establishes linkages with centers of excellence --both national and international, develops systems of information management, and communication systems. It also operates legal systems for the protection of technological innovations. It is semi-autonomous and is composed of 34 eminent individuals appointed on merit, headed by an Executive Secretary, who is the Accounting Officer to the Council. Clear programs are defined in published policy documents and there is close liaison with NARO on agricultural, environmental and sustainability issues. The Masterplan on agricultural research was published in 19911 and was the culmination of the deliberations of a working group, established in 1989. Priority-setting was again carried out taking account of national development objectives, using weights and translating them into research system objectives. High-priority commodity and factor research topics were defined together with medium-priority categories. Decisions were taken to address only the high-priority topics in the short to medium term. The priorities chosen have in general again been endorsed by donors, who have funded and collaborated on areas of interest to them. Kenya established a Agricultural Research master plan in 1991.2 This was based on a comprehensive review by KARI research scientists and administrators. Priorities were guided by the research priorities in four major policy documents3 of the Government of Kenya, which outlined the role and obligations of the National Agricultural Research System. The method used in setting priorities for research programs in KARI was the checklist scoring model because of its ease of use and implementation, limited data set requirement and the ability to incorporate multiple objectives and qualitative information. Again, the services of ISNAR were utilized in the planning and priority-setting process. Commodity and factor research programs were identified. Priorities were set by KARI scientists for commodities and factors using a range of comprehensive parameters which enabled weights to be assigned. There is a definite feeling of ownership on the part of the NARS. Generally speaking, donors have been supportive of the priorities set and have funded programs and activities, where they feel they have comparative advantage/interest. I National Agricultural Research Strategy and Plan, 2 Vols. 2 Kenya's Agricultural Research Priorities to the Year 2000. 3 Sessional Paper No. I of 1986 on 'Economic Management for Renewed Growth". The National Development Plan of 1989-93. The National Council of Science and Technology Report on National Priority Areas. No. 30, October 1989. The National Agricultural Research Project 1986. FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 3 9 Considerable skill has been shown by KARI management in ensuring that donor budgets are fully integrated into KARI's total research plan. 3.2 Common Elements of Masterplanning The broad guiding principles used in the planning exercises were similar in all countries visited. They were to prioritize research so as to guide the detailed design of research programs and projects in line with national development goals. All plans recognized the necessity to consolidate and down-size the large national systems to make them sustainable on the basis of intemal resources. Interestingly, in most countries, this involved the consolidation of agricultural and livestock research under one plan -- a necessity in considering natural resources sustainability and environmental issues. The planning process highlighted the necessity to improve incentives, conditions of service and accountability by strengthening research management, financial administration and support services. Important aspects of the planning process concemed development, consultation and expansion of extemal linkages. At the base of the planning process in all countries was the recognition of the need to move from supply-driven activities to a much more client and demand-driven set of parameters. Identification of clients figure prominently in all plans, together with a recognition of the need to involve farmers in the process of priority-setting. However, the team believes that the level of farmer involvement is low and that there is a significant lack of appropriate methodology to incorporate farmer perspectives in priority setting. A study of the Masterplans reveals few major differences in methodology adopted in the countries visited. Initial work involved the formation of working groups and the production of papers on specific research topics. Consultants were generally employed to create a broader vision of the priority-setting process and, in nearly all instances, ISNAR provided invaluable assistance to national programs in the provision of backstopping and in developing techniques of priority-setting and examining management issues. A significant feature was the unanimous adoption of the simpler checklist/weighting methods of priority-setting, rather than the more demanding mathematical and econometrics approaches which require much more data collection, analysis and time. On balance, the deliberations of the working groups have arrived at sets of priorities which are acceptable and defensible. The process of Masterplanning would not have been possible without significant funding support from multilateral and bilateral donors. The processes, especially in Tanzania, were long, tied up a significant amount of scientific and administrative time, and were generally undertaken with insufficient planning. Nevertheless, the process was important in providing a sense of ownership by national systems and was worthwhile, since new ideas and dimensions were introduced to scientists' planning programs. Linkages were made to development objectives in the plans which gave the final output considerable credibility. 10 FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 3 SPAAR undoubtedly played a significant role in focusing attention on the need for NARSs to seriously address research planning and move away from "wish lists" which had previously been a feature of donor/NARS contacts. The workshops organized by SPAAR also raised the profile of agricultural research in development at the political level. The Review Team's discussion and study of the evolution of the FFA process, and the development of stakeholders' thinking and dialogue, indicated a distinct acceptance of the necessity to include the regional research themes as an important element in NARS priority- setting. This is a logical outcome as the process of priority-setting and modes of improving organization and management in NARSs become institutionalized. However, this opens up new challenges for NARSs as procedures for open and frank discussion and mechanisms for the resolution of conflicts on genuine differences of opinion relating to national scientific and economic policy, determination of relative national competence for execution of regional research projects, and modes of information sharing, reporting, and fund allocation will need to be put in place. None of the existing Masterplans explicitly incorporate regional research activities and priorities. Development of the FFAs has also thrown into relief the relative weakness of the NARSs in policy research and the need to strengthen abilities in this field. The FFAs, particularly those for Southern Africa, make a strong case for attention to be paid to policy analysis. However, only minor attempts have been made to address this issue in the Masterplans of one or two of the countries visited by the Review Team. 3.3 Priorities in the Masterplans Generally speaking, strategic planning and priority-setting exercises have been carried out in a thorough fashion which has involved considerable staff involvement and significant planning and managerial inputs from external sources. The processes have served to produce a sense of ownership of the priorities on the part of the scientists of NARSs. Priorities set tend to be essentially of an adaptive nature and from that point of view realistic and geared to immediate needs. All plans allude to the extreme difficulties related to the provision of operational funding. The Masterplanning exercises have produced priorities which, by and large, accord well with development issues. They also, to a great extent, seek to address identifiable problems which are susceptible to technical solution and have a more prominent linkage to farmers problems than was formerly the case, i.e. are much more demand-driven. It is questionable whether additional farmer inputs would significantly improve outcomes unless mechanisms are developed for obtaining clearer indications from farmers of their priorities. This is not an easy process. Techniques for achieving such inputs have been suggested for Ghana, Tanzania and Mali and require further assessment. FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 3 11 Lemon 1: The Masterplanning process has had an important and significant effect in institutionalizing priority-setting mechanisms in NARSs and in aligning agricultural research with national development objectives. The cost of the operation in staff involvement and time is high, but it is difficult to see how ownership of strategy and plans can be established without the evident use of internal scientific know-how and experience. The process has had a marked value in capacity building for planning in NARSs. Lesson 2: Complicated methods of priority-setting proved difficult to implement in the formulation of NARS Masterplans. Generally, national systems adopted weighted checklist systems, which enabled modifiers and local value judgments to be incorporated in the priorities set. Priority-setting needs to be well-supported by the timely provision of hardware, generally by donors. Lesson 3: The use of carefully-selected key consultants from within the country and external sources was justified. Consultants need to have considerable experience of the development process and the countries/national research systems. The final selection of consultants should be a national system responsibility. The role of ISNAR in the provision of important know- how, techniques and backstopping in assisting in the Masterplanning exercise was invaluable. It is questionable whether the published strategy documentation could have been achieved in the absence of this input. Lesson 4: Additional consideration needs to be given to the realities of collaborative regional research. NARS management, while appreciating the potential benefits of such activity, is conscious of the necessity to create stable, well-funded and self-confident national systems as a first priority, and to avoid the dissipation of scarce national capacity and funding. The regional research agenda therefore needs to be very carefully identified and relative comparative advantages fully exploited to mutual advantage. Lesson 5: While there has been a marked improvement in aligning national priorities with demand-led perspectives through the Masterplanning exercise, further efforts are required to develop adequate techniques to ensure that farm-level issues are fully incorporated into research agendas at the national level. While techniques exist for the incorporation of fanners' views at the local level, there are still difficulties in involving farmers in priority-setting at the national level. Lesson 6: In spite of the emphasis put on policy research in the FFAs, Masterplans developed have hardly addressed the topic. This is a reflection of the weakness of NARS staffing in this area. Lesson 7: Strategies and priorities set have, in general, been endorsed by both national governments and donors. Donors, however, are still comnmitted to long- standing research projects. Care is therefore needed to ensure that donor perspectives are not at variance with priorities agreed on in national strategies. 12 FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 3 4. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FFAs: REORGANIZATION OF THE NARSs The FFAs advocate reorganization of the NARSs in order to improve their institutional and management capacity. The aim is to put NARS managers in the driving seat and to make them more accountable. 4.1 Legal Status of the NARSs During the last five years there has been a general move to change the legal status of the NARSs, usually from that of a government department to a public parastatal type of organization. The aim has been to free research systems from the strictures of the civil service, encourage more client-oriented and efficient management, allow the adoption of staff conditions of service that offer better incentives, and open the way for partial financing of the NARSs by private firms and non-governmental organizations. These moves are consistent with the recommendation in the FFAs for more effective, transparent and client-oriented management systems in the NARSs. The Review Team found that in most of the countries visited, moves towards such institutional reform predated the preparation of the FFA. In Kenya, KARI was created as 1 of 6 parastatal research institutions in 1979. With the assistance of ISNAR, the research system was subsequently reorganized, and all agriculture and livestock research except tea, coffee, forestry and fisheries placed within KARI in 1986, during implementation of the first phase of the multi-donor funded National Agricultural Research Project (NARP-1). In Uganda, NARO was established in 1992 as a semi-autonomous parastatal responsible for the coordination and management of all agricultural research in the country. However the reorganization of the research system started in 1988 with the creation of an independent, self-accounting department for research, with its own Permanent Secretary, within the Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries. It is the result of significant lobbying by national opinion leaders and the strong support of the present political leadership of the country. In Senegal, Institut senegalais de recherches agricoles (ISRA) was established as an EPIC parastatal (Etablissement Public d Caractere Industriel et Commercial) in the late 1970s. Legislation has now been prepared to convert it to an EPST organization (Etablissement Public a Caractere Scientifique et Technique) that would allow it even more autonomy, particularly in setting attractive conditions of service for its staff. In Ghana, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) was established in 1968 as a semi-autonomous organization to advise government, and to promote and coordinate research efforts which are divided among several ministries. After a CSIR/ISNAR review of the NARS, the World Bank-funded NARP which started in 1991 brought about further institutional changes in CSIR that have strengthened its research coordination role. FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 4 13 However, in the two FFA pilot countries, institutional reforms have occurred at the same time or soon after the preparation of the FFA. They were based on earlier suggestions by ISNAR, and occurred as part of donor-funded projects. Even in these countries, the process of reform started long before they were nominated as pilot countries. In Mali, IER was converted from a government department to a semi-autonomous self-accounting EPA research organization (Etablissement Public a Caractere Adninistratif) in 1993. But the drive for reform started in 1985. Studies were conducted between 1985 and 1988. Work on drawing up a strategic plan and formulating reforms started with ISNAR in 1990. The exception to the general move toward more independent parastatal organizations in the NARSs, has been in Tanzania. As part of the conditions for credit effectiveness of the World Bank-led, multi-donor funded National Agricultural and Livestock Research Project (NALRP) which commenced in 1989, the existing semi-autonomous research parastatals (Tanzania Agricultural Research Organization, Tanzania Livestock Research Organization) were abolished, and their functions consolidated fully within the government civil service structure as the DRT in the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock Development. This was meant to reduce costs and duplication of initiatives. Although there have been significant reforms of the research management system of DRT since then, the Review Team got the impression that the civil service nature of the organization results in reduced discretionary authority of the research managers. Lesson 8: Reform of the legal status of the NARSs is a long-term process. It needs firm support from national and international organizations. -esson 9: The moves toward setting-up of independent semi-autonomous NARSs have had a positive effect on their operations by increasing the flexibility and discretionary authority of research managers, and should continue to be encouraged. Lesson 10: In the move to achieve other objectives (e.g., removal of duplication between research organizations, reduction of costs to the government budget, etc.), care should be taken not to compromise the existing independence, however limited, of the NARSs. 4.2 Decentralization As part of the institutional reform of the NARSs, there has been a shift toward the increased decentralization of management systems. There is an emphasis on matrix management systems which give more responsibilities to RegionalVZonal Research Directors, who supervise most of the researchers and programs. Technical/scientific direction is often provided by headquarters-based Directors. In Tanzania, 7 zonal Directorships have been established, and in Mali there are 5 research center Directors. In Uganda, 7 regional research institutes have been established, and in Ghana there are a number of virtually independent institutes and research organizations. 14 FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 4 The Review Team got the impression that, except for Senegal, there has been a general move in the last 5 years to increase the autonomy of regional/zonal research Directors. Partially decentralized financial management systems exist (Ghana) or are being put in place (see Chapter 5). Where studies by ISNAR and others have detected a weakness in the decentralized system, apex coordinating mechanisms have been put in place, e.g. the National Agricultural Research Council (NARC) in Tanzania and Ghana, the restructured Comite National de la Recherche Agronomique (CNRA) in Mali, etc. Annual research plans (Action Plans) are initiated by scientists in the zones/regions, where systems for consultation with potential users (farmers, extension agencies, NGOs, etc.) have been put in place. The process of regionaUzonal planning involving users has been most institutionalized in Mali (see ChapLef 5). Only in Senegal did the Review Team detect a move towards the increased ralization of management systems. This seems to be driven by difficulties encountered in preparing financial reports on time in a system which has down-sized considerably in the recent past only by reducing non-scientific staff (see Chapter 3.1). Lesson 11: Thc gencral move towards more decentralized decision-making in the NARSs is facilitating, and is reinforced by moves to have more client or user-oriented research programs. The moves have been universally welcomed by the clients and partners of the NARS and their collaborators. Lesson 12: Having a decentralized system does not in itself reduce the management problems of the NARSs. In fact, the creation of a coordinated research program, and financial management might be rendered more difficult. There might be a temptation to solve these problems in the short run by centralizing management. This should be avoided. Instead, efforts should be directed towards making the decentralized system function better. e.g. through providing adequate incentives for administrative staff, training of staff based in the regions/zones, and the setting-up of consultative bodies such as Advisory Committees. 4.3 Rationalization of Staffing One of the problems of the NARSs during the past decade has been overstaffing in a context of declining research budgets. The result has been that: operational budgets have declined in relative as well as absolute terms, conditions of service have deteriorated and morale as well as scientific output have declined. One of the recommendations of many ISNAR and other review missions, which has been incorporated in the FFAs, is therefore the rationalization of the staffing of the NARSs. This is usually expected to involve actual reduction in staff numbers (the so-called down-sizing exercise) and evaluation of existing staff in order to place them in the appropriate scientific grade or level. The objective is to improve the enabling environment for productive work by increasing recurrent budgets, and salaries for staff retained. FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 4 15 4.3.1 Down-sizing The Review Team found that most of the NARSs have implemented very significant staff reduction exercises over the last 3 - 5 years. The extent of the down-sizing would have been inconceivable 5 - 10 years ago. It has occurred, in many instances, under pressure from central governments which have been required to make significant reductions in the public sector as a part of their Structural Adjustment Programs, and in some cases, this process commenced before the preparation of the FFAs. In Senegal, at the request of the government, the staff numbers in ISRA were reduced from about 1,420 to about 860 in an initial exercise in 1985. As part of the World Bank- funded Agricultural Research Project, a further reduction occurred in 1989 that brought total staffing down to 575, including 158 researchers. In this exercise, while research programs were cut and some research stations closed, the number of scientists was not reduced. The resulting difficulties that ISRA encountered in terms of insufficient technical and administrative support for scientists, e.g. in accounting services, is now evident. Unlike Senegal, down-sizing in the other countries has involved reduction in scientists as well as support staff. In Mali, the number of staff in Institut d'Economie Rurale (IER) is being reduced from 240 senior staff in the civil service Category A to 110 scientists. Ten percent of the original number of senior staff were transferred to extension, while the rest are staying as support staff or are being sent for training. In Uganda, about 25 percent of the scientific staff were redeployed to the ministry when NARO was formed. In Tanzania, some research staff were released when the parastatals were abolished, and the remaining staff are being redeployed from program areas that are no longer of high-priority in the Masterplan, to high-priority research areas and stations. A total of 88 scientists, 102 technicians and 41 assistants are to be redeployed in three phases which started in June 1993. Although 26 had been redeployed by November 1994, the Review Team noted that the exercise appears to be constrained by lack of funding to finance staff transfers, and lack of incentives to staff to move from their present locations where they are well-established, in the absence of financial incentives. Lesson 13: Significant down-sizing of NARSs in order to free resources for recurrent expenditure is now possible and has occurred in the NARSs. Lesson 14: In the down-sizing exercise, care must be taken to ensure that cuts are made proportionally, in order not to end up with unbalanced staffing profiles that may result in management problems. Lesson 15: Down-sizing must be accompanied by a significant increase in salaries and by better conditions of service, if the low staff morale in NARSs is not to suffer even more as a result of the uncertainty and insecurity introduced by the exercise. The team encountered such uncertainty in many of the reforming NARSs visited. 16 FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 4 4.3.2 Staff Evaluation During the down-sizing exercise, researchers have usually been evaluated and reclassified. In all cases, evaluation panels have been constituted that included people from outside the NARSs, usually from the universities, extension agencies and private firms. In at least one case (Mali), professionals from Europe, and from other African countries participated in the evaluation. This exercise has allowed staff to be put into their proper research grade, and in some cases to be removed from the NARSs. The Review Team was impressed with the thoroughness with which the exercise was undertaken and believe that the exercise has had a positive effect. In addition to the one-time evaluation referred to here, NARSs also need to institutionalize annual evaluation procedures that will ensure that researchers continue to produce the quantity and quality of output desired. The team observed that progress has been made in this respect in Mali, Senegal, Ghana and Kenya. In Tanzania and Uganda, appropriate annual evaluation procedures have yet to be put in place. Lesson 16: One-time evaluation of the researchers in the NARSs, using panels that include external evaluators, has resulted in the appropriate grading of staff, and has helped legitimize the staff of the NARSs internationally. Appropriate periodic staff evaluation systems still need to be put in place in some cases to ensure that the desired quality and quantity of output are obtained. 4.4 Staff Conditions It is generally accepted that the salary and conditions of service of researchers in the NARSs is poor by international standards, although salaries are in most cases the same as those received by university staff, and are slightly higher than those of civil servants in general. For example, in Ghana, salaries presently range from $1,301 per annum for an Assistant Research Officer in CSIR to $2,583 for a Director of Institute/Chief Research Officer. Very low salaries in some countries have encouraged staff to seek additional means of income, seek rent and other activities, which have constrained their research output. All the institutional reforms encouraged in the FFAs, and implemented by the NARSs in the past 5 years have therefore had, as one of their objectives, an improvement in the conditions of service and consequently the morale of the researchers. The Review Team found that there had been some, although very limited, success in improving conditions of service for researchers. This has been accomplished by setting up semi-autonomous institutes which have been able sometimes to negotiate better conditions of service for their staff who are no longer civil servants. FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 4 17 The biggest change has been in Uganda where very unusually, and innovatively, donors agreed to fund salaries of researchers at 60 percent of the difference between the "minimum living wage" determined by United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and actual government salaries. Under the Agricultural Research and Training Project (ARTP) the World Bank allowed use of its financing to cover 100 percent salaries of NARO staff in the first 2 years, dropping to 70 percent in the third year, and declining progressively. UNDP has been requested by donors to prepare a plan for the disengagement of donors from this incentive scheme. The new salaries at NARO were initially up to 10 times higher than government salaries, and 20 percent higher than science teachers in the university. This was possible because of strong support from the Head of State for scientific activities and the instructions to treat scientists as a special case in civil service reforms. In Tanzania, the civil service status of DRT has meant that all attempts to create special conditions of service for its scientists have not succeeded to date. In fact, the abolition of the parastatals and the integration of researchers within the government system has resulted in a significant drop in salaries for researchers. The expectation that conditions of researchers can be improved outside a general civil service reform appear unrealistic. The Government of Tanzania is not likely to treat researchers, or even all Ministry of Agriculture workers, as a special case. Lesson 17: Improvement of the conditions of service of NARS staff is only possible if the NARSs have a semi-autonomous legal status, and other steps such as the preparation of new schemes of service, are taken. Lesson 18: Chances for the much-desired improvement of staff conditions of service, and consequently of morale in the short rn in the NARSs will be possible only if donors are willing to be innovative in allowing their funds to be used to improve the conditions of service of researchers. There is, of course, the question of the sustainability of such support i.e. the ability of governments to take over such funding when donors withdraw. In any case, it is clear that such support should not be on a project basis as was done by individual donors in the past, but should be on a system-wide basis, as in Uganda. 4.5 Accounting Systems For a CFM to work, to inspire donor confidence in funding the NARSs, and to allow NARS managers greater autonomy, it is essential that there be reliable and transparent accounting procedures in place. Donors as well as national governments must be able to know exactly where their funds have been spent, and research managers need to know on a timely basis how they are progressing in spending their budget allocation as the financial year progresses. All the reforms instituted by NARSs have therefore had the institutionalization of a transparent and reliable accounting system as a centerpiece. The Review Team noted that there has been considerable progress in this area. 18 FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 4 In Tanzania, an accounting software (SUN system) was fully installed in the headquarters of DRT by late 1992. It was supplied and installed by an accounting firm that provided training and consultancy services up to September 1994. The NALRP project accountant and 7 other accounting staff have been trained in use the system, and the project accounts are now fully computerized. Accounts are produced showing expenditure for a given period by the DRT program, and by donor, and by cost head (furniture, maintenance, capital, etc.). The same software (SUN) has been installed and is being used in Mali and regional accounting staff trained. Data for 1994 accounts are now being entered. In Uganda, NARO is moving to program and project budgeting in which researchers are being asked to cost each item of experiment. A computerized accounting system is being put in place with the assistance of a resident advisor. In Kenya, a decentralized computerized system already exists, and in Ghana some of the research institutes already have computerized systems. CSIR plans to introduce a unified system over the next couple of years. Only in Senegal, as mentioned earlier, is there a move away from a decentralized accounting system. The Review Team is of the opinion that, in all the countries visited, adequate computerized transparent fund-accounting systems are in place, or are being put in place. Lesson 19: With the hardware and software available commercially, it is possible to install and operate appropriate decentralized accounting systems in the NARSs. Adequate progress has been made in this regard by the NARSs. The SUN and similar systems provide the degree of transparency that is normally required by donors. 4.6 Financial Management Having an adequate accounting system in place is one thing -- being able to use it appropriately for management purposes is another. While a start has been made in this regard in most of the NARSs visited, the Review Team found that this is still an area of weakness for the NARSs. In most NARSs, accounts are studied by senior managers only at the end of the year. The actual use of financial reports for day-to-day control by research management is just beginning. Most of the NARSs now have projects through which technical assistance is being provided in this area. They will need continued support in this area. Lesson 20: Computerized program accounting systems in the NARSs now provide the opportunity for effective financial management. NARSs need continued training and assistance to make effective use of the systems. 4.7 Consolidated Funding Mechanisms (CFMs) At the Tenth SPAAR Plenary Session in May 1990, there was agreement that the issue of adequate financing for recurrent costs of NARSs should be addressed by donors and their African partners. The World Bank took the lead in designing the so-called CFM that would treat the funding of agreed research programs as part of capital investment. The understanding of the Review Team is that the CFM would work as follows. All research activities in a NARS FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 4 19 are costed separately, including all direct and indirect costs related to a particular activity. Finance is then secured for an activity from government or donors. An activity is only taken on when enough funding has been committed for it to be completed. Donors and governments must agree to allow independent scientific and financial audits through a NARC. ARFs are regarded as simple prototypes of CFMs. Among the countries visited by the Review Team, Tanzania, Kenya and Ghana have established ARFs. The ARF in Kenya was formally established by the KARI Board of Management in February 1990 with a grant of $500,000, as part of the USAID component of the NARP. The fund management is independent of KARI and USAID with 6 members appointed in their personal capacity. ARF provides funding for contract adaptive research projects by non-KARI scientists. A maximum of $25,000 is provided for each 3-year project, to cover operational costs only (no salary supplementation or capital items are financed). The Kenya ARF is not a true CFM. USAID provided an advance to KARI, which on- lends to the fund. When receipts are provided by the grantees, these are transmitted to USAID which reimburses the KARI account. There were some initial problems in getting grantees, particularly from the University of Nairobi, to file returns, but the situation has improved considerably. When government funding did not come through as expected for KARI scientists, they began to question their exclusion from ARF. Instead of putting funds for them in the existing ARF, the World Bank then set up an "Adaptive Research Fund" with the same management and procedures as ARF, but for KARI scientists only. Again, this is not a true CEM, since KARI advances monies to the fund (initially for 3-month operations, now moving to a 9-month advance), and claims reimbursement from the World Bank using the receipts of expenditures from the fund. In Ghana, the Research Grants Scheme, which was established under the NARP in 1991, to provide funding for contract research by non-CSIR scientists, operates in a similar way to the ARF in Kenya. In the view of the Review Team, it is the Tanzania ARF that comes closest to the idea of a CGM, and its experience has clearly highlighted the practical problems in making the concept operational. The constitution of the ARF was drafted in October 1992, and it became operational in July 1993. Its main objective is to provide a transparent financing mechanism for the DRT to receive and disburse funds in support of priority research activities contained in the NALRM. It is managed by a 12-member management team made up of senior DRT managers and representatives from the extension service, the universities, the private sector, rural financing institutions and the donor community. It is intended to fund contract research by non-DRT researchers, as well as collaborative research between DRT and other researchers. All necessary conditions for the operation of the fund have been fulfilled and the fund is fully operational. Research proposals have been received, reviewed, and approved for funding. Some initial problems were encountered with the quality of research proposals received. This was not surprising given the lack of experience of the scientists in the preparation of such research proposals. The total cost of approved projects is $621,000 distributed over 3 years. 20 FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 4 It is estimated that the ARF can handle up to $5 million over the same period. The requests for funding of the ARF have been put to donors and discussed at consultative meetings. The only pledges received have been from the World Bank, the ADB, and the Government of Tanzania. The only payments received have been from the ADB and the government. There were initial problems with the transfer of World Bank commitments to the ARF. This indicated that even in the World Bank, the major proponent of the CFM, steps had not been taken to put the legal and financial mechanisms in place for such a fund. The problem appears to have been that the establishment of "Secondary Special Accounts" is not permitted. However, the Review Team was informed in Nairobi that permission had just been received from the Bank's headquarters for the establishment of such an account. No bilateral donor has made a pledge to the ARF in Tanzania. Discussions with donor representatives in Tanzania, as well as in other countries visited, showed considerable reluctance to contribute. Apparently, the concept of such a fund is contrary to their normal mode of operation, which is project-by-project funding. The donors are not convinced about the utility of an ARF. This raises the question as to why the process has been allowed to reach this stage. There was very visible disappointment in DRT about the apparent lack of financial support for the ARF. However, the Review Team also saw signs that a few bilateral donor representatives are seriously considering how they could make contributions to an ARF. The idea of moving towards program rather than project funding is gaining more acceptance. Lesson 21: Agreement by donors with the principle of the CFM, and pronouncements at SPAAR meetings does not necessarily mean operational support at the field or country desk level. Expectations in the FFA about donor support for the ARF seem over-optimistic. Lesson 22: When new and innovative concepts, such as the CFM, are agreed to by donors, they should take steps to ensure that the legal framework is in place so that implementation can proceed as soon as their partners in the NARSs have fulfilled the conditionalities. Otherwise disappointment and disillusionment among the NARSs will hamper collaboration in the future. Lesson 23: One donor can lead the pack in experimenting with new ways of funding NARSs. The example of USAID in Kenya is illuminating. Donors agreed to create an ARF in Kenya in 1989, and USAID got it started in 1992. There has been only a token contribution from one other donor (about $30,000 from ODA). It now seems that the ideas is gradually catching on. For example, the ODA field official is now apparently working on convincing ODA headquarters to agree to a more substantial contribution, and the World Bank is working on setting up a "Secondary Special Account" that would allow it to contribute to an ARF. Lesson 24: An innovative NARS can devise ways of getting around donor reticence in contributing to an ARF. The experience of KARI in parcelling out its program to different donors, and in devising ways of getting around reluctance of donors to put their monies in a CFM is evident. FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 4 21 4.8 Funding for Agricultural Research Productive NARSs require a stable, sufficient and timely supply of funds for agreed priority research programs. A major constraint to effective research is the inadequacy of funding, especially the lack of provision of operating funds. The shortage of local resources and the small proportion of research budgets allocated to operations and maintenance is exacerbated by the fact that donor support to specific activities and projects does not usually extend to the local costs of non-incremental recurrent research expenditure. To improve the situation, recent reform programs have reduced staffing levels in an effort to bring budgets more in line with national financing capacities and release resources for recurrent expenditures (see Chapter 3.1). Based on the agreed priorities in Masterplans, national governments are being requested to commit increased amounts to agricultural research for defined periods, and donors are being requested to coordinate their actions and to provide supplementary funding as a group so that the total research program is funded. 4.8.1 Funding for Infrastructure The major elements of the FFAs, particularly that for Southern Africa, focus on the so- called "research software." This is predicated on the belief that the research hardware (buildings, equipment, fields) is basically in place and that the greatest problems with the NARSs lie in the poorly-functioning management systems. In every country that the Review Team visited, except Kenya and Ghana, major capital expenditure on rehabilitation and construction of research facilities has been part of the reform programs being implemented. In all countries, significant expenditure on equipment and transport facilities has taken place. It is the team's general impression that most of the reforms taking place would have been invalid without such an investment. Fortunately, this has been recognized by the designers of the projects, who have made adequate provisions for such investments. Lsson 25: Focus only on the "software" of NARS in the reform process is unjustified. Equal attention must be paid to the "hardware." 4.8.2 Government Funding The Review Team found that based on Masterplans, several national governments appear to be making increased contributions to agricultural research. More important, commitments are being made for medium-term periods (5 years), which improves the prospects for more stable funding for the NARSs, and govermnents are meeting their commitments. 22 FFA Lessons Learnt - Chapter 4 In Tanzania, the widespread discussions and consultation that have accompanied the preparation of the Masterplan have increased the awareness and commitment to agricultural research on all sides. The government agricultural policy document calls for an increase in funding of agricultural research from 0.4 percent to 1.5 percent of agricultural Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Since preparation of the Masterplan in Uganda, funding of agricultural research by the government has been regular. Although the amount is still not as much as NARO would like, it has been increasing. NARO's recurrent budget from the government has increased 30 percent in each of last 2 years, and increase which is greater than the rate of inflation. Also, the university received an allocation of about $300,000 for agricultural research this year, the first such in a long while. In Mali, the government has signed a contract with IER for increased contributions over a 5-year period. However, the proportion of the total research budget to be funded from