The CGIAR’s 1999 Mid-Term Meeting (MTM99) was held in Beijing, China, from May 24 - 28, 1999.

1. Formal Opening. The Honorable Chen Yaobeng, Minister of Agriculture, welcomed the CGIAR to Beijing for MTM99. At a ceremony highlighting "China Day" at the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Science, Lu Ming, Vice Minister of Agriculture, emphasized the importance of the CGIAR partnership to the success of China’s agricultural research. The Chinese Ministry of Agriculture hosted a formal opening reception for the CGIAR as part of China Day, with Minister Chen representing the Vice Premier Wen Jiabao.

2. CGIAR China Collaboration. The strong collaboration between CGIAR and Chinese scientists was a recurring theme at China Day and on the first day of the CGIAR’s business meeting. Ismail Serageldin provided a keynote statement on "The Challenge to Agricultural Research in China and the World." Featured speakers included Liu Jian, Vice Minister of Agriculture, Lu Feijie, President of CAAS, Tang Zhengping, Director General of the Ministry’s Department of International Cooperation, Ma Shiqing, Director General of the Ministry’s Department of Science, Technology, and Education, Donald Winkelmann, TAC Chair, and Hubert Zandstra, Director General of CIP. Many senior Chinese officials attended the meeting and actively participated in the deliberations.

The CGIAR has collaborated actively with China for more than two decades. CGIAR activities in China encompass almost all aspects of its research agenda, including crops, livestock, irrigation, agroforestry, aquaculture, policy and training. Specifically:

• 11 of the 16 CGIAR Centers have established formal links with Chinese research institutions, and 5 Centers maintain offices in Beijing
• Over 50 Chinese institutions have engaged in collaborative activities with CGIAR Centers. CGIAR Centers have trained 3,400 Chinese scientists ranging from short-term trainees to post-doctoral research
• CGIAR-trained scientists are senior project leaders, chiefs of research divisions, or senior fellows in their own institutions, and Chinese nationals have served the CGIAR System as center scientists and board members
• China has bred 252 crop varieties, which contain genetic material from CGIAR Centers (wheat, rice, corn, peanut, potato, and sorghum). These varieties are grown on 5.6 million hectares.

3. Chairman's Opening Address. Ismail Serageldin thanked the Government of China and the Ministry of Agriculture for hosting the meeting. The theme of MTM99 was "The Third System Review: From Proposals to Practice." The System Review Panel presented its recommendations at ICW98, commending the accomplishments of the CGIAR and challenging it to rethink its role and re-design its strategy to launch the CGIAR into the new millennium.

A Consultative Council was created at ICW98 as a follow up mechanism to deal with issues arising from recommendations of the System Review. Creation of the Council was an important experiment by the CGIAR –a smaller group was given the responsibility of clarifying issues, reviewing options, reaffirming fundamentals, defining specifics for action, and thereby helping facilitate decision making by the Group as a whole.

The Consultative Council met in late January in Brussels, where Council members scrutinized, analyzed, and refined System Review recommendations. The Council then asked CGIAR committees to further develop proposals for consideration by the Group. The resulting set of action proposals was presented at MTM99.

In this context, the Chairman challenged the Group to consider nine specific propositions to enable the CGIAR to bring the third System Review (see box below) to closure and launch the CGIAR into the new millennium. In acting on the proposals, the Group also launched implementation of the follow up actions, as endorsed by the Group. The action now moves to the centers, standing committees and other groups charged with the responsibility of implementing the decisions taken at MTM99.

Proposition One: MTM99 will bring consideration of the third System Review to closure and, in doing so, will launch the implementation of all the action proposals emanating from that review, as amended and adopted by the Group.

Proposition Two: The Group endorses the recommendations for the strategic orientation of research priorities, as well as the ideas for expanded science partnerships, formulated and being further developed by TAC and the centers.

Proposition Three: The Group encourages the centers, in order to become effective partners in existing knowledge networks, to strengthen their databases, present their findings in a more user-friendly fashion, and expand their use of information technology, both for communication and dissemination.

Proposition Four: The Group welcomes the consultations between the centers and African NARS leaders, encourages all those engaged in this exercise to continue their discussions in a practical manner, and to present specific proposals for consideration by the Group at ICW99.

Proposition Five: The Group endorses the financing proposals of the Finance Committee and requests the Finance Committee chair to table at ICW99 a long-term funding strategy, a structure for implementing that strategy, and a public awareness component for fund raising.

Proposition Six: The Group endorses the governance recommendations presented by the Consultative Council, specifically the continued role of the cosponsors, the need to further strengthen the working of TAC, to fold IAEG into TAC, to redefine the composition and activities of the GRPC, and to create a new Science Partnership Committee, and requests that a progress report on actions taken be tabled at ICW99 for information.

Proposition Seven: The Group welcomes the commitment expressed by the World Bank and decides to await further action after ICW99, based on the results of the UNESCO action.

Proposition Eight: The Group recognizes that the Consultative Council operated very well and empowers the Chairman to call the Council into session as and when required.

Proposition Nine: The CGIAR will make a special effort to seek out talent of greater gender and national diversity in all key positions of the system, without compromising quality and standards.

5. System Review Recommendations. The Group made a useful start at ICW98, tackling the System Review recommendations with openness, candor, and self-assessment. At MTM99, the Group redoubled its efforts to ensure the CGIAR’s effectiveness in the future.

SCIENCE. The System Review Panel and the Consultative Council re-emphasized the importance of scientific excellence, partnerships and credibility, the defining strengths of the CGIAR. As requested by the Consultative Council, the CDC and TAC presented draft action proposals and progress reports on science-related recommendations for the strategic orientation of research priorities.

Timothy Reeves, chair of the CDC Subcommittee on IP issues, presented the CDC report on integrated gene management. Developments regarding public goods-oriented policies and ethical principles were tabled at MTM98. As decided at MTM98, a central IPR advisory service unit is being created and will be located at ISNAR.

The Group discussed creation of a system-level legal entity to negotiate or hold patents on behalf of the centers. Also proceeding is the previously agreed upon center-by-center audit of intellectual property.

Decisions: The Group endorsed the Consultative Council recommendation not to create a system-level legal entity to help patents and encouraged the centers to complete IPR audits expeditiously. It endorsed the CDC proposal that the centers conduct a feasibility study on a wholly-owned subsidiary (possibly of 2-3 centers). The centers are to report on results and progress at ICW99.

Jeffrey Sayer, chair of the CD subcommittee on sustainability and environment presented an overview of NRM issues covering soil, water, atmosphere, animals and plants. The twin thrusts of integrated gene management and integrated natural resources management were reaffirmed, although it was recognized that NRM research is more complex and the nature of the research is not as sharply defined as that of crop improvement.

TAC proposed terms of reference for a systemwide review of plant breeding, in the context of an IGM approach at CGIAR centers. Plant breeding has been one of the CGIAR’s basic strengths and continues to be of great relevance to CGIAR constituencies. The TAC review will analyze five principal issues:

• techniques and tools for each mandate crop
• total expenditures for plant breeding and for technology for each crop
• opportunities for cost reductions by improving on conventional techniques or substituting bioinformatics and other new applications
• opportunities for efficiencies by concentrating applications
• capital costs and likely gains from implementing different methods

Stein Bie, chair of the CDC subcommittee on information, presented the CDC response to System Review recommendations on global information sharing and capacity building.

The Group discussed the need to improve the effectiveness and enhance the impact of CGIAR research programs in Africa by removing obstacles to effectiveness and improving inter-center collaboration. All 16 CGIAR Centers work in Africa and four (ICRAF, IITA, ILRI, and WARDA) are based there. Joseph Mukiibi, speaking on behalf of the Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA), reported on efforts by the Special Program for African Agricultural Research (SPAAR) and FARA to develop a Vision of African Agricultural Research. The vision calls for a doubling of the annual rate of agricultural growth from the current 2-3 percent and urges increased commitment by all stakeholders to agricultural research for development.

The CDC held a "meeting of minds" workshop to help formulate a CGIAR strategy for sub-Saharan Africa, in light of the SPAAR/FARA vision. Hank Fitzhugh, chair of the CD Subcommittee on sub-Saharan Africa, reported the CDC conclusions:

• The CGIAR mission is fully congruent with the African vision for agricultural research
• Enabling policies are essential for the success of agricultural research and development
• Broader partnerships can ensure that research results have more impact on sustainable agricultural development
• CGIAR Centers can contribute new research approaches
• Human and institutional capacity for research skills must be strengthened as well as capacity in the management and leadership of collaborative research.

Pedro Sanchez, chairman of the CDC, and Grant Scobie presented CDC recommendations on policy and gender analysis, respectively. The Group agreed that the CGIAR's policy research and capacity building for policy research should be strengthened, but an additional policy dialogue mechanism is not needed. The CGIAR chairman and center representatives should articulate the views of the CGIAR at international policy discussions, particularly on genetic resources. In doing so, the CGIAR should represent the voice of the poor. The CGIAR’s gender analysis program, which is centered at CIAT, should also be strengthened.

PARTNERSHIPS. The principle of research partnerships was unequivocally endorsed at the CGIAR Ministerial level meeting in Lucerne, Switzerland, in 1995. This endorsement has been a strong impulse in CGIAR activities, and the NGOC and PSC are endorsed manifestations of that impulse.

The Chairman proposed that a partnership committee be established to link with the international scientific community and enhance the involvement of existing partnership committees in CGIAR decision making. The combined number of partnership committee members will not exceed the current total. In addition, Miguel Altieri and Sam Dryden submitted proposals for restructuring the membership of the NGOC and PSC committees respectively.

The Chairman reported on efforts to organize a high-level meeting of senior CGIAR representatives and CEOs of private companies engaged in agriculture and agricultural research. The Group discussed the need to assure that partnerships provide real value-added by strengthening CGIAR decision making with perspectives and experience beyond the system and by exploring the means by which partnerships can make agricultural research more effective. TAC presented terms of reference for an analytic review of partnerships.

GOVERNANCE. The System Review raised a number of important governance issues. The informality of the CGIAR system is envied by others, but there have been at various times weak points in the system. The issue is how to improve efficiency and effectiveness without letting go of the fundamental principles on which CGIAR’s governance is based. In dealing with these issues, the System Review made a number of proposals including creation of a Central Board with access to funds and power to act on behalf of the CGIAR.

On the issue of the chairmanship, the Group emphasized the importance of World Bank leadership. The CGIAR Chairman should continue to be a Vice President of the World Bank appointed by the World Bank President in consultation with the CGIAR.

Decision: The Group welcomed the continued commitment of the World Bank to support the CGIAR and agreed to await further consultation with the Bank in November.

The Group discussed the System Review recommendations on the role and status of cosponsors. To assure greater transparency in the work of the cosponsors, particularly in the case of system appointments, cosponsors should engage in wider consultation with members at all stages of the selection process. Cosponsor representative Alex McCalla is reviewing the specific concerns of members with cosponsors.

The Group discussed the system of regional representation at the CGIAR .

The question of future MTMs was discussed as part of the extensive deliberations on the proposal for the Consultative Council as a mechanism to prepare materials for decisions by the Group. The advantages of a Consultative Council include greater efficiency, continuity during the transition of senior leadership, involvement of CDC and CBC, and modulation of advice from committees. Questions were raised about the potential of the Council to become involved in decision making and become an alternative to MTM. The Group agreed that a body akin to the current Consultative Council be called by the Chairman as and when required around specific issues and that the Council would adequately represent the Group. The Chairman provided terms of reference and a proposed composition, stressing that the Consultative Council’s role is to engage in consultation and facilitation and that all decision making be made by the Group in the time-honored fashion.

The Group recognized the need to increase investment and membership in the CGIAR, while at the same time recognizing the enormous differential in contributions (based on domestic economic considerations) and the need to maintain the voluntary nature of contributions.

Decision: The Group endorsed the Consultative Council proposal that conditions of CGIAR membership should remain unchanged for the present.

TAC Chair Don Winkelmann presented a review of TAC’s future composition, role, and working arrangements. TAC should consist of scientists of the highest quality, representing clusters of skills, and should have between 10 and 14 members including the chair of standing panel on impact assessment and evaluation. The need to reach out widely for the best talent, and to ensure peak effectiveness in TAC’s functioning, was underscored.

Decision: The Group endorsed TAC’s proposals on its composition and working arrangements, and reaffirmed TAC’s present mandate.

Roberto Lenton presented the agreed upon recommendations on the integration of TAC and IAEG. The recommendations include the following:

• All system-level evaluation responsibilities would reside with TAC.
• The cosponsors would appoint a small external standing panel to work as an "expert" panel of TAC on impact assessment and evaluation.
• All system-level external evaluations commissioned on behalf of the CGIAR would be organized through TAC, with the panel serving as the principal instrument of TAC.
• There would be one secretariat supporting TAC and the standing panel on impact evaluation and assessment.
• There would be one TAC budget, with a line item for impact assessment and evaluation.

Decision: The Group endorsed the recommendation on the integration of TAC and IAEG.

Geoffrey Hawtin, chair of the GRPC, presented the GRPC proposal on its future composition and terms of reference. The committee’s composition and terms of reference have been reviewed by the Chair and other members of GRPC.

R. S. Paroda, chair of the Global Forum for Agricultural Research, reported on GFAR’s progress in developing partnerships throughout the global agricultural system, with the CGIAR’s support and collaboration. The CGIAR should act in concert with GFAR to mobilize frontier science and technology to combat hunger and poverty. An important step will be taken with the next Global Forum scheduled for the year 2000 in Dresden.

The Group discussed the need to strengthen the diversity and ensure gender balance, and reach out to the new generation of younger scientists. Diversification is possible without compromising quality or standards.

The Group discussed the CGIAR’s long tradition of demonstrating accountability to members and stakeholders through external reviews of centers, systemwide programs, and the system as a whole. TAC submitted an action plan to streamline the evaluation processes, with the emphasis on impact assessment and reduced paperwork. The Group agreed that TAC should take the lead in examining the context and added value of all forms of evaluation.

FINANCE. Innovations and initiatives arising from the System Review will require sustained financial support. CGIAR finances are currently stable, but nothing can or should be taken for granted. Finance Committee Chair Alex McCalla reported on progress in developing a long-term financing strategy for tapping both traditional and new funding sources, both from the public and private sectors, including corporate philanthropy, and a mechanism for public awareness and constituency building in support of CGIAR fund raising. A small working Group—members, including the Finance Committee, Centers, PARC, external experts—chaired by the Finance Committee Chair is overseeing development of the strategy. A final product is aimed for discussion at ICW99.

The Finance Committee proposed adoption of guidelines for members to improve the predictability and stability of the flow of funds to the centers. These include multi-year funding commitments, expansion of unrestricted funding to centers, timely disbursement of funds, and coverage of indirect costs in project funding.

Walter Falcon, CBC Chair, presented the initial findings of a review of systemwide programs from both a financial and management perspective. The CBC -- in association with TAC and FC -- is re-examining roles and responsibilities, program design, and program implementation.

6. The 1998 Funding and 1999 Financial Prospects. The Finance Committee reported the 1998 financial outcome and 1999 prospects, which show the overall stability of CGIAR funding. In 1998, funding totaled $340 million, up from $320 million in 1997. As of 1998, there is only a single funding figure as previous non-agenda funding has been fully integrated. The majority of centers received funding within a 10 percent range of their approved funding; only three centers were outside this range. Funds for 1999 appeared to be on track, with financial projections by center slightly above the financing plan of $340 million approved at ICW98. The FC also reported on the further allocation of 1999 World Bank contribution to support the livestock, water, and genetic resources programs as well as special requests by ICLARM and WARDA.

7. The 2000 Research Agenda and Funding. The Group adopted the research agenda recommended by TAC and the FC proposal that financial planning for 2000 be undertaken in the context of a $340-345 million funding target. The agenda reflects activities slated for implementation during the third year of the medium-term planning period 1998-2000 approved at MTM98 and now being extended to 2000-2002. The finance committee also advised the centers that the World Bank funding policy would remain unchanged from 1998 at 11 percent of the matching ratio.

8. External Reviews. The Group considered external reviews of two centers, ILRI and ICLARM, in parallel session: the ad hoc committees then presented reports to the plenary, where they were discussed and endorsed. Mr. Serageldin commended the Panels and ad hoc committees for their excellent reports.

9. Knowledge Management and CGIAR Logframe. The Group received reports from FAO on its enhanced information system, WAICENT, and from TAC on the implementation of the CGIAR logical framework (Logframe).

10. Reports from CGIAR Committees. The Group received reports from the Cosponsors, and the Oversight Committee, Finance Committee, TAC, IAEG, GRPC, NGOC, PSC, CBC, CDC, and GFAR.

A pre-ICW99 conference, "Ensuring Food Security, Protecting the Environment, and Reducing Poverty in Developing Countries: Can Biotechnology Help?" will be held October 21-22 at the World Bank. The CGIAR and the US National Academy of Sciences are the convenors.