0 C TO B E R 2 0 0 1 .gen de diversit ;. - . A PROGRAM OF THE tONSULTATIVE GROUP ON INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH (CGIAR) .~ .i. . . 23.9 Selectd Trend Dtao Gene and Diversity in, the uture Har vest. Centers, 199- 2001 , -. . _ ,. I , p. , . 4 -~~~~~~~I - Reseah (CGIAR)-was created in 1971 from an diversity. The 'rogram,provideisupportto the aissociation of public and private members that Centersmthrough small gradts, technical assitsance, - support a system of 16 intemnatioaal agricultural and management consulting, training, and information sivices. The CGIAR Gender and research centers known as Future Harvest' Centers. Diversity Program, is hosted by ICRAF (Nairobi, Workii¸g in more thaI 100 countties, The Future Kenya) and &he Progam leade is Vicki Wilde, Harvest Centers mobilize cuttijig-edge science to ' (v.wilde(,c_gar.orga. reduce hunger and poverty, improve human nutrition The Gender and Diversity gm seeks to'use and health, and protect the enviroriment. The Centers diversity to sten internal and exterfial arq located'inm 12 developing and 3 developed' '' '* ar^ -ocatedin 12 developingand 3 developed partnerships that enhance the relevance and impact countrios and.are sponstred by The World Bank, the of the (enters, by creating and maintaining an Food and Agriculture Orgahizatioiv (FAO), and the organizational culture that - United Nations Development Progfain (UNDP)- Ihe tGIAR budget in 2000 was US $340 million. All * Attacts and retains tworld's best women and new technologies arising from the Center's research , me;- are fieely available to everyone. For more * Encourages therecruitment andpromotion of information about the CGIAR, see: www.ciiar.org under-represented groups; Establishes a workplace clImate of genuine GENDER Al9D DIVERSITY; PROGRAM :. - ' respect, equity and high-morale;- The CGIAR Gender and Diversity Program serves to * Promotes a healthy balance between enltivate a workplape where diversity is celebrated professional andprivate lives; * and all staff are ecpowered tc give their best.to * Inspires world-class competency ip multi- enrich future harvests. Its overall goal is to assist the cultural teamwork, cross-cultural * . . - ~~~~~communication and i'nterpational mnanagement;.: 16 CGIAR Centers to seek out and collectively gain c a a from the diversity inherent within the global Empowers and endiuses all women And men -in' the system to maxinmize professional efficacy organization. The ad collectively contribute their,best anyd. grew out of a 1991 CGIAR initiative on gender ' R l I . .. , * RewaSrds leadershipb, creativity and4innovation staffing aimed at assisting the Centers.to promote the that employs and celebrates diversity the recruitment, accomplisjment, advancement and - Centers' retention of women scientists and professionals. CIAT Centro Intemacional de Agricultura Trppical (COLOM$IA) CIFOR Center fQrvinteriational Forestry Research (INDONESIA) CIMMYT Centro Intemacional de Mejoramiento de Maiz y Trgo (MEXICO) CIP Centro lntemacional de la Papa (PERU) . ICARDA International Center for Agricultural Researdh in the Dry Areas (SYRIA) ' fCLARM International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management (MALAYSIA) - ICRAF International Cejiter for Research in Agroforesry (KENYA) ICRISAT Infernational Crops Research InstiMte for the Semri-Arid Tropics (INDIA) IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute (USA) ,, IWMI International Water Management Institute (SRI LANKA), ,IITA International lbstitute of Tropical Agriculture (NIGERIA)s lUlRI Internationbr Livestock Research Institute (KENYA) . IPGRI Iitematiojial Plant Genetics. Resofirces Institute (ITALY) IRRI Internaticnal Ri,pe Research Institute (PHILIPPINES) ISNAR International Service for National Agricultwual Rsparch -(THE NETHERLANDS) WARD4 West Africa Rice Development Association (COTE D'IVOIRE) CGIAR GENDER AND DIVERSITY PROGRAM SELECTED TREND DATA ON GENDER AND DIVERSITY IN THE FUTURE HARVEST CENTERS, 1995-2001 Document prepared by the CGIAR Gender & Diversity Program for the Executive Committee and Annual General Meeting of the CGIAR Washington, D.C., October 2001 1. Summary of IRS and NRS Staff Changes This document summarizes the principal findings of the first ever comprehensive study of Future Harvest Center staff demographics, covering international and nationally recruited staff (IRS and NRS, respectively) trends between January 1995 and August 2001.1 Findings are reported here with regard to total staff numbers in the CGIAR, diversity trends reflected in the distribution of staff by their region of origin, the balance between men and women among IRS and NRS, and position distribution by gender. Major findings include the following: Overall staffing levels in the Future Harvest Centers have declined by 19% since 1995, with the majority of staff cuts occurring among nationally recruited staff (21% decline in NRS vs. a 6% decline in IRS). NRS staff cuts are not uniform across centers, however. More than 85% of the NRS staff cuts occurred in the four Centers that began the period with the largest national staff base: CIAT, ICRISAT, IITA, and IRRI. Staffing numbers are summarized in the table below Table 1. Summary of IRS and NRS staffchanges, 1 Jan 1995 to 31 Aug 2001 1995 2001 % change Total % of Total % of total 1995-2001 total IRS females 148 1.5% 182 2.3% 23.0% IRS males 941 9.7% 840 10.7% -10.7% Total IRS 1,08 11.2% 1,02 13.0% -6.2% 9 2 NRS females 2,190 22.6% 1,906 24.2% -13.0% NRS males 6,429 66.2% 4,923 62.6% -23.4% Total NRS 8,61 88.8 6,82 87.o% -20.8% 9 9 GRAND 9,70 7,85 -19.1% TOTAL 8 1 The present document is an abbreviated version of the Future Harvest staffing trends analysis to be presented in an upcoming monograph from the CGIAR Gender and Diversity Program entitled: "Gender and Diversity in Times of Change: Staffing Trends and Organizational Change Strategies." The findings described in this summary document are based on survey data obtained from the i6 Future Harvest Centers, documenting all international and nationally recruited hires and departures between January 1995 and August 2001, as well as total staff numbers (IRS and NRS) at several different intervals. Detailed data tables and CG System-wide staffing trends will be included in the monograph. In addition, the Gender and Diversity Program will synthesize each Center's data and return the analysis to the individual Centers for consideration by Boards of Trustees, senior management, human resources staff, external review, etc. One cautionary note is in order: in spite of valiant efforts on the part of the Centers to provide data in a common format, there remain some gaps and discrepancies. Where chart or table data do not add up consistently, it is usually because of missing information in the original (raw) data. CGIAR Gender & Diversity Program, 1 AGM Meeting Oct 2001 * Among international staff, the proportion of staff from World Bank Part 112 countries has increased very slightly over the seven year period, from 47.4% in 1995 to 48.6% in 2001. The increase is largelv due to a greater attrition rate among IRS from Part I countries rather than to stronger recruitment of Part II country professionals. For both Part I and Part 11-country natives, overall staffing declined in the upper ranks of the staffing ladder, and increased somewhat among Scientists, Associate Scientists and Post-doctoral Fellows. * The proportion of women international and national staff is gradually increasing: as of August 2001, women represent 17.8% of total IRS and 27.9% of NRS (up from 13.6% and 25.4%, respectively, at the beginning of 1995). However, the percentage of female IRS and NRS varies widelv among the 16 Centers. Female IRS continue to be clustered in the lower rungs of the Center career ladder. As of August 2001, women hold only 7.5% of senior management positions. The proportion of women in the top four position levels declined over the study period. As for NRS, the picture is mixed but more positive, with women well represented in management, senior researcher positions, and senior professional staff. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The Future Harvest Centers have cooperated generously in the collection of IRS and NRS staffing data - indeed, without the significant assistance of Center Human Resources staff, this study would not have been possible. 2 This document refers several times to World Bank "Part I" and "Part II" countries. By the Bank's definition, Part I countries provide donor funding, and Part II countries are recipients of said loan funds. CGIAR Gender & Diversity Program, 2 AGM Meeting Oct 2001 2. Overall trends for international and national recruited staff Financial constraints and deliberate workforce restructuring - to meet new ways of science - faced in the second half of the 1ggos by the Future Harvest Centers, resulted in staff reductions in many of the Centers. There was a greater impact on national than international staff. Figure i shows the annual totals of IRS and NRS by gender from January 1, 1995 to August 31, 2001. IRS numbers declined by 6% during the seven-year period, compared with a 21% decline in nationally recruited staff. However, in spite of the total decline in both IRS and NRS, the proportion of women staff at both levels is gradually increasing: from 13.6 to 17.8% in the case of IRS, and from 25.4 to 27.9% among NRS. It is noteworthy that the absolute number of IRS females increased by 34 over the study period, in spite of the overall downward trend in total staff. Although much of the decline in nationally recruited staff took place in the lower position grades, the changing demographics has also cut into the ranks of IRS and NRS researchers. Figure 2 shows annual totals for IRS and NRS scientists over the study period. Note in particular the decline in the ratio of NRS to IRS scientists, from 2.37 NRS per IRS in 1995 to 1.93 NRS per IRS in 2001. Figure 3 shows changes in the distribution of IRS men and women by region. Except in the case of Africa, the percentage of male IRS declined for every region, while the percentage of female IRS increased across all regions. The total percentage of World Bank Part II natives increased marginally, from 47.4% in 1995 to 48.6% in 2001; the percentage distribution of IRS on a region-by-region basis remained virtually stable as well. CGIAR Gender & Diversity Program, 3 AGM Meeting Oct2001 Figure 1. Total staffin the Future Harvest Centers, 1 Jan 1995 to 31 Aug 2001 148 152 I oooo- ._6L sooo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7 _1617 182 8000- 3000 -ISFeae 6000 - 5(000-. 4000 - 3000 - ] R emal es *IRS Males 2000- *NRS Females 1000- *NRS Males 1/1995 1 2/1 995 1 2/1 996 1 2/1 997 12/1998 1 2/1 999 1 212000 812001 * Note: numbers in itaiics are total staff numbers for that category. 1995 totai staff = 9708; 2001 total staff = 7851 CGIAR Gender & Diversity Program, 4 AGM Meeting Oct 2001 Figure 2. Changes in the population of scientists/researchers (IRS and NRS), Future Harvest Centers, 1 Jan 1995 to 31 Aug 2001 1600 --.-- .-----'--- 250 1465 1483 1400 5 3 * l |t y 1212 1200 1124 1111' 1iis 1122 2.30 Q .1000 0o 835 850 877 844 827 812 . 7,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L .0._i7 b 793 800 .l 2.10 0) E 600 -t; 513 t 518 .. 520 3 1--432 g| |t6- Xi441| | 1/1995 12/1995 12/1996 12/1997 12/1998 12/1999 12(2000 812001 |Total IRS scientists _ NRS senior researchers _Other NRS rscMEechnicians --* > Ratio NRS:IRS researchers | CGIA Gender &DiversityProgram, 5 AGMMeeting Oct200 Figure 3. Regional and gender diversity trends among internationally recruited staff, 1 Jan 1995 to 31 Aug 2001 0.25 *%IR 0% IRS Males 1995 * % IRS Males 2001 0 % IRS Females 1995 World Bank 0.2____ IRS Femaes 2001 0 _ ___ < __ Part I countries 0.2 L M% IRS Females 2001 World Bank Cn n.15 _ Part It countries _1i 0 0 a~~~~C I 0 4- z~~~ Based on regionofstaffmemberscontroforigin oos1AR Gender & Diversity Program, 6 AGM Meeting Oct001 S< , 0 *Based on region of staff member's country of origin. CGIAR Gender & Diversity Program, 6 AGM Meeting Oct 2001 Figure 4 highlights several trends. It points out the dramatic declines among both World Bank Part I and Part II natives in the top four staffing grades, compared with increases for both regional groupings in the three lowest grades. The increase in Post-doctoral Fellows for both regional groupings is especially significant. On the other hand, the table suggests that World Bank Part II. IRS appear to be underrepresented in the ranks of senior management (DDGs/ Directors and Research Program/Administrative Heads). Figure 4. Changes in the regional diversity by IRS position levels, Future Harvest Centers, 1 Jan 1995 to 31 Aug 2001 200 240% 180 . 210% 160 . . 180% 140 _Partl1995 1Pr / 150%19 _ Part 12001 120 CPart l t1995 _ 120% o0 I Part 112001 . .0 100 -+ % change Part 195-01 .-E__i_ 90% > E - .M1 00 ' . . 11to / 6% V) " 4 ichange Part l95 01 80 - 60% E z 60 -30% 40 -60% 20 -s) n en300 t: * X 0Q*_e _ 0 0 .~~~~~~ 0 2j m a. - . 0 60%~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0 00 o U)~~~~~~~~U o ~~~~~~~~L0 Data are for IRS natives of World Bank Part I and Part !! countries. CGIAR Gender & Diversity Program, 7 AGM Meeting Oct 2001 3. Gender and NRS Trends Previous analyses of IRS demographics have pointed out the wide variation among Centers in terms of the proportion of women; the most recent data reconfirm this dynamic (see Figure 5, "Female IRS as a percentage of total staff, by Center 1995 and 2001"). Figure 5. Female IRS as a percentage of total staff, by Center 1995 to 2001 WARDA__ W1% female IRS 1/1/1995 ICRISAT %1° feIale IRS 8/31/2001 ILRI 777O a cIP_ CIMMYT ICARDA 1995 CGaverage: 13.6% 2001 CG average: 17.8% ICLARM CIFOR CGIARAverage ISNAR ICRAF CIAT IPGRI IITA IFPRI 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% CGIAR Gender & Diversity Program, 8 AGM Meeting Oct 2001 For the first time, data are now also available concerning the male- female balance among NRS (see Figure 6). The data shows that the proportion of NRS women varies even more widely among Centers than does the IRS ratio. In the case of both national and internationally recruited staff, the Centers located in Northern countries clearly have an easier time attracting female staff. The case of CIFOR is an interesting outlier, however. It is not the purpose of this study to set target participation rates for female IRS or NRS. For NRS recruitments especially, each Center faces a different gender balance in its local labor pool, and local culture may also affect whether it is considered appropriate, for example, for women to work as field laborers (although we know that women represent more than half of the world's farmers). For the time being, the CGIAR and the Gender and Diversity Program will continue to monitor these trends, and support the Centers in their efforts to more effectively recruit, retain and promote women. The importance of strengthening an integrated strategy of female recruitment/retention/advance-ment is highlighted by Figure 7, which shows the distribution of IRS men and women by position level. IRS women continue to be clustered in the lower ranks of the career ladder, and both CGIAR Gender & Diversity Program, 9 AGMMeeting OCt2001 Figure 6. Female nationally recruited staffas % of total NRS, by IARC 1995 and 2001 WARDA _. -.{ IITA * - . *M%femaleNRS1/1/1995 ICRISAT liii, Il IE % female NRS 8/31/2001 ICARDA ;^7 1995 CG average: 26.4% ILRIX:Sa5:-S X 2001 COG average: 27.9%01 AVG 161IARCs ; 0 :t-t ;0;i- :I' IRRI IWMI ICRAF ICLARM CIFOR IFPRI ISNAR lS,SStAgg52gjS0LgoWsEjS 0%/c 1 0% 20% 300/o 4/M 50%/ 60%/a 70/. 80% CGIAR Gender& Diversity Program, 10 AGMMeeting Oct2001 Figure 7. Staff changes by IRS position levels and gender, Future Harvest Centers 1 Jan 1995 to 31 Aug 2001 300 350% 300% 250 250% 200% 200 Male IRS 1995 . . o Male IRS 2001 r Female IRS 1995 .t0% _Female IRS 2001 % change IRS males 95-01 0 150 - % change IRS females 95-01 _ . 100% c z 50% G 100 8_Ji|/ > 7 .1 0 0% -50% 0t v a t gg>,l--100°S~~~~~~~~~-00 0 -150% ' *fB 0 0 ~ ~ ~~ ~~0 No o _ ~ ° .B 0 CL _ 0 C -~~~~0U 0n *, en <,o 0 00 m 00Cl a CI C o U) 4~~~~~cnU En U~~~~~~~U Other data from the current study (not shown here) indicate that the departure rate for both IRS and NRS, and particularly the rate of voluntary departures, is higher for women than for men. It is promising that the Centers are recruiting new women employees at an even faster rate than they are leaving, but it would be more cost effective to retain the well-qualified female staff already present in the Centers. It will also be important to further explore the motivations behind women's (and men's, IRS and NRS) choices to voluntarily leave CG Center employment. Do different factors influence decision-making, depending on the gender of the employee? What can be done to make the Centers more attractive for staff that is already on board? CGIAR Gender & Diversity Program, 1i AGM Meeting Oct 2001 Among nationally recruited staff, the gender balance is more even, with women proportionally represented (relative to their total staff strength in the Centers) in management positions, and more than proportionally represented as senior scientists, and professional support staff (see Figure 8). Figure 8. Percentagefemale participation by NRS staffposition category, 1 Jan 1995 to 31 Aug 2001 0.5 - January 1995 - 47.7% 0 August 2001 39.9% 39.8% 40.1% 0.2 Average 2001. female* ii 0.3 =^ _ _. _ ^o. , 27-3% 26.3% 0.1~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~09 0 2 1 : ~~~~19.4% *"ii19 209 1i X |15 6%43E li ilX iX Field labor Other admin/ Professional Other Senior Managers/ support staff staff researchers/ researchers supervisors technicians * 1995 data do not include CIA T, CIFOR or ICLARM. CGIAR Gender & Diversity Program, 12 AGMMeeting Oct 2001 Figure 9 looks at where staff cuts fell most heavily among NRS by position level. In absolute numbers, the greatest reductions occurred among male NRS in the categories of "Other administration and support staff', "Other researchers/technicians" and "field labor". In percentage terms, the greatest reductions occurred among female NRS in the relatively smaller base categories of "managers/supervisors" and "field labor". Figure 9. National recruited staff changes by position in the Future Harvest Centers, 1 Jan 1995 to 31 Aug 2001 50 6 0 - 00 34 _ - Z -150 - 0 o ~~~~~~~~~~~-167 i--200- E -250 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-226 Z-300 -350 - 1l_N^,rr ,,",. - -327 * Male NRS staff changes -400 Cl Female_NRS staff chan_ge -400 -45 0- CD co I. o.> °c 0 Cs E cco °. cm ~ ~ ~ ~ a O > CGIAR L- &O Dt a W 0 Co*-CU co CL -Co CD e7 CDL. ~cL. CD. CD (5 _ Ca) *CD~~~~~~~) 0 CGIAR Gender & Diversity Program, 13 A GM Meeting OCt 2001 Figure lo concludes this summary with a picture of the current distribution of all CGIAR nationally recruited staff by functional area. Figure lo. Distribution of nationally recruited staff by position level, 16 Future Harvest Centers, 31 Aug 2001 Managers/ Senior Field labor supervisors researchers 16% (N=1 074) 5% (N=369) 7% (N=469) Otherresearchers/ technicians (N=1 367) Other admin & Professional staff support staff 31% 21% (N=1416) (N=2153) CGIAR Gender & Diversity Program, 14 AGMMeeting Oct 2001