17(c 5 Oct. eq Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research Preserving the Options: Food Productivity and Sustainability John Walsh ISSUES IN AGRICULTURE D l-aDJW 1 M11 M4 4 W 1W 1 p~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~V .' A: 0 . : | lPreserving the Options: Food Production and Sustainability | : stl John Walsh '''L '~ ' , , X Published by the Consultative Group on ISSUES IN AGRICULTURE, NO. 2 * lK _ InternationalAgriculturalResearch,CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research Secretariat, 1818 H St., N.W., Washington, '~.J[f' D.C., 20433, United States. October 1991. | - ' I''' "' ' ' '' " Foreword This booklet was prepared in antici ation of the 1992 UINCED Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. It describes the efforts of nearly a thousand agricultural scientists working to sustain food production in developing countries. It was commissioned by the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Re- search-CGIAR. Its author, John Walsh, is a former editor and reporter for Science magazine and a long-time observer of agri- cultural policy issues. Mr. Walsh points out that in the 1950s many experts predicted that developing countries would run out of food within two decades. Although famine did occur in some locations, large-scale starvation was averted by the introduction of high-yielding crop varieties developed at CGIAR centers. Today, the developing world produces three to four times as ------_____________________________________________ much food as it did in 1950 and the prospects of massive famine seem remote. The Consultative Group an International Agricultural Re- Food security, however, has come at high cost to the search (CGIAR) is an association of 41 public and private environment. To reverse this trend, CGIAR researchers are sector donors that supports a network of 16 international working at some 200 locations around the globe. Their efforts agricultural research centers located mainly In developing cover a range of projects, including biological control of insects, countitries. Over 1700 scientists of 60 nationalities work at pests and the conservation of biodiversity. These initiatives, or for the centers. and numerous others, are helping to ensure the long-term sustainability of agriculture, and the natural resource base on which farming depends. 'I'o meet future challenges, the CGIAR has recently undergone extensive restructuring. The objective hias been to increase the ability of researchers to help farmers adopt more sustainable and environmentally friendly farming practices. Indeed, today's CGIAR scientist is as concern,d with environ- ment and natural resources as the last generation of researchers was with increasing production. This fact is increasingly re- flected in our research and in the products that reach farmers fields. This booklet describes the patlh that CGIAR has taken to reach that juncture. In his essay, Mr. Walsh describes the issue of sustainability as seen by agricultural scientists working in the field. fie attempts to show that agriculturalists and environmen- talists share many common concerns, and he explicitly dem- onstrates the urgency of their working together to meet common goals. Hubert Zandstra Chair, CGIAR Sustainability Committee Preserving the Options: Food Production and Sustainability by John Walsh In the early 1970s, widespread drought caused a cycle of bad harvests, brought famine to Sub-Saharan Africa, and raised the specter of world hunger. Satellite imagery of an encroaching Sahara became a graphic symbol of the destruction of natural resources. Against thiis background, the United Nations spon- sored its first global conference on the environment in 1972 in Stockholm and on food in 1974 in Rome. In the same year that the UN held its environment conference, afledglingorganization with an unwieldyname, the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), established its first new research center in a developing country. The CGIAR's aim was to extend the benefits of the green revolution more widely by bringing modern agricultural science to bear on the problems of growing more food in developing countries. These were formative years for the environmental movement and for international agricultural research. But even though environmentalists and agricultural scientists had com- moii cause for concern, they seemed to be mutually wary and following different agendas. If the two perspectives differed then, in the next two decades they rapidly converged. The CGIAR owed its existence to the part played by agricultural research in the epic increases ,in wheat and rice production in Asia and Latin America. It was conceived as an interim organization. The founders set theirsights on helpingto increase food production and expected the CGIAR after a few years to pass the torch to agricultural scientists in developing countries. An organization in a hurry, the CGIAR-or CG as it is more familiarly known-was not attuned totakingthe longview on environmental matters. The CG's temporary mission, however, has proved to be open-ended. Along the way its centers have scored solid successes, but also suffered some humbling reverses and came in for their share of criticism. CGIAR scientists found that with other crops in other regions they faced problems far more complex and difficult than those encountered in dealing with wheat and rice. Prominent 3 among these were the long-term environmental issues that the UN conferonco had begun to address. tlho U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in an effort to reduce the scientific uncertainties. Population Pressures The aim of the EPA-IRRI experiment is to study how climate change might affect the growing of rice, In the poorest countries, where a majority of people still and also, by measurinF methane release from rice depenid on agricultture for aliving, trends of the last 20 years have fields, to gain some insight into the question of how inade circumstances more menacing. Above all, a predicted rice growing might affect climate change. doubling of world population in the next 40 years will put iaIn one controlled study, rice plants subjected to extreme pressures on developing countries where birthrates are elevated levels of UV-B willbecompared with plants generally highest and resources stretched most thinly. in field plots exposed at current I-B levels. EPA In the 1980s, new unknowns were injected into thej team leader David l'ingey says that the objective is to environmental equation. Some scientists predict significant establish an exposure-response function. "We want climate change in the near future with earth temperatures rising to know the result if exposure is increased. It will because of the buildup in the atmosphere of carbon dioxide and help make it possible to extrapolate the consequences otherso-calledgreenhouiseg,fses. Otherdangersw( wereporeeivof specific changes in the future." Increases in UV-B ohrsocatllednigrclehuegarhSes.OtherdieOngers werepercOeive I leVelS are expected to affect plant growth: some from a thiinning of the earthi's p)rotective ozone layer after hioles in the layer were detected over the South Pole. The CG stance so predict that the changes will weigh against rice plants far has been to acknowledge that the potential effects of global in the contest with weeds, insects, and disease. warming are enormous, to avoid taking sides in the debate, and In the global warming segment of the project. rice to play at least a modest part in helping to resolve the un- 'iin the field will be compared witl rice pl ants grown certainties, a in special greenhouses where temperature and CO2 levels are controlled. Here too, the aim is to learn the magnitude of changes, in this case those that would come with rises in CO2 and temperature levels. Tl he Wild Card of Climate! Change Researchers will also Investigate methane emis- sion rates fromn rice fields and consider how the rates Alarnm about a growing greenhouse effect and the wouldbeaffectedbyclimatechange. Methaneinspires thinning of the ozone layer of the earth's atmosphere interest because it is a greenhouse gas and about 20 has made the possibility of rapid climate change a timesmoreeffectiveintrappingheatintheatmosphere wild card in the environmental deck. In more omi- than carbon dioxide. The concentrati'on of CO2 is nous forecasts, global warming and increased ultra- currentlymuchhigherintheatmosphere, butmethane violet-B (UV-B) radiation will have a drastic effect on concentration is growing faster. agricujlture, Certainly, there would be winners and Rice is a major contributor to the methane load. losers. Some regions, notably those in cooler climes Estimates put the share of rice rields and swamps at toward the poles, would be expected to benefit. 20 to 30 percent of the total, but there are many Developing countries in the tropics, on balance, uncertainties, says Tingey. Knowledge of hbw much would apparently suffer as temperatures rose and rice is grown globally, and where, remains inexact. rainfall patterns altered. And lackof information onhow manycrops ayear are With the prognosis still unclear, CGIAR strategists produced adds to the questions. are looking hard at the environmental eventualities Methane is produced by the decomposition of and one center, the International Rice Research In- straw and other organic material in the anaerobic stitute (IRRI) in the Philippines, is cooperating with conditions under which paddy rice is grown. Rice 4 5 i Sustainability Forever plants themselves serve to vent methane trapped in the soil. beodThe upshot is that farmers in developing countries must Intentions in the five-year study are to go beyond do more with less. Agriculture, therefore, faces a double clial- analysis and frame effective responses where the lenge-not simplyto increase food production, but to assurethat findings indicate potential trouble. For example, the resource base is not degraded. That task is signified in the H.U. N eue, coordinator of IRRI's methane research term sustainability. says, "Some believe that the new high-yielding rice The concept is hardly new. Sustainable catches of fish plants allow methane to escape from the soil niore or harvests of trees have long been familiar notions where easily than traditional varieties. If that's true, breed- fisheries and forestry are concerned. Ecologists in the 1960s ers miglht try to alter the basic architecture of the applied the term at the planetary level and elevated it into modern rice plant." something of a holistic grail. The EPA-IRRI project calls for computer simula-i Talk about sustainable production systems in agricul- tion of variouis climate-change scenarios. Frits W.T, ture gradually gained currency. A bench mark in the political Penning de Vries, former leader of the IRRI siinula- etymology of the word was established with its conspicuotus use tion team, noted that "Even a I degree increase in in "Our Co(mimi1on Futtire," the report of the World Commnission average temperature, if sustained over several sea- on the Einvironment and Development in 1987. sons, could allow farmers who now grow just two By that time, the CGIAR had installed sustainability as crops to start growing three." On the other hand, rice a formal goal. Sustainable agriculture was defined as the is notoriouslytemperature sensitive and rice farmers "successful management of resources for agriculture to satisfy in hotter regions might have to switch to other crops. changing hluman needs while maintaining or enhancing the The CGIAR centers are accustomed to developing quality of the environment and conserving natural resources." crops adapted to difficult growing conditions. If the Like most general definitions, this one is not much of a gloom ierpredictionsaboutitncreased UV-Braidiationi gui(le to a(tion. What counts, says, llubert Zandstra, current and glol)al warmi.ng prove accurate, their abilities chairman of the CC committee on sustainability, is working out will at a premiiun in supporting sustainable agri- what sltstaistIial)ility rneans for (lifferent crops, (Iifferent growi ng culture, and not just in the developing world. conditions, and, yes, different CCIAR centers More explicit in indicating future difficulties for agri- The Slog to Sustainability culture are the sobering statistics on the impact of population pressure on land resources. A recent assessment of future While the CGIAR may be seen as a leading apostle of operating conditions by the CG's wheat and maize center intensified agriculture, a large part of the centers' (CIMMYT) in Mexico, for example, estimates that the average I research is directed at finding alternatives to reliance area of cropland per person worldwide declined by a quarter on fertilizer, insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides (from 0.24 to 0.18 hectares) between 1950 and 1975 and is to keep crop production rising. Such "interven- expectedtodropanotherquarter(to0.13hectares)bytheendof tions." as they are known in agriculture argot, can the century. involve usingbiological means of pest control,taking ClMMYT's review puts the annual loss of arabe land 'advantage of cultural practices, finding better agro- through desertification at 6.0 million hectares with another 1.0 nomic methods such as miniiimum tillage to reduce to 1.5 million hectares lost through waterlogging and salinity. lsierosion,dvopistitutesoforesla n The net annual loss of topsoil through erosion is estimated at 26 burngsystems, and, prospectively,exploitngbiotech- 6 billion tons a year. o 7 The successes here tend not to be dramatic in the dlscovery or technology thut has improved the lives sense of having as widle an effec.t as the releause of farmers in developing countries. Most CGIAR of hligl-yielding varieties of rice or wheat might have successes don't capture prizes or attract wide notice, had in the heyday of the green revolution. But that but what is essential is that the centers keep on WAS uintisual. As Roger Rowe, deputy director winning victories-small and large-on the slog to general/research of the lnternational Maize and sustainability. Wheat Improvemont Ccnter (CIMMYT) in Mexico, puts it, "Talk about breakthroughs is exaggerated. Zandstra,whoisalsodirectorgeneraloftheCC'sInter- Agricultural research is a continuing process based national Potato Center (CIP) in Peru, emphasizes that on small gains here aind there every year. sustainability does not mean si mplypreservingthe environmen- What seems a small gain to most people may loom tal status quo. "We're dealt the cards and have to live with them. who dep .nd on cassava as a staple food, for example, But it doesn't just mean that the choices we make today about who depmend on casavaasastaple foofd,fonern example, using resources are to be permanently maintained. What we the cassava mealybug hias been of deep concern, The would like to see achieved in sustainability is that we will still quaintly named insect was acci(lentally introdluced udeder ro o. into Africa from Latin America in the early 1970s and have tlhat same numlber of chioices a hulidred years from now." was soon causing losses to cassava crops of tip to 80 It req(uires, in other words, that today's options be preserved or percent. increaIsed. In a coup for biological control, the International In pursuit of sustainability, the CGIAR has undertaken Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) in Africa the most extensive overhaul of policy and organization in its collaborated successfullywith thelnternational Cen- two-decade history. In 1990, it announced thiat it would expand ter for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) in Latin America the Group from 13 centers, adding at least four new member in seeking an answer to mealybug depredations and organizations from amdng other international agricultural re- found it in the forml ofaparasitic wasp, Epidinocarsis search centers, most of them modeled on the CG centers but lopez. Importation and distribution of the tiny wasp, operating outside the Group. a natural enemiiy of the mealybug in Latin America, is resulting in the reduction of the mcalybug popula- An Ol( Dilemma tions in Africa below economically damaging levels. A campaign patterned on the one against the cassava By embracing the changes, the Group'is facing up to an mealybug has been mounted against anotherscourge old dilemma. As the current chairman of the CGIAR, World of an important crop, the mango mealybug, and is Bank vice president Wilfried P. Thalwitz, candidly acknowl- making encouraging progress. edged at a press conference on the expansion, it is clear to the Hans Herren, director of IITA's Benin research CGIAR "that the element of sustainability is in some conflict station where the center's biological control program with thie basic aim of increasing productivity." is based, observed that "withi biological control |Resolving this conflict essentially means achieving a methods, no extensive pesticides are required, and better balance between work on Droductivity and on the small-scale African farmers wlio depend on crops sustainability. Tosuggest,that the Group isstarting from scratch likecassavaand mangotofeedttheirfamiliesarefreed in its quest for sustainability, however, would be a distortion. of a damaging pest by nature itself." . The CCIAR sees the key to su.stainability in research on1 "natural For work on biological control IITA and CIAT last resources management." This is research directed at under- year won the King Baudouin Award. The prize is ! standing and preserving the resource base on which agriculture given every two years to a CGIAR center for a specific , depends. Concern about such research traces back to the 8 t CGIAR's beginnings. When the CC starte(l operations in 1971, it followed a That was not the en(l of the debate, however. As duial palttern in c reatiig new crop research centers. The first type scienltists at the CC centers turne(d their efforts to crops other than c(ol(centrate(londevelopingimproved varieiesofspecificcrops rice and wheat they found that the global commodity approach thirougliplantbreedingteciniqties;iiattvraIresourceworkrelated didri't work well in all locations. This was especially true in to those crops was a secondary function. The second model Africa where complex systems of production, harsh climate, placed majoremphasis on research on "agroecological" problems fragile soils, and a plethora of pests and plant diseases presented in the region where it operated; commodity research was a a daunting challenge. collateral responsibility. The CC centers' original strategy for Africa was to gain Donald L. Plucknett, Science Adviser to the CGIAR, quickresultsbyimportingplantvarietiesdevelopedelsewhere. observes that the four "regional" centers were "located within a That plan was quickly defeated by African growing conditions. particular production environment that had problems and that Thie centers were also confronted with higher hurdles in getting needed special attention." He says that the Rockefeller and Ford new technology adopted. The institutions and services required Foundations that had sponsored prototype intemational agri- I to enable the mass of African subsistence farmers to make the cultural research centers "decided that this was a good way to leap to green revolution agriculture were simply not available. tackle these problems" and the CG later took the same view. Quid Pro Quo Plus A Resistance Develops Coming up with an improved crop varietyor farming The CG's regional centers, however, encountered rough technique is one thing for the CGIAR centers. Per- going with their resources research. Thechairman of the Group's suading fanners indeveloping countries to use it may Technlical Advisory Committee (TAC), Alex F. McCalla, of the bequiteanother. Forexample,poorfarmerslivingon University of California at Davis, indicates that the conflict I the edge of subsistence in Africa, depend on what between prodIuition and sustainability flared up in the early they l)roduce to feed their families anid cannot afford (lays of the pilot regional centers, the International Institute of to gam)ble on novel technology. The CG centers, 'rOupic.al Agricutilture (IittA) inl Nigerial andtl thle Inlternlationall mIiust, therefore, demonstrate that an inn1ovationi is Center for Tropical Agricultture (CIAT) in Colombia. not u nsky venture. ClATstartedoutbyforminginerdisciplinaryteamstllatIf con1vincing poor farmers of an assured payoff is CIAT started out by forming interdisciplinary teamns that the key to the adoption of improved technol(ogy, the included economists and mathematicians to carry out systems same is doubly true of winning their cQoperation on modeling work on the environment. The idea was to make a measures to protect the environment. Particularl in comprehensive study of the resource base and use the results to Africa, where shihing cultivation is a prevailing plan research for the center. McCalla notes that there were pattern, land tenure and land use practices provide people in the CCIAR more interested ina"quick fix." Tlhesewere weak incentives for farmers to take the long view on notably partisans of a crop improvement approach who invoked the environment. Any initiative in sustainable agri- the successes of CIMMYT and IRRI to reinforce their views. culture must clearly appeal to farmer self-interest to WhenCIATgot new leadership in 1974,a judgment was be successful. made that the agroecological approach, while useful in defining I Examples of programs designed to do this are the problem, was not useful in solving it. CIAT's teams were being carried out by two CGIAR centers focused on sidelined. IITA underwent a similar cou rse correction. In the increasiniglivestockproduuctivity in Africa,theInter- 1970s, says McCalla, the dominant view in the CC system was national Livestock Center for Africa (ILCA) and the that the global commodity approach-the CG in-house term for International Laboratory for Research on Animal crop improvement-was the right way to go and that Diseases (ILRAD). In Africa, livestock and particu- 10 agroecological research took too long to show results. 11 larly cattle are of pivotal importanice to both the Scientists developed fodder banks-small pas- agricultural economny and the environment. In arid tures of legumes-that provide hiph quality feed for areas, cattle make life possible for pastoralists, but are herds in this period. Their appeal is based on mutual oftenblamed forenvironmental degradationthrough aldvantage for herders and farmers. overgrazing. In farming regions, livestock play mul- 1-lerds that have access to the fodder banks were tiple roles,providinganimal traction and manure for found to be generally more productive, notably in fertilizer or fuel and serving as a vital source of food respect to calf survival. l;armers-most in the area and cash for farm families, raise maize-reacted favorablyto fodderbanks when ILRAD research concentrates on two parasitic dis- trials demonstrated that grain yields on 2- or 3- year eases with the heaviest effect on livestock use and old fodder banks were substantially greater-by 1.5 to 2,5 tonnes per hectare--than on land that had been production in the region, theileriosis (East Coast f for upeto 6cyars. fever) and trypanosomi asis (sleeping sickness). Since faSoi udr the ferbo 1987, the center has had an epidemiology and sociol- nSitg wider the fodder banktsandt both from the ogy unit. It was formed both to study how improved I urine fromixedby the legves andnthe manure and disease control measures can best be applied and to assess the impact of such measures in epidemiologi- yfdder banks provide ground cover throughout the cal, economic, social, and environmental terms. condition 6f tho soil Creation of the unit was prompted in part by the Planting of fodder banks has spread from Kaduna rapid advances being made in control of parasitic | State where they got their start to other states in diseases generally and the prospects of early progress northern Nigeria-ILCA gives much of the credit to against livestock diseases through applications of the Nigerian goverpment's livestock service for the biotechnology. In the past, successes with disease increasing farmer acceptance of fodder banks. And control lhave led to rapid increases in livestock popu- interest in them is being expressed in othercountries lations resulting in damaging overgrazing on mar- in the dry zone, So ILCA seems to be showing that ginal lainds. The ILRAD unit, for example, hias begun| measures that both increase output and improve to study how changes in livestock systems effect sustainabilityarenotonlypossiblebutcanbepopular. household welfare in particular areas. Although the One response of the centers was to rely'more heavily on work is still in the early stages, the ultimate aim is to farming systems research. As the name implies, this sort of find ways to sustain increases in livestock produc- research involves looking at farming as a'system rather than tion without environmental degradation. An ILCA project begun in the subhumid zone of focusingonasinglecrop. Inparticular,farmingsystemsresearch nortliern Nigeria has a more immediate obiective of ! recognizes that farmers make decisions based on social and boosting crop and livestock production tbjecre and economic factors and takes these factors into account. Farming doing it in a fashion that benefits the environment. systems teams included asignificant proportion of social scien- Feed shortages in the dry season limit animal pro- tists. Thiscontributedtoincreasingtheirnumbers andstrengtli- ductivity in subhumid areas. Herders and farmers in ening their role in the centers. these areas historically have cooperated, with McCalla's appraisal is that a "farming systemns perspec- pastoralists migrating into farming areas during the tive"l has permeated the CCIAR. In practice, looking at fariniilg dry season and grazing their herds on farmers'fields as a system required the centers to make greater efforts to after the harvest. understand soil, water, weeds, and climate. By all accounts, a majority of farming systems programs in the centers were reborn 12 13 as resource management programs usirng a farming systems the close c.ooperation of the lnternational Potato aj)proach, Center (CllI) an(d the C)osta Rican national program. 'I'hedialectic betweenproduictivityandnatuiralresouirces Potatoes are a high value crop and also a favorite research, of course, did not proceed in a tidy an( linear fashion, host for a large number of pests and pathogens. as this account iiiiglht suggest. The dynamics varied fron ceniter Potatoes aie an increasingly popular crop among to center and the partisans did not divide on absolitist lines. No farmers in developing countries. Like their coun- one, for example, took the position that preserving the resource terparts in developed countries, they use pesticides base was unimportant. Nevertheless, the shiftin prioritiesintlhe to fend off attacks of insect pests. The results are also 1980s has gone in the direction of resource research. the same: control efforts require increasing amounts of insecticides. The target in the experimental program in Costa The Problem of Escalation Rica was th e potato tuber moth, which ranks as the most destructive and ubiquitous potato pest in de- The central challenge for the CGIAR is as old as velopingcountries. Potatofarmerstherehadresorted agriculture,buthasbeenintensifiedbymoderntech- to spraying against the tuber moth with the usual nology, In this century, industrialized countries results,saysKennethl.Brown,CIPdirectorofregional have achieved prodigious increases in production by programs. The moths' natural predators were killed breeding high-yielding crop varieties and plainting off so that when moth populations exploded there them in huge concentrations. The uniform genetic: was nothing to control them, "When you start make-up of the plants makes all of them highly spraying and find that the moths don't react, you vulncrable to the same pests and plant diseases. eitherputon more(insecticide)orswitchtosomething T'hese can sweep through a crop virtually destroying inore toxic because they've become resistant." CIP it. scientists call it "thed insecticide treadmill." In traditional agriculture, inultiple genetic strains A start was nade toward getting off the treadmill existing in the same field defend tthe crop from such with a s(u(ly of the moth's life cycle in a small area. losses. Bly adopting green revolution genetically- Next, a nlonitoring system was created to alert thie uniiformii crop varieties, poor farmers in developing farmers to big flights of the moths when the depos- countries have imported the problem of escalation in iting of eggs on the plants occurred causing the its acute form. ( danage. The modern practice has been to protect crops by "You didn't spraybeforethat," says Br6wn. "That heavy applications of agricultural chemicals. Such permitted the ladybugs and parasitic wasps and protection, however, is temporary. Insects and dis- other predators to pick off the small number of eases evolve resistance, the chemicals are applied in moths that were always around. When the place was increasing amounts, anid eveinttially become irnef- inunidated with moths and the predators couldi't fective. In the mean timne, dire environmenital side lhold tlhein, you'd go in and spray." effects can ensue. The contest is akin to the one The onset of spraying was delayed for several between offense and defense in military weaponry weeks and farmers have reduced their rounds of and tactics. spraying from about 20 to four or five. That meant a The CGIAR centers are putting much effort into major drop in chemical pollution and in cost. The researchlon metlodstocontrol majorpestsanl, attthe saune formula is being tried in Mexico near Leon same time, cut excessive use of pesticides. An where the tuber moth is rampant and potato farmers example of an alternative approach that worked was are spraying 24 or 25 times a season. This kind of developed inapotatogrowingareainCostaRicawith 15 S ~~~~~~~~~~~~- - . orchestrated control technique is an example of Nevertheless, the CGIAR favored the development of integrated pest management that is being heavily l agroforestryandactcdas institutionallgodfatherwhentheInter- einegrabted propst ma osutanageetta sbleagingeailyur i national Ce,nter for Research iin Agroforestry (ICRAF) was estab- reliedonbytheproponlentso)fsustaunableagricullture. lished in 1977. ICRAF was one of the non-CCIAR centers that cooperated most closely with the CGIAR centers and was among A close observer of the CGIAR, C. Edward Schuiih, dean the first centers selected in the 1990 expansion. of the Humiiplirey Iinstitute of Public Affairs at the University of During the CGIAR discussions about expansion in the Minnesota,HsaysthatCe IARstaff believedAstrongly invwhatttUley 1980s, a need for strategic research in forestry was strongly were doing in the cause of productivity and many "fouind the expressed. Such matters as tree breeding and research on forest concept of sustainability not very congenial in the 1970s." utilization and products were given priority. CGIAR planners Schuh says ue thinks that before signine on wholeheartedly for would have preferred to centralize agroforestry and forestry the trek to sustainability, some center directors went thro rgh a researchinasinglecenterandnominatedICRAF. ButICRAF has period of "denial" that took the form of sayingr 'We are atready astrongsenseofmission. It has concentrated on takingagroforestry working to increase thatt thfo o utput,' and tat will take systemsthat worksuccessfullyinthefieldandtransferringthem care of itn to other sites, and was unwilling to change its orientation to Schuh's perspective is that of a longtime participant in include a major forestry research program. the CG. lie says hle hlas seen-l a clange in ouatlook towarl Wheln the CGIAR looked elsewhere, it found tlhat tropi- sustainability in recent years and finds it "most sigiiircar.t" that cal forestry in the 1980s had broadened its focus from industrial the Group decided to bring in centers that specialized in forestry to take into account the need of rural people for such agroforestry, forestry, and irrigation, all of which have a strong and fruits and other forest productsranThmalsbuldingmaterialst natural resources managemenit emphasis. an frit an ot 'rfrs rdcs heslto aocet a new forestry institution. There are plenty of details to iron out on what exactly ICRAF and the new forestry center will do and A Place for Trees h1ow they will cooperate with each other and with the otlher centers, butthere is a sense of relief thatthe twocenters will help Thie CC decision in 1988 to include agroforestry and the CGIAR to deal better with a major natural resource. forestry in its mandate was not impelled by a sudden revelation on the importance of trees to tropical agriculture. There was Not by Research Alone never a dispute about the value to food production of trees, with their nitrogen-fixing properties and capacity to prevent erosion A realization reached early by the ¶GIAR was that by wind and water, especially in areas where soils are poor. increases in food production in developing countries cannot be The CGIAR at the start, however, had difficulty finding achieved by agricultural research alone. Economic and social the right formula forintegrating researchontrees intoits progranm. conditions and, in particular, government policies, limit what Tropical forestry was dominated in those days by interests in can be done. In Sub-Saharan Africa, such constraints, as forest management and lumber production. Forestry research- economists label them, are most severe. And Africa in the 1980s ers tended to be isolated from agricultural researchers and was the only continent in whiclh per capita food production relations between the two communities were uneasy. actually decined, In tlis period, agroforestry, whiclh is devoted to the Since the middle 1980s, sweeping economic reforms study of growing trees, crops, and animals together, was emerg- l have been pressed on Sub-Saharan countries by the World Bank ing as an activity separate from forestry. Two CGIAR centers, and other multilateral lending organizations and by the inter- ICRISAT and IITA, did conduct serious agroforestry research, I national development agencies of the induistrialized countries. but by and large the CGIAR interpreted its mandate to increase The ultimnate effect of thic reforms is still not clear, but agricultrC food production as preventing it from, so to speak, branching in these countries is no longer systematically on the policy short 16 out. end, 17 In the early days, CG leaders foresaw instances where bad policy woul(i prevent goo(l technology from being al) )lied. Peril was sustainable," says Stephen Vostl, who has 'rey1 perceiv((l t need( for a source ofsouii( research o a Croad(l worked on the experiment for IPPRI. Data on the spectruni ofeconoinicand policy qtiestions relatiiigto food. The natural resource base on climate, soils, and topogra- lnternationial Food lPolicy Research Institute (IFPRI) was created phy and social science information on population, in the 1970s by the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations and agricultuiral production, and market linkages were became a CGIAR center in 1979. In the view of Zandstra, integrated by means of computerized geographical chairmiian of the sustainability committee, "WIPRI has drawn the information system techniques. A good deal of attention of policy makers to relationships between certain i imicro-level"research,thatisfieldwork,wasdoneto policies-be they on prices, ownership of land, international fill out the picture. trade policy, positions taken on food security, etc.-and the Crop distribution was mapped in the area and land performance of the agriculture sector." On the subject of classifiedin respecttoerodibilityand fertility. Itwas sustainability, Zandstra says, he thinks that national policy then possible to designate some areas as at risk of makers are becoming more sensitive to the consequences of degradation and others that were not, The latter, not damage to the resource base and are willing to conisider infor- I surprisingly, tended to be on flatter land with more mation on the subject. fertile alluvial soil. It will take more research, hlow- ever, to establish the impact of agricultural practices on the natural resource base, according to William M. Amazonian Profiles : 0: ! :; : Loker who anchored the study for CIAT. Amazonian Profiles This and the practical task of devising sustainable \ produc~~~tion systems for farmers there have had to be Concernl about sustainability in agriculture has productinssesfrfresteehv a ob uppedrthe astakesonfindingpote ntia trouble sos put on hold. Increased activity by the Sendero upped the stakes on finding potential trouble spots Luminoso guerrillas has made field work too hazard- before the damage is done. The International Food 'I0ous for re-secarr.hers. Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) has risen to the o f searcprosc. challenyge by developing ways to identify areas that inirazilthrougeacollabotationoflsPI bwithBrazil- areat risvofi.nvTronputeoryal degirdationfrom agncul- ian government agencies. The aim of this study is to tural activity. 1'o pUt theaory ilitO prarice, Washing- gain a better understanding of the factors that deter- ton-based IgPRf cas tcaried up with research groups mine the direction and speed of aricultuml develop- in developng countries that have collected iefor- mentinaregionhighlyvulnerabletoe0vironmental mation on places in jeopardy, wdegradation. In eona such venture, IFo RI collaborated with thc Vosti says that the study reinforced a decision by International Center forTropical Agriculture (CIAT) the Inter-American Development Bank to revise its a study on the Peruvaan Amazonp The study criteria for lending for agricultural development in focused on the Selva area in the tropi s lowlands of the area. The bank until recently refused to make Iaeru east Of ahe Andesg Part of the Selva is a frontier loans to support rural development projects that had area regarded as having great agricultural potential. livestock components, The clearing of land oyi a However, the same questions arise, as in other parts massive ccale tor cattle ranching, particularly in the of the Amazon Basin, about the environmental and male forectt ranching, part int social effects and the long-term viability of human Amazonian ain forest,k had cauns sevre sen avs on settlement in the region. mental damagop Lowk loan wre ss and In broad terms, the idea of the study was "to see if incentive to chop down more trees and the ba.-k agriculture as practiced in the tropical lowlands of stopped making them. 18 On close examination, tlhe researchers conclutded ; CG centers allso inaintain connections with individual 11 thlat livestock In morcmodest numbers are or- researchers inniationial progrars througi a variet of' ntworks- tant lvest in iiinbilityeto numbe d ar mi connections that can amount to professional lifelines. The idea systelmes tnt gre enviroailtetally suitabe ft3toathig ofcreati ng networks to I ink scientists doing research on the same The bank saw things that way too and let livestock cropGutworkingindiffrentainstitutions and counteres prdeedes back into its portfolio, illustrati'ng how research of teGA,uhsenaelvrYhcftradmdit this sort can have a direct effect on policy and a main means of outreach. practice. Centers operate their networks differently, but, in gen- eral, networks provide encouragement to scientists in often straitened circumstances with travel, seminars, and an opportu- Needs of National Programs nity to trade germnplasm, all of which incidentally, imparts alittle professional prestige useful back home. And networks make ideal conduits for spreading the word on a subject like When the CGIAR started out, the assumption was that its sustainability. centers would provide improved crop varieties and the work necessary to get the material into the hands of farmers would be A Malter of Equity taken on by national research and extension organizations. This strategy worked satisfactorily withi green revolution strains of Theissueofhlelpingpoorfarmers-equityistheCGIAR rice and wheat in Asia and Latin America. In Africa, bythe late shorthand term for it-has been an enduring subject of debate 1970s it was evident that most of the national research and witlhin the CGIAR. Critics of the CGIAR have argued that by extension services being counted on to adapt new technology encouraging reliance on irrigation and the substantial use of and relay it to the farmers were poorly funded and highly fertilizer the centers have mainly helped larger farms in more politicized. favorable growing areas and have done too little to benefit poor The Group concluded in the 1970s that the national farmers, the people that the organization was established to programs needed help specifically to exploit green revolution ssist. Smallhol ders in Asia, who have made major gains technologies and established an entity withliin the CGIAR to through improved technology, would say this amounts to unfair provide such help. The International Service for National stereotyping. Agricultural Research (ISNAR), located in the Netherlands, The centers'experience in Africadid spur them to make began operation in 1980. changes in policy and organization to better meet the needs of ISNAR is a small organization that differs from most poor farmers-the ascent of farming syst6ms research can be CGIAR centers in having technical assistance rather than re- largely ascribed to that effort. Several centers are putting more search as its purpose. Its stock in trade is advice togovernments emphasis on research designed to help increase production on on matters of policy and on the organization and management of land where soil and water conditions are less favorable. agricultural and natural resources research. However, the idea of reordering research priorities in A serious squeeze on funding is straining the capacity of favor of less productive land has been a chronic cause of soul many national programs to recast their research a in the searching within the CGIAR. Strong evidence indicates that the context ofsustainability. InrsnavriyINRstategiesin payoff in increased production is greater from researchi focused its clients on how to a Inpresent adversity. ISNAR is advising on prime agricultural land than on poorer growing areas. The Itscllnt onhowtomanage change when budgets are slashed. ltolrs si oe rt frtr nrsac u Blut ISNAR's depuity director general, ll.K. Jain made a grimi initrodutiLion of more intensive agriculture in less favored areas point about the sag in support o the national programs when he not only results in a lower rate of return on research bt warned that "National agricultural research systems can make frequenitly inflicts substantial environmental damage. very little contribution to the sustainability of agricultural pro- Diversion of resources from research on the best land 20 duction if their own sustainability is in jeopardy." may also reduce the potential for future increases in production. =~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 4 The question of whether to shift resources to try to help farmers IThe CG was not only prodded by its patrons to give witlh poor land, therefore, has ethical as well as economic L environmiiinl considerations mzore weight in its overall strat- dimensions for the CGIAR. egy, but ad(litional pressure was applied by a coalition of "There are two sides to it. Onie, you miuist deal with the enviroimnental organizations. Earlier these groups achieved farmers and find technologies that give them higher income and some success in persuading the World Bank and other interna- mininmize darnage." says Zandstra. "On the other hand, as much tional agencies to consider environmental consequences in the food as possible shouild be produced on more stable production selection and design of development projects. land so that more people will not be literally driven into the hills In 1988, CG efforts to flesh out a formal policy on because of lack of food." sustainability attracted the interest of these organizations which Often, traditional farming systems in fragile environ- had earlier formed a watchdog group on the subject. The U.S. ments are ecologically undesirable. Farmers may routinelyburn Committee on Agricultu ral Sustainability for Developing Coun- off grasses, the rains come, and the soil erodes. With the right tries has a mnembership of about 30 environmental groups and approach,it isoftenpossibletodevelop "responsibleagriculture" private voluntary organizations. Many of the member groups in such areas, says Zandstra. operateprogramsindevelopingcountriesand combineinterests One alternative istohave"theiintroduced system slowly in developmuent and inienvironental protection.The chairmian evolve toward growing high value crops." Once the land has Rob Be, a forinvirUSinbador to Mali. been stabilized by contour farming and othier techniques, it is IS Robert i Blake, a former U.S. ambassador to MalI. possible to build up productivity. "There are methods by which Initial contactsbetween the committee and CGIAR were one can reduce soil loss and, over time, improve the organic conducted cautiously on both sides, but a dialogue started and content of the soil." Investment is justified then because "there has been maintained. Blake says the committee's appraisal is is a certain security of return and the system can evolve toward that "Afteraslowstart, manyofthecentersarebeginningto make perennial crops with high market value like coffee." There is no a lot of progress." In particular, he says, the CG now accepts that clearanswertothequestionofwherethecentersshoulddrawthe it is necessary "to pay more attention to small farmers, the lineindevelopingtechnologyforfragileareas,butsustainability protection of natural resources, and getting its research out to is increasingly being applied as the chief criterion. farmers." Blakesays that in developing its policyon sustainability The Environmental Message theCGIAR "handled it right." Draft plans were circulated widely within the CGIAR system and to outside groups, says Blake, "and In the middle 1980s, the intensive agriculture champi- they came out substantially improved." He observes that once oned by the centers also came under scrutiny from another the outside groups had participated in the drafting process, "No quarter. The donor organizations that provide finds for the longer was anyone able to say no." CGIAR made an issue of the environmental effects of green Representatives of both the committee and the CG say revolution technology. that thie dialogue has brought thetwo sides closerto ameetingof What was behind this new push from the patrons? the minds on the problems of increasing food production in a Leslie D. Swindale, first chairman of the committee on sustainable way. Environmentalists' greater concern about sustainability formed by TAC saw no great mystery. Swindale, productivity in agriculture is spurred by what Blake calls "thie who was director general of ICRISAT for 14 years and retired in lhorrendous problem of feeding 40 percent more people in the 1991, said "An important change came in the world in the mid world in the next 25 years." 1980s, Worries about drought, deforestation, soil degradatioll, As population increases, food-deficit countries will not global warmiling, anid (estru(tion of theozone layercaused world be able to get the food required uniess they can pay other leaders to become more interested in environmental affairs. countries for it, says Blake. Because the economic picture is They were less worried about global war or political conflict" bleak, they have to produce as much of their basic foods as 22 and could afford to pay more attention to the environment, possible. "You'll be asking unsophisticated farmers to under- 23 22~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~2 take an unlheard of task," he says. "It's awesome to think of the Pingali emphasized that recently released varieties produced impact on natural resources," if it is not done in a sustainable lower yielulo whel first introduced than the original green way, revolution varieties. way. The data suggests that the reason for the decline is that Is the CGIARequal totaking aleading international role the rate of growth of yield of improved rice varieties is less than on sustainability? Some critics suggest that the Group's com- the rate of degradation of the paddy environment from such parative advagitageis indealingwith germplasa and developing thi ngs as increase(l pressure from pests, depletion of soil nutrients, new agricultural technologies and it is not well suited to be a and (lvhaniges in soil chemistry caused by intensive cropping. If protagonist on sustainability. Blake cites some positive evi- the ceiling on yield is not broken, the researchers say "the dencegainedfromrecentvisitstoCGLARcenters,butessentially implications for future national production trends and to the answers the question with a question. "If they don't do it, who economic viability of rice production are serious." will?" The implications are serious indeed; rice is the most For its part, the CG found that entering into frank important food crop in terms of world consumption. CG discussion with the coalition and, in effect, allowing itself to be attention dulring the last decade has been heavily, perhaps monitored earned it useful if not uncritical support from the dislproportionately, on Africa. It suffered aboutofAfritca-slhock environmentalists when sustainability issues have been raised when it started operating seriously there and many of the in the public arena. The CCIAR for years was sheltered from the changes now under way were precipitated by that experience. usual forms of publicaccountabilityand the interactionwith the Because of population numbers, however, many within the committee marked a significant opening up. CGIAR believe that the organization's greatest future challenge TheGroup is less comfortable with othersegmentsofthe lies in Asia. environniental community. Science Adviser Plucknett takes a representative CGIAR view when he says "Some people define The First 20 Years sustainability as low input, no input agriculture or organic farming. They forget about demand." He quotes the CG The major achievement of the CGIAR and the interna- definition's reference to the "successful management of re- tional agricultural research system is the system itself. Interna- sources to satisfy humani needs," and says that doesn't mean tional agricultural research virtually did not exist until after "steady state, low productivity agriculture." World War 11 save for plant collecting expeditions and occa- Zandstra is similarly insistent on the need to "separate sional cooperative efforts aimed at combating disease threats to sustainability from low production. We can't afford low produc- important crops. Long-term financial support of the CGIAR by i tion." CGIAR's responsibility is to find "an efficient way of reliable donors has made possible a degree' of planning and producing a lot of food at low cost while avoiding damage to or continuity of effort that development agencies could not match while improving the resource base." on the project-by-project basis under which they operate. Thpconcern ofC scientistsaboutproductionhasbeen Muchi of the CG's success is owed to the way it is sharpened in recent years by reports of a decline in rice yields in organized and operates. The organization grew out of an effort by Asia. The declines have shown up both where irrigated rice is United Nations agencies in the late 1960s to rally long-term the single crop grown and in rice-wheat cropping systems in funding for agricultural research. Members of an advisory the singladesh crop growndiand.in StdiesyIR eatrchro gsystemstify tcommittee were recruited from the international agricultural Bangladesh and India. Studies by IRRI researchiers testify that research community and served as individuals rather than as the trend applies both in farmers' fields and on experiment representatives of their governments or homyie institutions. After anailyzing dta from several rice-growing Asian This principl e was perpetuated in the CGIAR; both countries, IRRI economist P.L. Pingali and his associates con- policy and technical decisions are made by independent inter- cluded that there is a trend toward stagnation or decline in rice national agricultural scientists on the boards of the individual 24 yields even where rice is grown under scientific management. centers and on the Group'sTechnical AdvisoryCommittee. The 25 Group also operates without a formal charter of the sort tlhat p giii(Ies most internationial organizationis. In(lividutal centers thle causo of reservin endalngere(l plant species exercise broad independence of action. Policy for the Group is seems more abtstract, 'I'he losses occur out of the made by conscoisus. public eye, arid the responses are lower key. The To a remarkable degree, this form of governance has stakes, nonetheless, are very high. The disappear- enabled the centers to elude the ideological and bureaucratic ance of traditional crop varieties and their wild troubles that afflict manly international organizationis. The relatives threatens future world food supplies. Group's decentralized organization and pluralistic operating In both cases, the underlying issue is conserving style mean that decisions on policies and programs are made at geneticdiversity. Theseimperiledplantscarrygenes a very measured pace. The donors do exert leverage through ' with unique potential for resistance against pests and their power of the purse. And there has been a noticeable disease. The loss of these options undercuts pros- increasein cooperationbetweencenters and aquickened response pects for achievingsustainability in food production. to Group-wide policies emanating from TAC, such as that on Staying ahead of the insects and plant diseases sustainability. But the centers hardly move in lockstep. means pressing the battle at the genetic level. The TheCC's stan(ling within theagriculttural research coom- only source of resistance to such threats and of other munity seems solid enough. The University of Minnesota's dlesirable characteristics that plant breedlers look for Schllh, says that majorstrengths ofthe CCIAR are thiat "tlhey have is in the germplasm of the doomnesticated plants of a avoided bureaucraticsnarls and have run atight ship." Hepoints particular crop and related wild species. Plant to the CG's exhaustive evaluation system, particularly the re- germplasm is the ultimate nonrenewable resource. quirement that every center undergo a tough review every five Plant breeders' work, therefore, is never done. On years before it is renewed. An important test that CGIAR average, pests and disease, overcome resistance in continues to pass, says Schuh is that "it can attract top people, improved cereal varieties of wheat and rice in an creative people," to work in staff positions, be active on its average of five or six years. Developing a new variety boards, and collaborate on its projects. may take a dozen years. It is necessary to have new varieties always in the pipeline and, if possible, to be Agmecological Approach Redux prescient about what new characteristics will be required. What lies ahead for the CGIAR? The collection and The CGIAR has played a major role in efforts to conservation of germplasm is the heart of the CGIAR and that is stem genetic erosion. CG centers have b,en active in unlikely to change. Commodity research can be expected to collecting plant germplasm and conservingit ingene continueasamainactivity,butwithmaiormodifications. Green banks. The International Board for. Plant Genetic revolution strains of rice and wheatcould be widelyadopted. As Resources (IBPGR) in Rome was created as a separate the centers began to focus on less well endowed growing areas entity by the CGIAR in 1974 to deal exclusively with and other crops, localized problems made it difficult to develop the issue. varieties with wide adaptability. Major progress has been made. The number of national germplasnm programs, forexample, iAcreased from fewer than 10 in 1974 to more than 100 today. The Ultimate Nonrenewable Resource But the task of conservation is far from finished. linportant plant varieties remaini uncollected. Nothing incites defenders of endangered anMmal Meanwhile, areas of natural diversity are coming Nothing of e ed augher under heavy pressure from a rapidly growing popu- species like the spectacle of heedless slaughter-of lation claiming new territory for human settlement elephants or whales, for example. By comparison, and agriculture 26 27 I!~ ~ ~ ~ ~~.. ,..,,.*? Centers that do commodity research are moving to a Ironic ally, the wido adoption o)f im proved pl ant strategy of (leveloping technologies for conditions common to a varieties that are the product of agricultural research number of countries. Rather than offer what are termed "fin- has ac(;eleratedgenieticerosion inthesecritical areas. islhe(d" varieties, they providegermplasm in a form that national Traditional cultivars are replaced and wild species programs can adapt to meet local requirements. obliterated. Dealing with localized problems requires better re- Thevalueofcollec-tingwild relativesofmajor f(x)d search on natural resources management. The addition of new cropsi ybcginninlgtobe recognized and acted on. centers broadens CGIAR capabilities in resource research and crops isoilyd relaivescotaincgnedatdacte enhances its efforts in the cause of sustainability. But plenty of Thiese wild relatives containigeniesthat may be valu- h ean able when transferred to domesticated varieties. obstacles remain. The future viability of mauch germplasm already One is the question of how to quantify and measure collected is highly uncertain because many develop- sustainability. Thomas Walker, an economist who is now chief ing countries lack the money and trained personnel of social sciences at the International Potato Center (CIP), cites to maintgin existinggene banks. the difficulties encountered in an effort by the International IBPGR was created to help raise the alarm about Crops Research Institute forthe Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) to the loss of genetic resources and to,promote creation establish a trend in crop yiel(ds. Walker, who until recently was of a highly structured international system of at ICRISAT, notes that biological and physical scientists tend to germplasmi conservation. What emerged was a rnuch I identify sustainability with trends in yield. The variability of less formal arrangement that relies on national collec- conditions from year to year in the semiarid tropics make such tions and gene bank-s at international centers. Lack of trends hard to establish. In this case, ICRISAT researchers resources and political problems have meant that concluded that getting within 5 to 10 percent accuracy might gaps remain in collections and that linkages in the take 20 to 25 years. system are far from perfect. High on IBPGR's agenda ,Research to meastire sustainability demands long-term are measures to help correct these shortcomings. studies. Results are less tangible than from commodity research. The CGIAR's guiding tenet has been to make .One reason that agroecological research faltered in the 1970s was germplasmii freely available. In the middle 19180s, fear thalt diversion of research effort fromn commodities to re- however, IBPGR and the CGIAR as a whole was sourc;es would make CC research less productive overall. For caught intheline of firewwhen adisputecrupted over some, that fear still weighs hcavily. charges that developing countries were not getting CGIAR strategists see a better way to conduct research the benefits of their own gennplasm and deserved a on sustainability in what they are calling an "6coregional ap- greater degree of control. The topic has since become proach." The Group's Teclhnical Advisory Committee proposes grist for negotiation in other international forums,but this as a way to expand research on resource management while the experience seems to have taught the CGIAR that maintaining emphasis on productivity. The focus would be on politics cannot be ignored. agroecological zones in particular regions, therefore the label IBPGR and the CCIAR at large appear to face some ecoregional. tough second generation problems in respect to plant Is the CGIAR coming full circle with a large-scale revival germplasm. Questions about access will certainly of the sort of resources research that failed to flourish in the persist,particularlyasbiotechnologyburgeons. And 197(1s? Proponents of research on natural resources working to see that wor!d plant genetic resources are management argue that environmental priorities have changed preserved an(d existing germnplasin collections are in ways that make such research necessary. They also insist adequately maintained is essential to insuringthlat a that research methods have improved to a degree that puts key resource-arguably the key resource-is sus- success within reach. The centers have learned a lot abou thow tainable. to dothe multidisciplinary studies that typicallyare required for 29 28 resources research and were a CG weak suit in the 1970s. Of central importaince would be new model "ecoregional centers" Annex that would apparently be homiie to strong multidisciplinary teams made up of researchers in soil science, agroclimatology, social sciences, agronomy, hydrology, and forestry. CGIAR Then and Now The design for the future CGIAR is still very mnuch in the discussion stage and the organization is moving witlh its charac- TI'he roots of the CCIAR reach back to research centers teristic deliberateness. But a major restructuring was begun with established by the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations the expansion of center membership, and if the ecoregional in the decades after World War 11. The International approach prevails, as now seems very likely, the CGIAR will get Rice Research Institute (IRRI) in the Philippines and another big push on the route to sustainability. the the International Maize and Wheat Improvement It may bec hard to pin down the exac t meaninlg of I Center (CIMMYT) in Mexico were created for the sustainability or specify how to measure it, but the idea does purposeofincreasingproductionofthemajorcereals seem to be widely accepted among the CG rank and file. Con- in developing countries, ith IRRI concentratigon sideronecenterscientist'sshiort, easy-to-rememberdefinitionof irrigated rice and CIMMYwT on wheat. The driving sustainability as it applies to people who live on the margin in ifrreigntedhernierswasplaaCtbron diwhg,butboth also developing countries. "It means survival." i carried out natural resource work. The successes of the first centers led to requests for help that moved1 Ford and Rockefeller to establish two other centers. The International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) in Nigeria was given a mandate different from CIMMYT's and IRRI's. Its imain mission: was to deal with agriculture in the humid tropics ratherthan with aspecific crop. To its marndate for resource management was added re- sponsibility for research on food crops important in Itie region-cassava, maize and rice in Africa and ! ~~~~global responsiibility for cowpeas. ! The foundations also launched the International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT) iin Colombi ai an expansion of an existing Rockefeller program. CIAT was designated to work on natural resource management problems of the lowland tropics, espe- ciallythe acid savannaareasofLatin America. Again, some commodity research responsibilities were added-forbeans, cassava and rice in Latin America. After the CGIAR was created in 1971, the first center it established under its own design was the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi- Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) with headquarters in India. ICRISAT followed the IlTA-CLATpattern,beinggiven responsibility for research on land and water prob- 30 31 ,/-.- lems in the semi-arid tropics of Asia and Africa. and conservation of disappearing plant varieties: it Its commodity responsibilities were for cereals- has become a loader in the international effort to sorghumand illet-and for grain legumes maintain biodiversity. The lnternational Service for chickpeas and pigeon peas. National Agricultural Research (ISNAR) in the Hague These centers enabled CGIAR scientists to do I gives advice and practical assistance to national research in most of the geographical and climatic agricultural research systems. Thelnternational Food conditions affecting developing nations. There was P'olicy Research Institute (IrPRI) in Washington spe- one conspicuous gap, however, and the Group filled cializes in economic and policy analysis on agricul- it by founding the International Center for Agricul- ture. Its main clients are policy makers in developing tural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA) in Syria. countries. ICARDA's mission was to help make farming more Three existing international research centers were productive in North Africa and West Asia, a region accepted for membership in 1990. These are the where water is scarce and soils fragile. ImprovinR International Irrigation Management Institute (IIMI) basic food crops such as wheat, barley, lentils, and I in Sri Lanka, tlce International Center forResearch in broad beanS was part of the assignment. Agroforestry (ICRAF) in Kenya, the International The CGIAR in the 1970s also added two centers Network for the Improvement of Banana and more nearlyin the mold of CIMMYTlandlIRRI. These !Plantain (INIBAP) in France. A new center for more nearly in the mold of CIMMYT andresar lIRRI,resry These planed werethelnternational Potato Center(CIP) in Peru and I research on forestry is also planned. the West Africa Rice Development Associationi (WARDA) in Liberia (relocated to Cote d' Ivore in 1989), Their primary charge was for research on specific commodities, in the case of CIP a global responsibility for potatoes and later sweet potatoes, auld witli WARDA, as the name implies, for rice in West Africa. In its first decade the CCIAR showed a concern for animals in agriculture as well as for food crops. Two other new centers were formed, the International Livestock Center for Africa (ILCA) in Ethiopia and the International Laboratory for Research on Animal Diseases (ILRAD) in Kenya. ILRAD research concen- trates on two of the most economically important and scienti fically intractable diseases in Africa, theileriosis (East Coast fever) and trypanosomiasis (sleeping sickness). ILCAwasgiven acontinental commission for increasing livestock productivity. Three other centers launched in the first decade were intended to round out the system by perfonning services the other centers did not provide. The International Board for Plant Genetic Resoujrces (IBPGR) in Rome was established to foster collection 32 1 33 The CGIAR Centers |. ;t CIAT Centro Internaclonal de Agricultura Tlropical ; 4 . CIMMYI' Centro internaclonal (lo Mojoraminnto do Maiz y I rigo , ClIl Centro Interinacional de la Papa IBPGR International Board for Plant Genetic Resources , .A ICARDA International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas ICRAF Int(rrmational Coutil l for Research in Agroforestry ICRISAT international Crops Research tInstitute for the Semi -Arid' tropics IFIPRI International Food Policy Research Instituito IIMI International Irrigation Management Institute IITA Initernationallnstitite of Tropical Agriculture ILCA Iniernational livestock Conter for Africn|a ILRAD International Laboratory for Research on Animal Diseases INIBAP International Network for the Improvement of Bananla an(d Plantain IRRI International Rice Research Institute ISNAR International Service for National Agricultural Researchl WARDA West Africa Rice Development Association Printed on Recycled Paper