Review of Systemwide Programmes with an Ecoregional Approach
Review of CGIAR systemwide programs with an ecoregional approach conducted between April and July 1999 by a panel chaired by. Ted Henzell. The document also contains an excerpt from the summary of CGIAR International Centers Week 1999 where the review was discussed, a transmittal from the TAC Chair, TAC's commentary, and a transmittal from panel chair. The panel appraised eight CGIAR programs. It sought insights into their effectiveness in pursuing sustainable improvements in productivity, and on the value added by making the programs systemwide rather than center-based. It concluded that the principles underlying the ecoregional approach were valid and of high priority. However, the full value of the approach, particularly its human and social dimensions, had not been fully explored. The panel said that the greater part of CGIAR research on the management of natural resources should be conducted by centers, with a combined system effort reserved for a few exceptional cases. It made three operational recommendations, one of which called for clear rules on accounting for and allocating funds. In addition, it made ten recommendations concerning future actions.TAC drew a number of lessons from this report at its 77th meeting. The ecoregional approach remained valid. Procedures for monitoring progress and performance indicators were lacking in many programs, and governance was not well defined in most of them. There was sometimes too much focus on methodologies as opposed to research producing useful results. The principle of subsidiarity should apply to alliances, which became less efficient as the numbers of centers involved grew. TAC agreed with the panel that the term "ecoregional" was confusing and should be dropped from the technical language in favor of integrated natural resource management (INRM). The Group endorsed the report and TAC's comments, and requested follow-up on the issues raised.
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Internal Document biblioteca |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
2000-06-01
|
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/10947/1240 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Review of CGIAR systemwide programs with an ecoregional approach conducted between April and July 1999 by a panel chaired by. Ted Henzell. The document also contains an excerpt from the summary of CGIAR International Centers Week 1999 where the review was discussed, a transmittal from the TAC Chair, TAC's commentary, and a transmittal from panel chair. The panel appraised eight CGIAR programs. It sought insights into their effectiveness in pursuing sustainable improvements in productivity, and on the value added by making the programs systemwide rather than center-based. It concluded that the principles underlying the ecoregional approach were valid and of high priority. However, the full value of the approach, particularly its human and social dimensions, had not been fully explored. The panel said that the greater part of CGIAR research on the management of natural resources should be conducted by centers, with a combined system effort reserved for a few exceptional cases. It made three operational recommendations, one of which called for clear rules on accounting for and allocating funds. In addition, it made ten recommendations concerning future actions.TAC drew a number of lessons from this report at its 77th meeting. The ecoregional approach remained valid. Procedures for monitoring progress and performance indicators were lacking in many programs, and governance was not well defined in most of them. There was sometimes too much focus on methodologies as opposed to research producing useful results. The principle of subsidiarity should apply to alliances, which became less efficient as the numbers of centers involved grew. TAC agreed with the panel that the term "ecoregional" was confusing and should be dropped from the technical language in favor of integrated natural resource management (INRM). The Group endorsed the report and TAC's comments, and requested follow-up on the issues raised. |
|---|