SETTING AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH PRIORITIES FOR
THE CENTRAL AND WEST ASIA AND NORTH AFRICA REGION
(CWANA)

Toward a new NARS/NARS and CGIAR/NARS collaboration spirit

By
Abderrezak Belaida
Mahmoud Solhb
Ahmed Mazidc

a: Agricultural economist (ICARDA) now posted in Rabat, Morocco;
b: Assistant Director General- International Cooperation (ICARDA) now Director, Plant Production and Protection Division-Agriculture Department; FAO, Rome;
c: Agricultural economist; ICARDA, Aleppo, Syria.

March 2003

Countries in the developing world share a great many social, economic, and environmental challenges in common. Among these is a growing trend toward globalization, which will see people and markets ever increasingly entwined. It makes sense then that countries work together to meet their common challenges and plan for changes that might affect their citizens' food security and livelihoods. The member centers of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) have a critical role to play in this move to increased cooperation. Since its founding, ICARDA has, for example, worked hand-in-hand with the national agricultural research systems (NARS) of the world's dry areas to promote the development and sharing of technologies, in large measure by facilitating cooperation between researchers in many countries, to improve the lives of the rural poor.

In 2000, the CGIAR adopted a proposal that called for a systematic approach to regional priority setting, cooperation, and CGIAR research agenda setting. The aim was to increase the level of intra-regional cooperation, and improve its efficiency and effectiveness. Central to the proposal was a call for a clearer and more direct link between the research agendas of the CGIAR centers and the research needs and agendas of NARS. GFAR and its sub-regional for a had to play a major role to fulfil this objective.

ICARDA was given responsibility for facilitating the implementation of this regional approach in Central and West Asia and North Africa (CWANA), where it already enjoyed long-standing productive relationships in research and development. The Center was pleased to accept this important responsibility, working closely with sub-regional organizations--the Association of Agricultural Research Institutions of the Near East and North Africa (AARINENA) and the Central Asia and the Caucasus NARS Forum (CAC Forum).

This document is the outcome of more than two years of truly bottom-up, participatory priority setting throughout CWANA, involving the NARS, NGOs, farmer organizations, private sector and the regional
fora, along with scientists from the CGIAR centers active in the region. It is the product of much effort by each country's national program, and finally the product of all those individual NARS striving together in regional workshops to develop a plan that might make best use of limited resources for the good of all the region's rural poor.

ICARDA was privileged to have played a part in this process. All who took part will recognize the value of this process, and this document, in pointing the way toward a more food-secure and prosperous future through regional cooperation.

Prof. Dr Adel El-Beltagy
Director General
ICARDA

Table of content

I. OVERALL CONTEXT

1.1. Background
1.2. Characteristics of the region and major challenges
1.3. Rational for a regional approach to agricultural research

II. THE PRIORITY SETTING PROCESS ADOPTED IN THE CWANA REGION

2.1. Key features
2.2. Sub-regional brainstorming meetings
2.3. Survey
2.4. Regional consultation

III. RECOMMENDATIONS

3.1. General recommendations
3.2. Gap analysis
3.3. Mechanisms
3.4. Challenge programs
3.5. Follow-up Committee

IV. OTHER KEY ISSUES

4.1 Role of the private sector
4.2 Natural resource management paradigm
4.3 Time dimension of research priorities

V. LIMITATIONS

5.1 Criteria and weights
5.2 Achieving regional consensus
5.3 Inadequate regional capacity to address emerging research issues
5.4 Relevance of survey-derived priorities

VI. PERCEIVED RISKS AND THREATS

VII. MEETING THE CHALLENGE

Annex 1: Identified regional priorities
Annex 2: Summary of key survey results
Annex 3: Regional consultation: list of participants
Annex 4: Regional Meeting

This report is the outcome of a global effort, which aims to set the agricultural research priorities for the CWANA region. It builds on extensive discussions and recommendations made by a wide spectrum of stakeholders, either individually or as representatives of their -respective institutions and countries, throughout the various meetings that were held during this priority setting process (five sub-regional brainstorming meetings and a regional CWANA consultation). Among these stakeholders, representatives from ICARDA, CIMMYT, IPGRI, the two SROs (AARINENA and the CAC-NARS Forum), ACSAD, and NARS (scientists, decision makers, NGOs, farmers' organizations, and farmers) were particularly active throughout the process. Other stakeholders contributed either by attending the regional consultation meeting in May 2002, e.g., ILRI, IFPRI, ICBA, ICLARM, and CIHEAM, or by participating in the survey undertaken throughout the region. Sincere thanks are extended to all of them.

This important study would not have been possible without the full support and guidance of Dr. Adel El-Beltagy, ICARDA Director-General, whose invaluable input throughout the study is gratefully acknowledged.

We would like also to acknowledge the valuable contribution of Dr. Raj Paroda in his capacity as Executive Secretary of APAARI and Chairman of GFAR, as well as the financial support of GFAR to the Regional Consultation Meeting (May 2002).

The valuable contribution of the ICARDA Follow-Up Committee for CWANA Priority Setting, consisting of Dr. M.C. Saxena (Chairman), Dr. M.B. Solh, Dr. W. Erskine, Dr. A.R. Belaid, Dr. E. Baily and Dr. A. Mazid, is highly appreciated. Thanks are due to ICARDA Regional Coordinators in Central Asia and the Caucasus Region (Dr Raj Paroda and Dr. S.P.S. Beniwal), North Africa Region (Dr. M. El-Mourid), Nile Valley and Red Sea Region (Dr. Habib Halila), North West Asia/Highlands Regions (Dr. A. Amri, Dr. M.G. Mosaad and Dr. H. Ketata) and Arabian Pennisula Region (Dr. Ahmed Moustapha) for their valuable follow up on obtaining responses to the questionnaire from various stakeholders in the region and, in addition, for organizing the Brain-Storming Regional Meetings on Agricultural Research Priority Setting in CWANA sub-regions.

Finally, special thanks are extended to all those who provided comments and suggestions on the early drafts of this report.

I. OVERALL CONTEXT

1.1. Background

At the MTM-2000 in Dresden (Germany), the CGIAR approved a proposal by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for a new vision and strategy and presented in a document entitled: A Food Secure World for All: Toward a New Vision and Strategy for the CGIAR. The endorsement of the proposal was later confirmed at ICW-2000. Articulated around seven planks, the goal and mission of the new CGIAR strategy were defined as follows:

Goal: To reduce poverty, hunger and malnutrition by sustainably increasing the productivity of resources in agriculture, forestry and fisheries.

Mission: To achieve sustainable food security and reduce poverty in developing countries through scientific research and research-related activities in the fields of agriculture, livestock, forestry, fisheries, policy and natural resources management.

In its plank 4 (Regional Approach to Research), the new strategy specifically states that "... the CGIAR should adopt a regional approach to research planning and implementation in order to address the heterogeneous nature of the causes of poverty and food insecurity in different regions and integrate regional priorities with global priorities in international agricultural research". The aim pursued is to implement a bottom-up priority-setting approach in order to foster integration of the CGIAR Centers activities with NARSs' regional agricultural research priorities. This bottom-up approach, intended to promote a multi-stakeholder dialogue, would complement the on-going CGIAR global and eco-regional approaches and would ensure that the identified research priorities of NARSs are used as an input by the CGIAR in its strategic planning process.

To facilitate the implementation of the recommended regional approach to agricultural research, lead regional responsibilities were assigned to particular CG-Centers (through the CDC/CBC Chairs) as follows:

It is within this framework that ICARDA has initiated, in close collaboration with the two sub-regional organizations (SROs) - the Association of Agricultural Research Institutes in the Near East and North Africa (AARINENA) and the Central Asia and Caucasus NARS Forum (CAC-NARS Forum) - a series of consultations, which aim to re-visit agricultural research priorities in the region and to enhance CGIAR/NARS integration in the CWANA region.

The adoption of a regional approach to agricultural research priority setting is not a new endeavor for ICARDA. Over the past two decades, ICARDA has been actively involved in several regional meetings aiming at setting regional priorities:

In WANA, four such regional meetings are worth mentioning:

• Technical Consultation on Agricultural Research in the Near East and North Africa organized by FAO, ICARDA and ISNAR and held in Cyprus, 1983.
• Research Priorities in WANA and Modalities of NARS-ICARDA interaction (ICARDA Special Task Force/Questionnaire to all Concerned Stakeholders in WANA), 1992.
• West Asia and North Africa Regional Forum: Towards a Shared Vision on Agricultural Research in WANA, organized by AARINENA, IFAD, FAO and CGIAR, in 1995 at ICARDA.
• AARINENA Towards 2000 and Beyond: A Strategy for the Future, approved in AARINENA General Assembly held in Iran, May 1998.
  

In CAC, regional research priorities have been addressed in two major events:

• Central Asia and Caucasus: Seed Production and Agricultural Research Priority Setting: organized by GTZ and ICARDA (involving CIMMYT, ICARDA, IPGRI and ISNAR), in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, December 1995.
• Meeting of the CGIAR Task Force on the involvement of the CGIAR in the Central Asia and the Caucasus Tashkent, Uzbekistan, 1996.

As priority setting is a dynamic process and in view of the substantial developments that have occurred in the CWANA region over the past decade, the two sub-regional fora (AARINENA and CAC-NARS Forum) have recently engaged in re-visiting their long-term vision and strategies with the aim to enhance the process of regionalization of agricultural research and foster CGIAR/NARS collaboration and integration.

I.2 Characteristics of the region and major challenges

The CWANA region spreads over two large continents: Africa and Asia. The considerable diversity of the region implies a mosaic of problems confronting agricultural research in particular and agricultural development in general. However, in spite of a very heterogeneous geography, agriculture of the region is characterized by some common features and trends, which reflect the urgency of collaboration and cooperation through a regional agricultural research agenda; these are:

• a relatively large area of which only a small portion is arable;
• a diversified agricultural environment of which a substantial proportion is classified as "less-favored areas", i.e., where agriculture production is significantly constrained by factors such as moisture stress due to low and highly variable rainfall, recurrent drought spells, extreme temperatures, short cropping season, shallow soils, soil nutrient depletion, topography (steep slopes), socioeconomic factors, lack of infrastructure, etc.;
• farming systems that have evolved to cope with the formidable constraints imposed by the harsh natural and economic conditions, through adapted integrated crop/livestock production strategies;
• wheat and barley representing the main components of annual rainfed cropping systems, although crops such as sorghum, especially in the Sudan and the Arabian Peninsula, and cotton, especially in the Caucasus and Egypt (under irrigation), are also important. Food legumes: faba beans, chickpeas, and lentils also represent major components of prevalent annual crop rotations. Other annual crops such as potatoes, summer crops (melons), oilseeds and sugar beet, are also gaining in importance, especially where irrigation is possible. Perennials mostly include olive, almond, fig, and pistachio trees and fodder trees;
• livestock, small ruminants in particular, represent a major component of the farming system. Feed is by far the most limiting factor to the improvement of livestock production. Due to its extensive nature, livestock production mainly relies upon grazing on communal lands that hardly provide the minimum nutrient requirements in view of overstocking and an advanced state of degradation. By and large, the area devoted to forage and fodder crops remains insufficient, showing no sign of growth in spite of a real potential;
• the adverse effects of the difficult climatic and edaphic conditions under which crop and livestock productions are taking place are particularly reflected in the low and unstable productivity levels of rainfed production systems;
• high population growth, especially in West Asia and North Africa countries, which has become the driving force of food demand leading to increasing food deficits as food supply has not kept pace with the increasing demand, leading to increased reliance on imports to fill the resulting gap;
• as a result of low crop production, and lack of income generating opportunities (on as well as off-farm), especially in the less-favored areas where most of the resource-poor smallholders live, household food security remains a serious concern in the region. This in turn is exerting tremendous pressure on most governments of the region to increase food production, at least to maintain politically acceptable levels of food security;
• in view of a short supply of arable land and increasingly scarce water resources, sustainable increases in agricultural production in the less-favored areas will have necessarily to come from sustainable increases in productivity per unit area and unit of water, in particular through a significant improvement in water-use-efficiency at the farm level (more crop per drop);
• the degradation of natural resources, especially soil and water, represents one of the major threats to rural livelihoods. This threat is exacerbated by steady upward trends in population growth (both human and livestock) and by poorly designed technologies. For example, over-pumping of ground water has resulted in increasing salinity level of irrigation water, overgrazing and barley encroachment have led to degradation beyond recovery of most rangeland areas of the region, not to mention extensive loss of biodiversity;
• Poor linkages between research, extension, the farming community, especially women, and policy makers are the norm in the region. This lack of interaction has significantly affected the effectiveness of technology transfer activities. In general, extension programs remain dominated by classical top-down approaches that consider farmers as passive recipients, not to mention dated extension methods which continue to rely on a strategy exclusively geared to the promotion of input intensification rather than input efficiency. Farmers' input in setting research agendas remains the exception rather than the rule. In the very rare instances where participatory mechanisms are in place, they tend, by and large, to benefit high-resource farmers;
• on the policy side, past subsidies on feed, fuel, and machinery have provided strong incentives to farmers to increase their flock size and expand cereal cultivation on fragile lands. Even in high potential areas, degradation of the resource base as a result of intensive cropping, especially mono-cropping, and inappropriate use (overuse) of inputs such as irrigation water, inorganic fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides, has been a major contributing factor to the dwindling crop yields;
• in the CAC sub-region, the abrupt collapse of the monolithic Soviet system has led to a significant decline in agricultural production and productivity. Although considerable progress has been achieved in land reform and privatization, much remains to be done. CAC countries are in transition, moving with difficulty from a highly centralized economy, legacy of the soviet era, towards a market-driven economy. The on-going efforts of privatization of former large scale state farms - initiated against a backdrop of economic recession, loss of major captive (Russia) markets, an abrupt removal of subsidies on fuel, fertilizer, and pesticides - have been beset by inextricable problems leading to a significant decline in crop productivity and food production. As a result, and in spite of enormous research capacity and food production potential, official statistics indicate that about one third of the population is now living below the poverty line;
• in view of current trends of high population growth, negative trade balances, and growing food deficits, significant improvements in agricultural growth are required to keep pace with the escalating food demand. To make matters even worse, this tremendous challenge will have to be met with less resources, in particular less land and much less water as growing urbanization and a dynamic industrial sector are increasingly diverting the supply of these resources from agriculture, not to mention a shrinking rural labor force increasingly attracted by the "urban dream";
• throughout the region the next decade will be crucial in terms of achieving the objectives of food security and poverty alleviation.

Clearly, the CWANA region is facing a series of challenges of such magnitude that NARS/NARS and NARS/CGIAR/other partners' collaboration and cooperation is no longer an option but a necessity. It is now widely admitted that the major market changes currently underway, and the ensuing policy and institutional reforms, will have major effects on agriculture in general and the welfare of farmers in particular. In an era of increasingly open markets and constant communication/information revolutions, the fate of the region agricultural sector will undoubtedly depend on its capacity to "grow in place", i.e., by adopting a regional research/development approach that would create the right conditions and incentives to significantly improve agricultural productivity while preserving the environment.

I.3 Rational for a regional approach to agricultural research and underlying principles

As a result of increasing funding constraints (all too often exacerbated by a lack of expertise, especially in emerging research areas such as integrated natural resources management, biotechnologies, etc.), national agricultural research systems (NARSs) have undertook, over the past years, to organize at the sub-regional and/or regional levels to better tackle common research and development problems through a regionalization process of agricultural research. This effort has in turn led to the emergence of new forms of inter-regional collaboration/cooperation. The establishment of various sub-regional organizations, e.g., AARINENA and CAC-NARS Forum in the CWANA region, and of the Global Forum of Agricultural Research (GFAR) represents one of the key features of such global effort.

On the CGIAR front, the need for a regional approach to agricultural research (priority setting and implementation) is strongly called for in plank 4 of the new strategy (see statement above). A TAC document presented at MTM-2001 in Durban (South Africa) provides further justification for the adoption of a regional approach (1):

"The CGIAR has sustained extensive and highly fruitful collaboration with NARS in basically every region of the world. However, such collaboration is not part of a comprehensive approach to poverty reduction. The renewed attention to a regional approach, with region defined in a geopolitical sense, would increase the possibility of integrating the regional and national research plans into national and regional development plans and comprehensive poverty reduction strategies, and improve the impact of agricultural research conducted by the CGIAR and NARS".

The relevance and viability of a regional approach to agricultural research will greatly depend on the perceived add value the concerned stakeholders expect to derive from the initiative. Although benefit differentials should always be expected, to be socially desirable a regional research initiative should meet a sort of Pareto criterion whereby the expected gains to be derived should make all concerned partners (stakeholders) better off or at least make some better off while no one is made worse off as a result. To increase the likelihood of value addition, the focus of a regional collaborative program must, therefore, target a portfolio of shared research problems (projects) that would enable all partners, regardless of their size and capacity, to capture some gains induced by the regional program. The advantages of a regional research process could materialize under various forms key of which could be summarized as follows:

• Economies of scale: the magnitude of the challenges facing the countries of the region calls for a research agenda that would necessitate high investment (large fixed entry costs) and expertise levels that no individual NARSs of the region is able to afford on its own. Therefore, a regional approach would enable the development of a critical mass of research that could lead to substantial economies of scale;
• Synergies and complementarity: by and large, the increasing scarcity of resources at the regional level has been exacerbated by a high degree of research duplication leading to an extreme dilution of resources. Seeking regional complementarity and synergies, based on NARSs' comparative advantage, would significantly reduce research duplication and would enhance the efficient use of scarce regional resources;
• Enhanced exchange flow: a regional approach would promote the exchange flow among scientists and institutions and would enhance the sharing of information, methodologies, and experiences;
• Internalizing spillovers (spillins): due to the nature of agricultural research outputs, many countries, especially within a sub-region, are usually able to derive significant gains (spillins) from other countries' research. The real possibility to tap on such valuable research spillins has very often been used by some countries as a justification for under-investing in their national agricultural research program. A regional approach to agricultural research represents a logical and efficient path to internalizing such positive externalities;
• Enhancing attractiveness of external funds: as many NARSs of the region continue to rely on external funding for investing in agricultural research, a regional research agenda may reveal more attractive to donor agencies.

Although the above generic advantages are widely recognized, the following potential disadvantages are worth mentioning as well:

• High transaction costs: in spite of its many advantages, a regional approach to research may be plagued by relatively high transaction costs, e.g., time of scientists involved, especially for regional coordination and monitoring of regional projects;
• Monitoring (follow-up): depending on the size of the region under consideration and the resources available, the adequate monitoring of regional project activities may pose serious problems that could significantly affect the quality of the expected deliverables;
• Ownership: the research capacity of the NARSs involved in a regional research program could be very heterogeneous. "Strong" NARSs often tend to play a dominant role within a regional framework, which in turn could lead to inadequate sharing of ownership and to potential misunderstandings and even conflicts. Building a multi-stakeholder dialogue is a very challenging task; building a multi-stakeholder ownership is clearly even more challenging;
• Bureaucracy: by and large, regional collaboration tends to lead to a proliferation of networks and red tape that could not only dilute the available resources but also give rise to a bureaucratic environment that significantly slows down action and hence expected impact.
  

A key purpose of a regional research agenda is to lay the foundation of a regional partnership that would facilitate consensus on the identification of common agricultural research priorities to be addressed within a regional framework, which would enhance synergies, efficiency, and impact. The basic premise being that such a regional process would strengthen NARS/NARS partnerships and create opportunities for a more efficient division of labor and more efficient use of other resources that would greatly enhance the likelihood of impact. Clearly, the effectiveness of regional research initiatives will greatly depend on the facility with which consensus, on the common problems and strategies among the partners, is reached. Therefore, to be successful and sustainable a regional research undertaking needs to be guided by a few underlying principles:

· First, the quality of partnership relations is clearly the key to ensuring a lasting and effective regional collaboration and cooperation for the mutual benefit of all partners. In other words, trust, mutual respect, and full attribution of credit should be the overriding principles governing regional partnerships ;
· Second, a successful regional collaboration would be difficult to envisage without a long-term commitment from all concerned partners. The willingness and readiness of partners to make such commitment must be unequivocal and clearly stated at the outset of the process because no matter how generous external funding may be, all partners will have to commit some of their own resources to regional activities if the latter are to be sustained;
· Third, in view of increasing resource scarcity resulting from sustained budget shrinkage, serious competition may arise in the allocation of resources between national and regional activities. Therefore, it would be unreasonable to expect significant and sustained national contributions to regional research initiatives if the latter does not hold a clear promise for tangible benefits to all partners. In other words, commitment would likely happen only if the regional undertaking were expected to be of value (incentives) to the concerned partners;
· Fourth, the identification of (research) areas of convergence at the regional level strongly depends on the existence of clearly established national research priorities. Clearly, regional congruence will be difficult to achieve when national research priorities have not been clearly identified (2).

(1) Regional Approach to Research for the CGIAR and its Partners. TAC Secretariat, April 2001. Presented at Mid-Term Meeting 2001, May 21-25, Durban, South Africa.

(2) It must be clear, however, that regional research priorities are not obtained by adding up national research priorities. Rather, they constitute a set of common issues jointly identified and addressed by a group of regional stakeholders (NARSs). Obviously, there exist research priorities that are specific to given NARSs and hence are not shared at the regional level. However, all agreed upon regional research priorities should reflect priorities already included in the national research agenda.

II. THE PRIORITY SETTING PROCESS ADOPTED IN THE CWANA REGION

Since its inception (1977) ICARDA has regularly consulted with the NARSs on the identification of their agricultural research priorities relevant to its mandate(3). Such a long and sustained ICARDA/NARS consultation process takes place at two levels: i) national level through annual national coordination meetings initiated since 1977 and ii) sub-regional level through regional coordination meetings - initiated since 1979 in WANA and since 1996 in CAC(4). Sister CGIAR Centers also participate in these meetings through their staff posted either at ICARDA, e.g., CIMMYT, IPGRI, and ICRISAT, or in the region. The ICARDA/NARS dialogue also takes place through other numerous ad-hoc consultation opportunities. For example, the WANA regional priorities for livestock research have been established in two consultation meetings held jointly by ILRI and ICARDA in 1995 and 1997 with participation of NARSs of the region.

2.1 Key features of the process

Being a dynamic process, the setting of regional agricultural research priorities is in a perpetual need of re-visiting, especially in view of emerging (and tremendous) challenges that need to be rapidly and adequately addressed. Therefore, the regular up-dating of the identified regional priorities is an essential exercise to be undertaken in order to improve their focus throughout.

Rural poverty, food insecurity, climate change, desertification, and the globalization of markets are among key challenges facing the region and which call for a global and concerted action plan to be carried out through innovative and diversified forms of partnership involving as wide as possible spectrum of stakeholders among which NARIs, SROs, NGOs, the private sector, universities, farmers' organizations, CG and non-CG centers, and donors. As mentioned earlier, ICARDA and its CWANA partners have been actively engaged, over the past several years, in the setting of agricultural research priorities and the formulation of regional agricultural research strategies. Building on these past efforts and experiences, ICARDA and the two SROs (AARINENA and CAC NARS Forum), have launched a region-wide initiative aiming at re-visiting and refocusing CWANA research priorities through an innovative consultation mechanism relying on a bottom-up approach and broader participation including "non-traditional" stakeholders. The emphasis on a wide inter-stakeholder dialogue to set research priorities clearly represents a major departure from the traditional forms of CGIAR/NARSs' consultations often circumscribed to a selected number of NARIs, farmers, and ministry officials(5). The key features of the new approach adopted by ICARDA and its partners in the CWANA region to set regional agricultural research priorities therefore consist in:

• Broadening dialogue through participation of a wide range of stakeholders including farmer's organizations, universities, NGOs, private sector, grassroots organizations, investors, donors, etc. in addition to the national agricultural research institutes (NARIs);
• Enhancing coordination and integration of CG-Centers' research activities undertaken in the region;
• Seeking complementarity in tackling the regional research agenda based on comparative advantages of NARS and CG-Centers;
• Capitalizing on the NARSs' strengths to serve regional needs (outsourcing).
  

Over the past two decades, the CGIAR has made significant, and often decisive, contributions to the global effort to improve food security and reduce poverty throughout the developing world; although more efforts need to be made as the rate of decline of poverty remains below expectations. From the CGIAR point of view, the overall goal of the regional priority setting process set in motion over the past year in the CWANA region, as well as other regions under its mandate, is to enhance the effectiveness of the CG system in working with the NARSs of the region to better address their (agricultural research) priority problems and the challenges posed by increasing natural resource degradation, reflected through alarming desertification and loss of biodiversity, and unacceptable levels of rural poverty and food insecurity(6). This innovative regional undertaking is anchored on the determination of all concerned stakeholders, in particular the CGIAR, the SROs, GFAR, and the NARSs, to improve the economic and social wellbeing of CWANA rural communities through enhanced productivity and sustainability of the region's agricultural production systems.

The regional priority setting and integration exercise launched in CWANA, therefore, aims to lay the foundation for a renewed NARS/NARS and NARS/CGIAR partnership through the identification, on a consensus basis, of common agricultural research priorities that are best handled at the sub-regional and/or regional level(7). Its specific objectives consist in:

1. Re-visiting sub-regional and regional research priorities with the aim to factor-in the global, regional, and national developments that have occurred over the past few years;
2. Identifying the CGIAR niche within the NARSs' regional priorities;
3. Defining a coherent CGIAR strategy in CWANA;
4. Developing an action plan to implement such a strategy;
5. Harmonizing and integrating CGIAR activities within CWANA research priorities;

To be viable, the elaboration of a regional research agenda must reflect the combination of different perspectives, in particular of the various NARSs involved and of different stakeholder groups within these NARSs. The approach used in the CWANA exercise was designed to address two main concerns: i) ensure that the process develops through a bottom-up approach, and ii) that the consultation involves as broader range of stakeholders as possible. The approach, implemented under the leadership of the two SROs and facilitated by ICARDA, is centered around three pillar activities: 1) a series of sub-regional brainstorming meetings; 2) a questionnaire widely distributed across the region to various stakeholders; and 3) a final regional meeting that brought together (national, regional, and international) stakeholders with different backgrounds and levels of responsibility within the national agricultural research system. The three activities are briefly described below.

2.2. Sub-regional brainstorming meetings

The CWANA regional priority setting exercise, and its corollary the integration process, has been formally initiated through five sub-regional brainstorming meetings held between September 2001 and January 2002. One of the aims of these sub-regional consultations was to broaden partnership and set the tone for a multistakeholder dialogue and preliminary discussions on the identification of agricultural research priorities of each sub-region. The terms of reference and the schedule of the brainstorming meetings were developed in close collaboration with AARINENA, the CAC-NARS Forum and the Global Forum for Agricultural Research (GFAR). Countries' participation in, and venue of, the five brainstorming meetings were as follows:

• Central Asia and Caucasus (CAC) sub-region: 20 September 2001 in Tashkent (Uzbekistan) with participation of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan;
• Nile Valley and Red Sea (NVRS) sub-region: 27 September 2001 in Cairo (Egypt), with participation of Egypt, Ethiopia, Sudan, and Yemen;
• West Asia (WA) sub-region: 18-19 November 2001 in Aleppo (Syria) with participation of Cyprus, Jordan, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, and Turkey;
• North Africa (NA) sub-region: 8-9 January 2002 in Hammamet (Tunisia) with participation of Algeria, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco, and Tunisia; and
• Arabian Peninsula (AP) sub-region: 24 January 2002 in Kuwait City (Kuwait) with participation of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen(8).
  

Based on the discussions and debates that took place during these brainstorming meetings, it was clear that all stakeholders were placing increasing emphasis on environmental issues mainly through calls for sustained research and policy efforts to preserve water, soil, and also genetic resources. By and large, water has emerged as the central issue in the region. It was suggested to address the water issue at three different levels: watershed, community, and farm and through various research themes among which water-use-efficiency at the farm level, sustainable management of ground and surface water, safe use of waste and brackish water, salinity control, and institutional and policy aspects of water use and management.

The views expressed and the suggestions made during the meetings were all in support of sub-regional and regional research collaboration and cooperation. It was indicated that sub-regional agricultural research priorities must be viewed as "the smallest common research denominator" among NARSs of the sub-region. A strong consensus emerged on the need for the NARSs of the sub-regions to foster collaboration and cooperation, first among themselves and second with international/regional centers, and other research organizations, which are active in the respective sub-regions(9). There was a unanimous agreement that a renewed and strengthened partnership is critical for the development and implementation of sustainable agricultural research policies, which would foster economic development through sustained agricultural growth while preserving the natural resource base.

The research priority setting exercise launched by ICARDA, AARINENA, and the CAC NARS Forum represents an important undertaking in view of the urgency to tackle the problems of poverty, food insecurity, and natural resource degradation. In these brainstorming meetings a consensus was reached that strong research-extension-development linkages constitute the surest and most efficient path to agricultural development, hence to addressing the challenges faced by the region, in particular improving food security, alleviating poverty, and reversing the degradation of the environment.

In view of the common concern on natural resource management, it was indicated that there is an urgent need and clear potential payoffs to raise the awareness of the general public with regard to the importance of natural resource management (NRM), not only for agriculture development but also for sustainable economic development in general. Capacity for inter-stakeholder dialogue and consultation could be enhanced at all levels: national, sub-regional, and regional, by forging alliances with "non-traditional" partners with complementary resources and expertise to enrich the process of research priority setting underway. Such partners include universities, the private sector, NGOs, regional and national development agencies, farmers' organizations, etc.

2.3 Questionnaire

The bottom-up approach sought for the identification of agricultural research priorities was further re-enforced by means of a comprehensive questionnaire, undertaken between January and April 2002, and widely distributed to various categories of stakeholders across the region. The questionnaire, prepared by ICARDA with contribution from sister centers and the two SROs, was designed to elicit information on agricultural research priorities, sub-regional and regional cooperation, cooperation with CG-Centers including mechanisms to enhance integration of the CGIAR activities within regional priorities. Using information provided by the two SROs, CG-centers active in the region, and ICARDA regional offices, a list of recipients, including representatives from NARIs, NGOs, universities, the private sector, farmers' organizations, etc., was established and over 500 questionnaires distributed throughout the CWANA region (Figures 1 & 2 exhibit questionnaire distribution and return rates/sub-region).

However, although questionnaire recipients included representatives of all relevant stakeholders' categories, the bulk of respondents were NARIs' representatives (researchers and managers), which obviously would have implications on the survey results(10). Therefore, to make this initiative more meaningful, more efforts are needed to ensure a larger participation of non-traditional stakeholders (farmers and NGOs) as their participation in this questionnaire appears rather symbolic, especially in the Arabian Peninsula sub-region (Table 1). In spite of these obvious limitations in terms of stakeholder representativeness, the results of the survey, nevertheless, provide interesting insights and valuable information (see summary of key results in annex 2).

Figure 1a. Questionnaire distribution/sub-region

Figure 1b: Number of completed questionnaires returned/sub-region

Note: Percentage in parenthesis represents the ratio of questionnaires returned to questionnaires distributed at the sub-regional level. In view of the time allocated and conditions for the implementation of the survey, the rate of return of 67% (340 questionnaires returned out of 504 distributed) is an acceptable rate. The West Asia sub-region had the lowest rate of returned questionnaires (61.8%) while North Africa had the highest with over three quarters (78.5%) of questionnaires distributed were returned.

2.4 The regional consultation

The purpose of the brainstorming meetings and the survey was mainly to prepare the ground for a regional and broader consultation during which regional agricultural research priorities will be identified. The process leading to the identification of regional research priorities, therefore, culminated by a regional consultation held on 8-10 May 2002 at ICARDA headquarters in Aleppo (Syria). Participation (over 100 participants) included senior representatives from 29 countries as well as representatives from the two regional organizations (AARINENA and CAC-NARS Forum), GFAR, 6 CG-centers (CIMMYT, ICARDA, ICLARM, IFPRI, ILRI, and IPGRI), 2 international non-CG centers (CIHEAM and ICBA), 1 regional center (ACSAD), 1 UN organization (OSS) and a regional organization (Maghreb Union). Country representation consisted in a wide range of stakeholders including NARIs, universities, NGOs, farmers, and the private sector (the complete list of participants is shown in Annex 3). Throughout the consultation, the emphasis was on seeking convergence and consensus for setting regional research priorities in order to overcome the problems confronting the region.

Being the conclusion of a process launched a few months earlier at the national and sub-regional level, the consultation builds on the outcomes and recommendations of the five sub-regional brainstorming meetings and on the key findings of the survey. It was structured as follows (see program of the consultation in Annex 4):

• Three plenary sessions that set the tone of the meeting. Session I was devoted to welcome and opening statements by Dr. Mustafa Yaghi, President of AARINENA, Dr. Azimkhan Satybaldyn, Chairman of the CAC-NARS Forum, Dr. Raj Paroda, Chairman of GFAR, and Prof. Dr. Adel El-Beltagy, Director General of ICARDA. An introductory presentation, by Dr. M. B. Solh, ADG-International Cooperation, ICARDA, outlined the objectives and expected outcomes of the consultation and provided participants with the chronology of the process followed. Session II provided an overview of current agricultural research priorities in CWANA by means of 3 presentations covering WANA (by Dr. C. Hilan, Executive Secretary of AARINENA), CAC (Dr. A. Satybaldyn, Chairman of CAC-NARS Forum), and the CGIAR (Dr. W. Erskine, ADG-R ICARDA). Session III was devoted to the presentation of the APAARI experience in agricultural research priority setting and the presentation of the preliminary results of the CWANA survey undertaken in the region.
• Parallel sub-regional working groups were established to re-visit and finalize the agricultural research priorities identified during the sub-regional brainstorming meetings. A background presentation highlighting the outcomes of the brainstorming meetings set the scene of the respective working groups. To keep the debate focused, the working groups were provided with a series of questions to be addressed. Upon validation of the sub-regional research priorities, the working groups reported their findings to the plenary (session V).
• The last session of the second day (session VI) was dedicated to a comparative analysis of sub-regional priorities, validated by the respective working groups, in order to identify those priorities that are common to the region. Following a very frank and lively debate, a consensus was reached leading to the identification of regional agricultural priorities of the CWANA region, presented in Annex 1. The priorities identified could be grouped into five clusters: 1) Germplasm Management, 2) Natural Resource Management, 3) Socio-Economics & Policy, 4) Cross-Cutting Issues, and 5) Methodologies & Approaches. Germplasm management was further disaggregated into 3 sub-clusters: a) Crops, b) Animals, and c) Fisheries. Moreover, three research areas have been identified as major specific challenges to the region: 1) Desertification, 2) Mountain Production Systems; and 3) Drought Mitigation(11).

(3) The same process was later extended (since 1995) to NARSs of the CAC region.
(4) The sub-regional coordination meetings used to be held annually, on a rotational basis, following the national coordination meetings. Starting in 1998 the frequency of the sub-regional meetings has been changed to once every two years.

(5) In the recent past, CG-Centers' collaboration with NARSs was by and large confined to focal National Agricultural Research Institutes (NARIs). Over the past few years, however, the CG-Centers/NARSs partnership has evolved to include other national stakeholders among which universities, extension, NGOs, the private sector, grassroots organizations, etc. In the CG literature, the latter are referred to as "non-traditional" stakeholders, a term also used in this report.
(6) According to latest estimates, over one billion people still live in absolute poverty throughout the world.
(7) As mentioned earlier, sub-regional and/or regional priorities are by no means the sum of national research priorities.

(8) In view of its diversified ecologies, Yemen is included in two ICARDA regional programs: Nile Valley and Red Sea (NVRS) and Arabian Peninsula (AP). Moreover, some countries of the region under the AARINENA umbrella are also affiliated to other SROs. For example, Iran and Pakistan are also members of the Asian-Pacific Association of Agricultural Research Institutes (APAARI), while Eritrea, Ethiopia, and Sudan are also members of the Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in East and Central Africa (ASARECA).

(9) However, it must be pointed out that based on the national research priorities outlined, there are clear trends indicating that some NARSs are more interested than others to (re-) orient research towards export commodities, i.e., more client-driven research. If such trends materialize it is not clear what role sub-regional and regional collaboration would have to play, in view of increasing trade liberalization and its corollary stiff competition, which may reveal a serious stumbling block to building sub-regional collaboration.

* FTE stands for full time equivalent
Note: N represents the number of respondents who answered this specific question of the questionnaire. At the regional level, only 48.2% have answered (243 out of 504).

(10) Three versions (Arabic, English, and Russian) of the questionnaire were made available. The poor rate of response from farmers, NGOs, and extension was probably due to lack of information and insufficient assistance at the country level. The implications of such sample biases are clearly reflected in the survey results reported in Annex 2.

(11) The degree of priority of the research areas identified as having a regional importance was set as follows: first, key regional problem areas were identified (the five clusters mentioned above); second, within each regional problem area identified, priority research themes were identified; third, each sub-region was asked to give a score, on a scale of 1-to-5 (1 being very high priority and 5 being low priority) to each priority regional research theme identified; fourth, a regional score was computed for each identified regional research theme by adding up the sub-regional scores; and fifth, within each cluster, the degree of priority of each research theme of regional importance is determined based on its regional score (the higher the score the lower the priority) obtained by adding the sub-regional scores.