CGIAR Reform: unpacking the principles and the processes in the African context By Yemi Akinbamijo

Yemi Akinbamijo

There was hardly a time in history when developing countries, particularly those in Africa, needed the CGIAR more than they do now. By the time the global population stabilizes in the 2050s, and the Africa we want as enshrined in the African Union’s Agenda2063,  Africa will need 60% more food than is produced now, on a land base that is rapidly approaching its ecological limits. Much of the additional global food will be needed in Africa because the continent leads the pack with a population that is growing the fastest. Aggravating this grim demographic scenario is the growing scourge of climate change – a brunt visited on Africa mainly due to activities from other continents. Against this backdrop, is the recognition that more than 950 million people in 93 countries go to bed hungry, a high proportion of which, are in Africa.  More than being fed, food and nutrition security entails the production and utilization of food with nutrients in the right balance.

There is no doubt that the CGIAR has been playing a pivotal role in supporting developing nations, especially over the last fifty years, to meet this food and nutrition security challenge by helping to rapidly increase agricultural production and productivity, particularly in Africa where these indicators lag behind the rest of the developing world.

- Advertisement -

But the challenge is not only about food and nutrition security. The agriculture sector must contribute much more to sustainable economic growth and development, and serve as a means of much more gainful employment. The size of the population in Africa is currently under 1.4 billion and 60% of these are under 25 years. However, the industrial and service sectors where the demand is for more knowledge rather than labour-intensive workers, will not absorb most of Africa’s youth. Agriculture must do much, much more than it does now.

It is clear that to attain the much-needed economic transformation, food, and nutrition security, the agriculture sector must contend with increasingly erratic weather patterns, changing climate, the pandemic, and now the crisis in eastern Europe.  It is therefore imperative that new agricultural technologies are deployed faster, not only to adapt to these conditions but to mitigate them. In other words, we must green our economies with agriculture playing a big role and as we say, doubling productivity with half the inputs without further degrading the physical environment.

- Advertisement -

To achieve this noble goal has been the core value of many of the Advanced Research Institutes in operation worldwide but with emphasis on developing economies whose growth depend largely on agriculture. This is the cohort of research institutions that make up the Consultative Group of International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). In order to attain efficiency, the CGIAR has reinvented itself during many years of reform – trying to do better, what they do best. As the collective voice for research and development on the continent, in principle, FARA is delighted at the idea of the current reform which also implies the coalition of research centres in the context of the One CGIAR. Indeed, over the last couple of years, most of the Advance Research Institutes within the CGIAR cohort had celebrated their golden jubilee – singularly or collectively.  These are over 50 years of meaningful contribution to livelihoods and national economies. These institutions very rapidly became the bastion of high-end agricultural research and innovation achievements on the continent as the results of the research generated from them helped to liberate people from the pangs of hunger, malnutrition and poverty.

Innovations around rice, cassava, aquaculture, ruminant livestock and poultry, fodder agronomy, pulses, dryland cereals, general agricultural practices, bioengineering and biofortification etc are some of the visible footprints of the CGIAR. These solutions would have been otherwise impossible in Africa without the support of these institutions conducting upstream science in agricultural research. The outcome of these scientific interventions in the human development indices have been phenomenal.

In terms of human capital development and as a firsthand beneficiary of the CGIAR human capacity development plans myself, I was able to conduct high-end research in four countries in the course of my doctoral studies. I had benefitted from the CGIAR at a time when the significant emphasis was placed on developing the capacities of Africa and Africans to conduct the Africa-oriented science, and we did just that! That was almost three decades ago and still counting. There are certainly hundreds like me who have greater and better stories to tell and are making their strides courtesy of the benevolence of the CGIAR Training Programs for Africans. Let me be very clear here, that the CGIAR means well and very well at that, for Africa.

What informed the reform and the misinformed conceptions and contraptions?

As the global dynamics within the economic topsy-turvy began to hit all spheres of the common man, the donor-dependent research and innovation in agriculture was bound to feel the heat. The thinking to rationalize the Centres with a view to optimizing resources was no longer farfetched as donor support was dwindling and the concept of ‘donor fatigue’ became alter ego. The donors dictate the pace, the show, and the reform!

Consequently, in the past two years, there has been a lot of discussion on sustainable models to support the much-taunted agricultural transformation on the continent. The investments in time and energy devoted to the good intentions behind the One CGIAR was enormous. To be clear, there is nothing wrong with reforms in themselves. They are the second chance to fix the odds. Therefore, for all the strong and good reasons, the reform was heralded with a lot of excitement. Reactions to this change were as diverse as the interests that the various centres served, varying from outright withdrawal to aloofness, to wait-and-see and outright acceptance. It then appeared as though we have a lopsided game even as intentions were most sincere and noble. For example, in the grand scheme of things,  the Global South, by omission or commission is struggling to be seen. Even more notably, continental apex institutions like FARA and the SROs to some extent have been consistently left out of the reform processes and principles. It should have been the case that the continent that deserves the highest attention of the outcomes of the One CGIAR should have been rigorously engaged on the methodology, processes and outcomes of the reform.  This would have meant that all stakeholders are properly placed and paced as the reform unfolds the pathway and challenges en route are fully anticipated, leaving no one behind. In our opinion, the current call for a proper articulation for an African common position is non-negotiable and a pointer to the fact that there are issues demanding immediate answers.  Judging by the optics and body language of the key actors, I believe that the intention to resolve the impasse is also there.

It was understood that the consolidation of the One CG Reform would lead to a stronger system cohesion and output in a way that allows for the Centres to be better.  However, the clear hesitation in some quarters deserves further attention. Critically, there is need to respond to the flurry of demands on Africa-based institutions, who hold documented legal custodianship by African nations. Time has now come for Africa to present its own anticipation of the reform and where synergy can be best exploited in a win-win scenario.

For the avoidance of doubt, an inclusive One CGIAR for Africa must change the game plan from One-CGIAR that consolidates all powers in the centre only to dole out governance instruments from the core to one that must now empower African member institutions in all boldness, to confront the social ills of hunger, malnutrition and poverty on the continent.

It is time we got our acts together and take calculated steps.  Nigeria, Kenya, Ethiopia and Cote d’Ivoire (host countries for IITA, ILRI, ICRAF and Africa Rice respectively) must now make themselves heard in no unmistaken terms, take the bull by the horn and push for the Equitable Vison of One CGIAR – one that is intrinsically inclusive with a bottom-up approach..

There is no doubt that there will be significant shifts of power and direction in the Africa-based Centres. However, the interregnum (whenever they happen) ought to be manned properly without losing grounds. Otherwise, it will turn out to be the effacing of the strong voices and champions of the ‘Strengthen African Institution’ calls among others. The succession plans in these institutions should not be degrading of the governance mechanism that has been built over the past decades. For example, the replacement of the Boards of Trustees/Directors with defanged Centre Managers taking instructions and resources from outside Africa must now be revisited in the best interest of Africa! Africa deserves strong institutions – if the reform will not build, it should not break!

We have come of age in Africa. We have the capacity for institutional governance, human resource management and fiduciary matters. It will no longer be worthwhile for African institutions to be governed from Washington, Rome or Montpellier. The strong message is: Make African Institutions resilient by systematically strengthening them. This is the

Equitable Vision for Africa.

Africa at Crossroads and the Transition Agenda of the One CGIAR

 The reform in its current design has systemic fault lines that are inimical to the agricultural research and development agenda of Africa. Left unchecked, it will leave the continent with puppet centres that can no longer determine their own trajectory outside the decisions made on their behalf from outside Africa! This transition agenda will leave Africa hamstrung by the erosion of the autonomy of African institutions and their associated governance mechanisms. By all intents and purposes, after almost six decades of the presence of capacity-building CGIAR, if the rights to self govern and the determination of our own destinies are further withdrawn, then something is intrinsically wrong with our growth plan and the future is bleak and jeaopardised!

The Roundtable is the  next best moment for Africa to have a deep reflection on the One CGIAR Reform and review the processes and plans for the future. It will be the moment to be seen and heard before the boat takes to sea. Where will Africa be once the strongest R&D institutions on the continent lose their autonomy and governance to other agencies? This is now set to happen with the stampede approach of closing the reform in 2022 and ceding staff, assets and governance instruments to the One CGIAR System in Montpellier. The IA is being shoved down the throat of centres without recourse to the headquarter agreements signed with the countries, but the continent and its opinion leaders will be needed more than ever before to help galvanize a continental response to this clandestine move.

As stated in my opening paragraphs, we certainly applaud and recognize the great work and thinking behind the One CGIAR reform. However, we rebuff the weakening of African institutions, which the reform in its current configuration portends in strong terms. To have ignored the African AR4D institutions in having a say on the evolution of the One-CGIAR where Africa is concerned, is a huge gap that must be addressed immediately. So far, there has been no formal redress of the fading glimmer of hope that there is the goodwill to amend this oversight.

This is the call of Africa for ‘Equitable Vision of the One CGIAR in Africa – The Africa we want! This Forum will be convened and consisting of the Board Chairs of the FARA, SROs, voices of the NARS, opinion leaders and strategic agencies on the continent.

In its proper role as the continental coordinating platform for Africa’s agricultural R&D, FARA has decided to put together a FARA-One CGIAR African Roundtable. This is the place to bring the voice of Africa to the table. Africa must unpack the One CGIAR Reform, understand it in its widest implications and then decide what its next steps will look like. The current governance mechanism of the One-CGIAR can demonstrate stronger balance and equity in its composition and decisions.

With no time to lose in Africa in the war against food and nutrition security and in taking the Feed Africa core values further, African stakeholders in Agricultural Research for Development spaces must gird up and engage all partners -technical and financial to discuss the future scenarios for a food and nutrition secure Africa. The Roundtable must now focus on the wider implication of the One CGIAR reform for Africa. This sort of consultation should have happened two years ago at the beginning of the reform, rather than an afterthought that it now presents. Albeit it is still a good moment – better late than never- to have the African say in its owns destiny. To have left the farmers out of the whole conversation and all other mechanisms in place on the continent in the new design leaves a big gap in the context of inclusivity in the policy and approaches to development. It is a discountenance of the intelligence of the operators on ground which at best is a tactical error that is akin to attempt to shave one’s hair in absentia. We were expecting a shared vision and not just to be handed one.

• The need for African to have the right to decide the evolution of the Research and Innovation Agenda of the continent and the associated governance/institutional mechanisms.

  Some key issues begging for attention

• In the repartition of the continent into three blocks, which institutions or entities were consulted? What informed this division at a time when Africa needs a holistic approach to its growth agenda? The fragmentation of Africa is inconsistent with the one integral vision of the African Union and its programs for the holistic development agenda of the continent viz CAADP, STISA, Malabo Declaration, Agenda 2063. North Africa and NAASRO will be wiped out in the current arrangement!

• Why empower the hub at the expense of the spokes? Like a true federation, we need very strong arm and a much weaker coordinating mechanism at the centre. The reverse is currently the case. Strengthening the One CGIAR with a strong coordination mechanism in France and weak institutions across our continent is akin to a strong General with a weak army. As the saying goes, a bird never flies with one wing!

• The current institutional arrangements of the One CGIAR will weaken and undermine regional and subregional institutions. As the Technical Arm of the African Union (and SROs for the RECs), FARA is the logical Coordination Centre for Africa and the natural liaison office for the One CGIAR-Africa. Why is this so difficult to achieve? Where is the strengthening of FARA and the subregional institutions? Why is FARA out of the Reform?

• For the reform to be meaningful to Africa and Africans, FARA and the SROs must be the entry point of the One CGIAR in Africa. It will have the highest mileage/impact if FARA is strengthened and transformed to become the One CGIAR-Africa locus. This is the true essence of institutional strengthening. Furthermore, with a mandate from the African Union Commission, FARA represents the best coherent regional voice at the System Council not individuals without the continental mandate. However, FARA has no seat there
• It is absurd that Africa and Africans are not visible in the governance of the One-CGIAR.

• Africa needs to have internal consultations in order to obtain cohesion and a common position on the One CGIAR, not a conflagration. The continent needs to be consulted and informed as the reform progresses and be heard when it brings its own decisions to the table through FARA, the technical arm of the AUC/AUDA. So far, this is not happening, and permanent decisions are being made for Africa, not by Africans and certainly not with Africans.

• Somehow, the central players who drive Africa’s agrifood systems have been left out of the conversation. Where are the African Farmers in the conversation?

• Sub-Saharan Africa is no longer an acceptable geopolitical descriptor of any part of the continent by the African Union.

• Is One CGIAR open to other pathways to achieve similar goals?

As the One CGIAR transition has been rolling out, it is also emerging that we have serious concerns with the vision that is evolving.

• We expected an integrated CGIAR—not a CGIAR Corporation. A decentralized, streamlined, and nimble One CGIAR—not a centralized, top-heavy bureaucratic one
• we expected the One CGIAR to build on, not weaken the capabilities of the African Centres of Africa Rice, IITA, ILRI and ICRAF which the Governments of Cote d’Ivoire, Nigeria Kenya and Ethiopia have helped support and nurture over the past 50 years, and capitalize on their close, long-standing partnerships they have built with agricultural research and development institutions across the continent. It is our loss that ICRAF, ICRISAT and CIFOR took the decision not to join One CGIAR and worthy of asking ourselves why.
• Most of all FARA and the African constituencies expected to be adequately consulted on the vision not just to be handed one.
• It is also unclear where Africa’s apex institution for the coordination of Africa’s agricultural research and innovation (The Forum for Agricultural research in Africa) has been placed in the context of the reform.
• Our expectation is that this continental organ and its subsidiaries – the Sub regional institutions should be strengthened and positioned to lead the Africa process after more than 50 years of capacity support to the continent.

• Africa more than ever before needs the institutions in Africa that it has helped create over time. It cannot agree to exchange these for far away executing Agencies in Europe or elsewhere for that matter. We cannot agree to bequeath our Headquarters and other Agreements to the One CGIAR we see evolving; the African Common Position on this is firm and unequivocal. Africa ought to have been consulted on the One CGIAR reform process and principles. We are behind a One CGIAR endeavour that includes the characteristics that have been. Given the challenges indicated earlier, the CGIAR and its centres are too important to Africa to be experimented with.
  Dr Yemi Akinbamijo, Executive Director of the Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA) based in Accra Ghana.