The CGIAR Chairman introduced the item, and briefly explained the separate but linked\ud
external programme and management review process.\ud
The EPR report findings were presented by Panel Chair Paul Vlek. He commended the\ud
expertise of both panels. The EPR Panel took a retrospective and prospective view and\ud
focused on strategic and programmatic matters, mission relevance and quality of science, and\ud
accomplishments and impact. It noted the Centre’s excellent science output, but also that it is\ud
losing its competitive advantage in Asia. Its international public goods (IPGs) impact/delivery\ud
in Africa is not clear and the Panel felt that ICRISAT had not followed the recommendation\ud
of the fourth EPMR to focus on and contribute to Africa. The Centre does not have a solid\ud
footing in Africa, and is even losing ground, i.e. it lacks a critical mass in Africa.\ud
Management problems that were apparent include excessive changes in management, unstable\ud
organization, shifting vision and mission, dwindling support, and lack/weak fundraising\ud
strategy. In addition, it’s new vision/mission is rather broad. Global themes will, however,\ud
help integration.\ud
He gave an overview of the recommendations in the report, and noted that this is a defining\ud
moment for ICRISAT. Many activities need to be phased out in Asia and moved to Africa. It\ud
should rethink the Virtua l University, which does not appear to have any comparative\ud
advantage, lacks critical mass and is not delivering IPGs. Strategic upstream activities should\ud
be maintained in Asia, but its main activities and HQ should be moved to Africa. Most\ud
importantly, it needs a strategy for SSA.\ud
He concluded by thanking the ICRISAT staff, field teams and the CGIAR for the opportunity\ud
to serve the System.\u