It is undeniable that IRRI has been through a difficult period in the last few years. Several members of the most senior management staff have left, and their permanent replacements are mostly not in place yet. It is essential that the latter be of high calibre, and they should be allowed a reasonable period in which to settle into their new jobs before undertaking further change. The Staff Restructuring Programme, introduced in 1997 to balance staff needs with new responsibilities and to bring the budget into longer-term balance, is still clear in the memories of staff at all levels. However, this is now over, and we trust that IRRI can now provide salaries and other benefits that are competitive with other organizations. These administrative measures are an essential part of the re-stabilization of IRRI.
Rapid changes in science and in the science environment are becoming apparent, and the Panel believes that these present both opportunities and dangers for IRRI. The most prominent of these is that biotechnology, after a period of gestation, has quite suddenly come to fruition, and has started to produce extremely valuable outputs, both in new techniques that support conventional plant breeding and in the production of genetically modified crop varieties with radically new properties, including GMO rices produced at IRRI and elsewhere. This Report places great stress upon these developments because of their economic value and their potential to contribute to CGIAR goals. Not only the science, but also the organization of the science is changing extremely fast. There is a great explosion in the underlying information for molecular biology, and the organization and ownership of this are in a state of flux. The private sector is becoming a prime mover in the subject, and new styles of operation and alliances are developing fast. IRRI must position itself within this fast-changing scene to ensure that the interests of IRRI and its . stakeholders are safeguarded for the future. Over the next few years, probably before the next EPMR, decisions must be taken and changes must be made that may affect IRRI's future for many years to come. These decisions must be taken by the Board and senior management, in the light of policies determined by the CGIAR, in consultation with the countries who are its partners, and with the interests of IRRI and its staff at heart.
There is much other new science at IRRI. In general, we have found that its science is' appropriate and ranges from the acceptable to the excellent - nowhere have we found scientifically deficient work. Plant breeding, in which IRRI has such a distinguished history, continues to produce improved germplasm, and more radical achievements such as the hybrid rices that are now being used by three of IRRI's partners. Plant breeding links closely with the molecular techniques discussed above. The IPM Network has achieved a great reduction in the use of pesticides by farmers by an interdisciplinary research effort. Some science, such as the various aspects of NRM, requires organizing in ways that allow the interdisciplinary potential to be more fully realized in strategic programmes. For these to be successful, at least part of the staff have to invest the time to understand fully what their collaborators from other disciplines are doing. Modelling is an integrative discipline that can unify a joint approach, but the modelling must be truly grounded in real-life research, and tested by comprehensive validation. Another aspect of 'validation' that the Panel became interested in was the testing of ex-ante predictions of research outputs and impacts by ex-post analysis of the actual performance, which does not seem to have been done at IRRI. The Panel has recommended that the three "Rainfed' ecosystem programmes should be combined into a single programme. This would allow the range of hydrological conditions to be considered together, and allow resources to be allocated where the prospects for success are greatest.
The relationships of IRRI and its partner countries and their NARS are also changing. Some Asian countries are virtually 'developed' now, and have agricultural sectors with strong research and extension, and sufficient capital available to farmers. There are other countries where subsistence farming is still the norm, together with all gradations between. The task of relating to all these different situations in the most helpful and efficient manner is obviously complex, and means that IRRI may be required to spread its interests more widely, and therefore more thinly, than before. This will need skilled and strategic management to prevent fragmentation, lack of focus, and a confused approach to these various problems. The new partnership approach that IRRI has explained to us does seem to embody innovative and useful features that will allow this to be done. The new consortia have impressed us, and the networks INGER and CREMNET are valued very highly by IRRI's partners, and IRRI should ensure that they are well supported. IRRI also enjoys a special relationship with its host country, the Philippines, that has been very supportive.
What then is needed to capitalize on this challenging, but essentially favorable, scientific situation? The funding of research is a basic necessity, and overall we have not been overly concerned by what we have found. There have undoubtedly been shocks over the last few years, but the net result is better than we had at first expected, and IRRI seems to be in no short-term danger on this front. The situation within the CGIAR will always be fluid and largely unpredictable, but the Centre has shown its ability to respond to changes. It knows full well that there are no long-term guarantees and no free lunches. If it can continue to stay at the forefront of scientific research in its various subjects, if it can continue to attract world-class scientists, if it can make the right decisions about molecular biology, and if it can continue to show clearly that its research is having impact, it has little to fear.
The other great need is institutional stability so that staff can give their undivided attention to their research and its application by their partner countries. Hopefully this stability includes funding, because research programmes cannot be managed efficiently in a climate of boom and bust. We have particularly focused on organizational and management structures, where we fear that IRRI is in danger of causing a self-inflicted wound. The matrix structure was introduced in 1989 to develop interdisciplinary research teams. The Panel judges that it is working well enough, though it makes IRRI science more difficult to survey and analyze, and few members of the staff or of the Panel seem wholly enthusiastic about it, though most see some benefits. However, no judgement of a mechanism is possible unless it is being properly operated, and the Panel believes that this is not yet happening at IRRI. The deficiencies are in quite simple matters that are outlined in the text of our Report, and are largely the consequence of the turbulence and problems of the recent past and the stress this has placed on managers. We recommend that IRRI should concentrate on putting these matters right, make only very limited changes to the current structure, and only consider changing this structure radically some time after the new DG and other senior staff are in post, and only if IRRI is certain that the new structure is significantly better. If this is done, one can hope that for a considerable period IRRI will enjoy a basic stability in its management, its organization, its partnerships, and its funding, so that the staff can concentrate on their research.
The task in front of IRRI is clear and well-documented. The population of the rice-eating countries is in total still growing fast, and their predicted population in 2025 is about four billion, a figure which equals that in the whole world as recently as 1975. Taken together with the predicted increase in incomes, this will increase the demand for rice by more than 60%, as we argue in Chapter 1. IRRI will be a main instrument in meeting this need, as shown by the award of three World Food Prizes to its staff over the last 20 years. It may be that at some time IRRI will have to ask if its total focus on a single main food grain in a world where eating habits are changing fast is still appropriate, but that is still some time in the future. At present, IRRI must concentrate on more and better rice grown in more sustainable ways, and no other organization is so well placed to do so. If IRRI did not exist, it would have to be invented. As it does exist, it should be supported.
