FAO's internal strengths and weaknesses

A reform of FAO was necessary not only in response to the changing global context, but also to accommodate changes in the Organization's internal environment. Members have been seeking a wider range of services and programmes, while the Organization's resources and capacity have been negatively affected by a declining budget.

When proposing the reform in June 1994, the Director-General explained that it was intended to put FAO in a better position to serve its Member Nations by restructuring the Organization, refocusing its priorities, increasing its global outreach, improving resource management and enhancing its efficiency.

Against this background, the strategy adopted was to build on the strengths of the Organization and to identify and overcome its weaknesses. FAO's strengths include:

• The confidence that Member Nations have in the Organization's expertise and experience in working towards the goals of its mandate; its ability to take a global view of problems; and its capacity to identify and argue for common solutions, independently of specific ideological or national perspectives.
• Together with its extensive field office structure, the Organization's worldwide networking capacity - based on direct links with government departments, academic and research institutions and other national and international bodies.
• The unique blend of operational and normative experience of the Organization's staff, dedicated to the cause of multilateralism in line with the principles of the International Civil Service.
• The technical assistance that the Organization offers to countries, without commercial or political bias. To provide governments with the support they need, FAO relies on the basic competence and specialized expertise of its core staff as well as highly qualified external experts - drawn from an extensive corporate roster - all equipped with the necessary technical, managerial and linguistic skills.

Despite these strengths, an objective analysis of FAO's first 50 years had revealed certain lacunae and weaknesses that needed to be addressed in the reform process. For example, an excessively fragmented and diffused organizational structure prevented the Organization from concentrating on key areas and detracted from its ability to achieve high-quality results. There was a need to set clearer priorities, to incorporate cross-sectoral issues such as gender and people's participation into mainstream activities, and to clarify the complementarity of its normative and operational activities. FAO was too centralized, with a large proportion of staff based at headquarters and therefore remote from the complex problems experienced in the field. The Organization was inadequately prepared for delivering services to its members in a cost-effective way because of its centralized and bureaucratic procedures and resistance to change, including the adoption of modern office and communication technologies and new approaches to human resource management.

There was also insufficient recognition of how national management capacities in agricultural development had evolved, and the Organization was failing to take advantage of local expertise and human resources to improve its effectiveness through capacity building and cost reduction. Substantive dialogue was lacking among Member Nations and between the Member Nations and FAO's Secretariat. Moreover, the planning process was limited to the two-year budget cycle and a four-year Medium-Term Plan, and it therefore lacked strategic vision.