Medium-Term Plan 2006-2008 and Financing Plan for 2006
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Medium-Term Plan 2006-2008 and Financing Plan for 2006 © International Potato Center (CIP) 2005 Medium-Term Plan 2006–2008 and Financing Plan for 2006 November 2005 International Potato Center ii International Potato Center (CIP) Medium-Term Plan for 2006-2008 and Financing Plan for 2006 Contents Science Council comments on CIP’s MTP .................................................................................................. iv CIP’s Response to the Science Council Commentary on CIP’s MTP, 2006-2008.....................................viii Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................viii Research Agenda .......................................................................................................................................viii Nature of Research .....................................................................................................................................viii Research Planning....................................................................................................................................... ix Partnerships ............................................................................................................................................... ix MEDIUM-TERM PLAN OVERVIEW .............................................................................................................1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................1 CIP Research Program Context ...................................................................................................................1 CIP Research Program Discussion: 2004 Actual Highlights ........................................................................6 CIP Research Program Discussion: 2005 Anticipated Highlights.................................................................7 Implementation of EPMR Recommendations.............................................................................................10 Highlights of the 2006 Project Portfolio.......................................................................................................17 Collaboration ..............................................................................................................................................20 Internal Organization of Research ..............................................................................................................26 MEDIUM-TERM PLAN PROJECT NARRATIVES......................................................................................29 Project 1. Impact Enhancement ............................................................................................................29 Project 2. Genetic Resources Conservation and Characterization .......................................................31 Project 3. Germplasm Enhancement and Crop Improvement...............................................................34 Project 4. Integrated Crop Management ...............................................................................................39 Project 5. Natural Resources Management...........................................................................................42 Project 6. Agriculture and Human Health ..............................................................................................44 Project 7 Ecoregional Program: Consortium for the Sustainable Development of the Andean Ecoregion (CONDESAN) ............................................................................................................................46 Project 8. Global Mountain Program .....................................................................................................48 Project 9. Urban Harvest .......................................................................................................................51 Urban Harvest Annex 1...............................................................................................................................55 MEDIUM-TERM PLAN PROJECT LOGFRAMES ......................................................................................56 MEDIUM-TERM FINANCING PLAN.........................................................................................................103 Center Financial Indicators .......................................................................................................................103 Financial results of 2004 operations .........................................................................................................104 Development of 2005 Operations .............................................................................................................106 Medium-Term Financial Outlook for 2006–2008.......................................................................................107 Challenge, Systemwide and Ecoregional Programs.................................................................................108 Financial tables ..............................................................................................................................110 International Potato Center (CIP) Medium-Term Plan for 2006-2008 and Financing Plan for 2006 iii Science Council comments on CIP’s MTP October 2005 iv International Potato Center (CIP) Medium-Term Plan for 2006-2008 and Financing Plan for 2006 International Potato Center (CIP) Medium-Term Plan for 2006-2008 and Financing Plan for 2006 v vi International Potato Center (CIP) Medium-Term Plan for 2006-2008 and Financing Plan for 2006 International Potato Center (CIP) Medium-Term Plan for 2006-2008 and Financing Plan for 2006 vii CIP’s Response to the Science Council Commentary on CIP’s MTP, 2006-2008 October 2005 Introduction With respect to the overall commentary, CIP would like to thank the Science Council for the careful reading done of the MTP. We are pleased with the positive feedback and constructive criticism. We would also like to thank the Council for the new structure and content of the MTP. We find the MTP more useful than in the past as a meaningful Center-wide work-planning document. With this new MTP structure as a baseline component, CIP is moving forward towards an integrated work planning, reporting and evaluation system that can be applied Center-wide and to the individual scientist. As we respond to your commentary, we are in the process of preparing our strategic plan for the years 2006-2016. This new plan will inform the development of our 2007-2009 MTP and affects the nature of our responses below. Research Agenda CIP remains focused on contributing to the Millennium Development Goals as a target for the outputs of our research program. As such our research program discussions continually return to the question of will this make a meaningful contribution? Our vision exercise helped us identify eight regional clusters of countries and we continue to adjust our research investments towards output targets that will have either a direct or spill in contribution to them. We note with satisfaction that your conclusion is that ‘Advances…will result in gains towards the fulfillment of CGIAR goals.’ CIP continues to work towards implementation of EPMR recommendations and appreciates the Science Council’s concern about those for which implementation remains in process. The new strategic plan will enable us to make significant progress in complete implementation of many of these issues. Since delivery of this MTP to the Science Council, our new work plan and evaluation policies for research scientists have been integrated with the new CG MP and Performance Measurement Systems and include specific reference to refereed publications. Nature of Research We are happy that the Science Council concurs that the research presented in the MTP is a cohesive program for the generation of international public goods. As the Council notes, we continue to focus on priority issues. We thank the Council for emphasizing our comparative advantage for clarifying the role of potato in the human diet, both the positive and perceptions of negative impacts. CIP recognizes the Science Council preference to classify the various research challenges of agriculture and human health as a cross-cutting issue. In our new vision, we saw that to address these challenges we needed a focal point in the Center around which we can build a critical mass of research talent. We are actively recruiting a senior public health researcher to lead the new division. We appreciate the criticism of the output targets of the division. The intent is not to provide local services but to extract globally significant lessons on the basic information requirements and building consensus around pesticide use in crop production. In the upcoming MTP, we shall reformulate the output targets to reflect our true intentions for this program. The Science Council expresses concern that animal nutrition and human nutrition not be mixed in the project. Project 6 has no output targets for animal nutrition, so perhaps the Science Council has confused the output targets of Projects 5 and 6. The use of both vines and roots in dual-purpose sweetpotato varieties offers considerable benefits for the mixed system smallholder farm families in many regions. CIP is collaborating with ILRI in this work. viii International Potato Center (CIP) Medium-Term Plan for 2006-2008