• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Executive summary
 Table of Contents
 Introduction
 The problem
 Why agricultural research and why...
 Present program
 Discussion
 Program plan
 The bottom line: Food self-rel...
 Annex A. Research funding, major...
 Annex B. Production of major...
 Annex C. Population growth and...
 Annex D. Agricultural research:...
 Annex E. External funding for agricultural...














Title: Plan for supporting agricultural research and faculties of agriculture in Africa
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00055271/00002
 Material Information
Title: Plan for supporting agricultural research and faculties of agriculture in Africa
Physical Description: 25, 5 p. : ill., map ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: United States -- Agency for International Development
Publisher: Agency for International Development
Place of Publication: Washington D.C
Publication Date: 1985
 Subjects
Subject: Agriculture -- Research -- Africa   ( lcsh )
Agriculture -- International cooperation   ( lcsh )
Agricultural assistance -- Africa   ( lcsh )
Genre: federal government publication   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
General Note: "May 15, 1985."
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00055271
Volume ID: VID00002
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 13105472

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover 1
        Front Cover 2
    Executive summary
        Page i
    Table of Contents
        Table of Contents
    Introduction
        Page 1
    The problem
        Page 2
    Why agricultural research and why faculties of agriculture?
        Page 3
        Page 4
    Present program
        Page 5
        Page 6
    Discussion
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
    Program plan
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
    The bottom line: Food self-reliance
        Page 25
    Annex A. Research funding, major crop zones, and supporting data
        Page 26
    Annex B. Production of major crops
        Page 27
    Annex C. Population growth and projections
        Page 28
    Annex D. Agricultural research: AID annual funding levels per commodity - FY 1984
        Page 29
    Annex E. External funding for agricultural research to Africa, 1976-1980, by major donors
        Page 30
Full Text

Plan for
Supporting Agricultural Research and
Faculties of Agriculture in Africa


May 1985


Agency for International Development
Washington, D.C. 20523








May 15, 1985


Plan
for
Supporting Agricultural Research and Faculties of-Agriculture
in
Africa








The proposed plan builds on several-previous papers including:
o Africa Bureau Strategic Plan -
o A.I.D. Policy Paper: Food and Agricultural Development
o Africa Bureau Food Sector Assistance Strategy Paper
o A.I.D. Sector Strategy for Agriculture
o Africa Bureau Agricultural Research Strategy Paper
o A.I.D. Priorities for Research in Agriculture
o Africa Bureau Strategic Plan for Agricultural Education
and University Building (draft)








Executive Summary

Improved technology is necessary to achieve agricultural progress in
Africa. However, the research task in Africa is especially challenging
because the physical conditions for agricultural production are very
difficult, labor is a constraining factor at critical periods during the year,
and research on food commodities by African institutions is very recent and
generally weak. This document sets forth a two-pronged approach to this
problem:
o Strengthening agricultural research capabilities
o Strengthening faculties of agriculture

Agricultural technologies are usually_location-specific and sensitive to
agro-ecological and socio-economicenvironments of the farmers who use them.
Even to- brrow-effectivery,-it is necessary to identify, screen, and interpret
possible alternatives; borrowing requires some capacity to do research. A
period of 20 to 25 years may be the minimum feasible planning horizon to
achieve desired results, even in those countries which are highly committed to
developing strong national research capabilities. In order to make most
effective use of the Agency's scarce resources, this plan aims to:
a) Strengthen national agricultural research systems in approximately 8
core countries
b) Build strong applied research capacities in neighboring countries to
enable local scientists to screen and borrow technologies and adapt
them to local environments
Research networks -- which link national agricultural research systems with
international agricultural research centers (IARCs), collaborative research
support programs (CRSPs), and other research programs -- will serve as a means
of both accelerating research payoff as well as strengthening national -
systems. The networks link a "critical mass" oF scientists to work on aspects
of problems which transcend national borders. Support will be given to
research networks on four to six priority commodity areas in consultation with
interested countries and IARCs.

Shortages of staff trained at the college and post-graduate levels are a
major problem of national research systems. Participant training can
supplement and reinforce efforts to develop national capabilities. However,
the only long-term solution to Africa's severe shortage of trained
agricultural personnel is to expand the capacity and improve thequality of
national higher educationalinstitutions./, Uner/his plan, long-term
assistance will be provided initially to fouro(six faculties of
agriculture. These should be in the same country~ where we are strengthening
agricultural research systems. Our assistance will be purposefully designed
to build linkages between the faculties of agriculture and other research
institutions and programs.

In order to mobilize the vast range and amount of resources necessary for
this large and long-range effort, the U.S. is facilitating the coordination of
support to agricultural research in Africa as part of its participation in the
Cooperation for Development in Africa (CDA), an organization of seven major
members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
We fu-ther intend to work lstly-with-multilteral donors, especially the
or Bankwith respect unLversi y_-dev iet -. AID will seek means within
CDA as well as o ter mechanisms-to cooperat-ewith other donors to strengthen
agricultural research capabilities and faculties of agriculture in Africa.







Plan for Supporting Agricultural
Research and Faculties of Agriculture in Africa

Introduction .............................................. 1
I. The Problem ............................................ 2
II. Why Agricultural Research and Why Faculties of
Agriculture? ........................................ 3
III. Present Program ....................................... 5
A. Agricultural Research ............................... 5
1. Bilateral Projects .............................. 5
2. Regional Projects ................................ 5
3. IARCs ............................................ 5
4. CRSPs ............................................ 6
5. Centrally-Funded Projects ........................ 6
B. Faculties of Agriculture ............................ 7
1. Participant Training ............................. 7
2. Bilateral Projects ............................... 7
3. CRSPs ........ ................................... 7
IV. Discussion ............................................ 7
A. Need for Clear Objectives .......................... 8
B. Need for Focused Program Priorities ................ 9
1. Country Criteria (Technology Producing Countries) 9
2. Country Criteria (Technology Adapting Countries) 10
3. Commodity and Problem Research Criteria .......... 10
C. Need for Commodity Research ......................... 11
D. Need for U.S. to Concentrate on Food Crops
Research ......................................... 13
E. Need for Integrating AID Inputs ..................... 14
F.-Need for-Long-Term Commitment .............. ......... 15
G. Need for Stronger Management and
Administration Capabilities ...................... 16
H. Need for Financing Recurrent Costs .................. 16
I. Need for Donor Cooperation .......................... 17
V. Program Plan ........................................... 18
A. Agricultural Research ............................... 18
1. National Research Systems ........................ 18
a. Technology Producing Countries ................ 19
b. Technology Adapting Countries ................. 19
c. Commodity and Problem Research Priorities ..... 20
2. Research Networks ................................ 21
B. Faculties of Agriculture ............................ 22
C. AID Funding Levels .................................. 23
D. Implementation of This Plan ......................... 24
VI. The Bottom Line: Food Self-Reliance ................... 25

Annexes: A. Research Funding, Major Crop Zones, and
Supporting Data
B. Production of Major Crops
C. Population Growth and Projections
D. Agricultural Research: AID Annual Funding
Levels Per Commodity -- FY 1984
E. External Funding for Agricultural Research to
Africa, 1976 and 1980, by Major Donors








May 15, 1985



Plan for Supporting Agricultural Research
and Faculties of Agriculture in Africa


Improved technology is necessary to accelerate agricultural and rural
progress in Africa. The exceedingly high return from investment in
agricultural research to develop new technologies -- the payoff from research
-- is well-documented. Examples of high payoffs to research in Africa include
cotton, oil palms in West Africa, and hybrid maize in Zimbabwe and Kenya.

This paper lays out a plan to strengthen the contribution of agricultural
science and technology to achieve food self-reliance in Africa.*/ Emphasis
will be given to strengthening:

o Agricultural research capabilities

o Faculties of-agriculture

In order to make most effective use of Agency financial and human
resources, criteria are needed to guide choices among countries and
commodities to support. Twenty to 25 years of continuous support are required
to build the research and human capital base to achieve desired results. Our
effort will, therefore, draw on the resources of the entire Agency --
Missions, the Africa Bureau,-and AID/W central bureaus --_working with African
countries and other donors in a sustained, cooperative, -ocused program.-
National agricultural research systems will be strengthened in approximately 8
core countries. Strong adaptive research capacities will be built in
neighboring countries to enable local scientists to screen and borrow
technologies and adapt them to local environments. Networks will link
national systems, international agricultural research centers (IARCs),
regional research programs, collaborative research support programs (CRSPs),
centrally-funded projects, and other-donor assistance on selected,
high-priority topics. Four to six faculties of agriculture will be selected
initially for long-term assistance.

Policy, credit, input supply, marketing, extension, and other support
services also are important to agricultural progress. This plan, however,
specifically addresses agricultural research and faculties of agriculture, and
is presented to show what is needed to obtain technical breakthroughs in
African agriculture. To translate this into production breakthroughs will
require concomitant investments in infrastructure, input supply systems,
marketing, and substantial policy reform. The other complementary development
activities will be reviewed separately, taking into consideration the approach
in this plan for research and faculties of agriculture.


*/ Self-reliance in food is defined as the ability of a country to assure
continuing food security to its population from a combination of domestic
production, storage, and importation of food at commercial terms paid from
foreign exchange earnings.






-2-


I. The Problem

Agriculture provides income and employment for over two-thirds of the
population of Africa. Nearly all countries are dependent upon agriculture for
the major part of foreign exchange earnings. Increased agricultural
productivity is essential for raising government revenues and is necessary for
improvements in nutrition, health, and the general quality of life.

The performance of African agriculture has been dismal; per capital food
production has declined during the last two decades. Since 1960, growth in
aggregate food production has averaged less than two per cent per annum.
Yields per unit of land for food commodities are the lowest of any region in
the world. The result has been growing dependence on food aid and increasing
use of scarce foreign exchange for food imports rather than for other pressing
development needs. A close examination of the African agricultural situation
indicates that the causes of the poor performance include difficult physical
and harsh climatic conditions; restrictive economic policies; weak
institutions; critical shortage of scientists, teachers, and agricultural
managers; and few farmer-tested high-yielding technologies.

Physical Environment and Climate While Africa has some highly fertile and
productive areas, there are vast areas where growing conditions are
unfavorable because of difficult physical and climatic conditions. The
extension of agricultural production has often been accompanied by
devegetation that has depleted soil fertility and reduced the water-holding
capacity of the fragile African soils. The arid land of the Sahel and the
soils of the coastal and central tropics of Africa present unusually difficult
-physical environments for agricultural production. Irrigation will be a
long-term and then only partial answer to meeting Africa's food needs. The
tropical soils of Africa present management problems that have not yet been
properly addressed.

Government Policies Unfavorable economic policies have contributed to the
present agricultural crisis in three key areas. First, trade and exchange
policies have overprotected industry, held back agriculture, and absorbed too
much administrative capacity. Second, many governments have created large
state production and marketing and input supply organizations that are
incapable of efficiently performing their assigned tasks. Finally, most
African governments have not established an economic incentive structure for
increasing agricultural production. Rather, price, tax, exchange rate, and
investment policies reflect a consistent bias against agriculture.

Institutions The basic institutions required to step up agricultural
production are weak in financial and manpower resources in most countries of
sub-Saharan Africa. The colonial powers in Africa underinvested in human
capital, food crop research, and internal transportation networks to
strengthen internal market linkages for inputs or commodities. In the
twenty-five years of independence, little progress has been made by African
governments in correcting these past mistakes, in part due to lack of
political commitment and lack of resources. Today most countries do not have
adequate infrastructure to support a major expansion in agricultural







-3-


development. Donors have also been short-sighted by focusing on discrete
projects and by pursuing an on-again, off-again approach to supporting basic
agricultural institutions.

Indigenous Scientific Capacity There is consistent evidence across the
continent that there is not enough qualified human capital to carry out a
sustainable agricultural development effort. Since independence, African
governments have made little progress to improve the situation. Opportunities
for professional growth are limited. Lack and underutilization of trained
human capital, ranging from farmers to senior administrators and scientists,
coupled with poor management of existing resources, are major factors in the
present agricultural crisis.

Technologies Lack of productive research institutions in most African
countries has resulted in a dearth of farmer-acceptable improved technologies
needed to increase agricultural production and productivity. The
expatriate-led export research capacity developed under colonial rule has
deteriorated. With the single exception of maize, "African agriculture has
probably been less affected by technology change in the past twenty years than
agriculture on any other continent." (USDA: 1981)



II. Why Agricultural Research and Why Faculties of Agriculture?

The process of modernization or development is inevitably a process of
de-agriculturalization. While the absolute size (in total GNP) of the
agricultural production sector increases, other sectors includingg
agricultural support and processing industries) grow even faster so that the
relative share of agriculture in GNP decreases. Thus, the U.S., which is the
outstanding example of this process, moved from an economy in which
practically the entire population was engaged in direct agricultural
production to one in which less than two percent of the population is now
engaged in that occupation -- while in the process, becoming the major
agricultural exporter in the world. This transition was not achieved by
neglecting agriculture; on the contrary, agriculture received substantial
public support which enabled it to "finance" the development transition.

Research, initially largely supported by public funds, was a powerful
contributor to the development transition in the U.S. Although the beginning
of a formal public-supported agricultural research process dated to 1861,
results in terms of increased yields did not begin to appear until the 1930s
with the introduction of improved soil husbandry and the spread of hybrid
corn. From then on, productivity increases have been the principal
contributor to U.S. agricultural growth. As time has passed,
privately-financed research has become an increasingly active contributor,
complementing and, in some cases, replacing public research programs.

Much has been written about the failure of the Green Revolution to emerge
-in Africa. But recent studies have shown that agricultural technologies are
usually location-specific and sensitive to agro-ecological and socio-economic






- 4. -


environments ;of the farmers who wse themr-.Africa's disappointingg experience.
with technology generation and transfer :since independence adds further ,; .
evidence to the historical record that-"only a country that establishes its ,
own research capacity in agriculture can gain access to- te advan-e~--il
knowledge rthat are ava17-iab toTi from the globalr-ie n ic commintj and -
'embody that. :knowledge i techology cited to._its own resource and -
cultural endowments.!" ,Ruttan; i~984). .When .one, asks: "why put.-jore money into,
agricultural -research .in _Africa?", -the: clear :answer is .that strong support for
agricultural research is necessary to promote African development. ,:.:

National agricultural research institutions and programs.in Africa 'vary in
both size and effectiveness; in general, however, they.are weak.and poorly-
staffed, equipped, financed, and managed. Most national agricultural research
programs in Africa are structured along disciplinary-.lines. .Until recently,
research was oriented toward export crops and animal health, with food crops
and animal husbandry largely neglected. The research programs concentrated on
the physio-biological.aspects.of crop and livestock production-with limited -
attention to-socio-economic aspects of-African farming. Most of.the:research
has been --:and,- to a large:degree, continues to be ---done in laboratories.
and on experiment stationswith few direct linkages with, or participation by,
extension service personnel or farmers. Linkages among national systems,
international agricultural research centers, and other external sources of
technology are limited. These orientations are beginning to change, but much
more needs to be done.

Shortages of staff trained at:the college-and post-graduate levels are a
major problem for national agricultural research systems. Participant
- training may-be a short-term-answer and has an important longer-term role if
used to supplement and reinforce efforts to develop local capabilities.
Higher education capacity is increasing (about 10 per cent per year) but is
still inadequate. The only long-term solution to Africa's severe shortage of
trained agricultural personnel-is to expand the capacity and improve the
quality of higher agricultural educational institutions.

Universities in Africa have much in common. They generally are small
institutions which concentrate on teaching. Entering students are poorly
grounded in science and require extensive remediation which takes attention
away from the regular curriculum. With few exceptions, little research is
carried out at universities and the quality of research is low. Resources are
ce and there is little opportunity for collegial interaction or peer
review. As yet, research activities in universities and government ministries
are not closely linked. As a result, a scarce and valuable resource, the
better trained scientists who often locate at the universities, is
underutilized.

Efforts to achieve economies of scale through regional universities have
consistently failed. Each nation wants its own major institution, which is
understandable in terms of national prestige considerations. But, in some
cases, the broader objective of African agricultural development has been
ill-served by this approach.








-5-


Support to agricultural research and to faculties of agriculture in
selected countries will respond to the major problem areas inhibiting African
agricultural development. Research will produce farmer-tested high yielding
technologies adapted to the difficult physical and harsh climatic conditions.
Sustained support to research systems-and faculties of agriculture .will
promote stable productive institutions and improve the supply of trained
scientists, teachers, and agricultural managers. Improved agricultural
research systems and stronger faculties of agriculture, while not sufficient
by themselves, are necessary for African agricultural progress.



III. Present Program

Agriculture is-the central focus of AID's long-term development assistance
strategy for Africa. Agricultural projects, in general, accounted for 47
percent of African Bureau obligations in FY 1984. Support to agricultural
research and faculties of agriculture is a large part of this assistance.


A. Agricultural Research

AID uses a number of tools to support agricultural research in Africa
including bilateral projects, regional projects, international agricultural
research centers (IARCs), collaborative research support programs (CRSPs),
and centrally-funded projects. The Agency currently funds almost $100
million of agricultural research in and on Africa annually. -

1. Bilateral Projects

To improve agricultural research in Africa, AID works to strengthen
national agricultural research capacities to generate and utilize
technology. Included in a "national system" are all public and private
institutions involved in conducting research to develop agricultural
technologies. For FY 84, fifty five mission-funded projects located in
25 countries had agricultural research components. Annual expenditures
for the research components are estimated at $51 million.

2. Regional Projects

AID supports regional projects promoting the sharing of research, the
exchange of other types of information, and the cooperation of donors.
For FY 84, eight regionally-funded agricultural projects had research
components. Three of these are located in the Sahel, two are in the
Southern zone, and three cover the whole continent. Annual expenditures
for the research components are estimated at $22.4 million.

3. IARCs

International agricultural research centers (IARCs) -- the
institutions supported by the Consultative Group for International
Agricultural Research (CGIAR) plus associated centers funded by






-6 -


international donors outside the CGIAR -- provide a research system that
works on most of the major food crops and animals, food policies, and
improvement of national research systems. Four CGIAR-sponsored
activities are located in Africa: the International Institute of
Tropical Agriculture (IITA), the International Livestock Center for
Africa (ILCA), the International Laboratory for Research on Animal
Diseases (ILRAD), and the West African Rice Development Association
(WARDA). A substation of the International Crops Research Institute for
the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) and associated centers, i.e., the
International Center for Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE) and the
International Center for Research on'AgroForestry (ICRAF), are also
located in Africa. Other IARCs carry out research which applies to
African problems and are linked to African national research systems.
For FY 84, AID provided $45.3 million (approximately 25 percent of the
total) for core support to the CGIAR-sponsored IARCs. Of this amount,
approximately $14.4 millionois estimated to be directly or indirectly
supportive of African agriculture. In addition, AID provides $4'million
annually to the International Fertilizer Development Center (IFDC), of
which approximately $500,000 is directly or indirectly in support of
agriculture in Africa.

4. CRSPs

Collaborative Research Support Programs (CRSPs) provide a means by
which the talents of research scientists from the U.S. and developing
countries can be mobilized to focus their collective efforts on solving
long-term agricultural research problems of common interest. In FY 84,
approximately $5.3 million ofCPSB expenditures were-directly or
indirectly in support of agriculture in Africa -- sorghum and millet
($1.6 million), beans and cowpeas ($1.6), small ruminants ($0.8),
tropical soils ($0.7), peanuts ($0.5), and aquaculture ($0.1).

5. Centrally-Funded Projects

By means of contracts and cooperative agreements, AID maintains and
strengthens the technical competence of U.S. universities and other
institutions in specialized areas so that the institutions, in turn, may
better serve AID regional bureaus and missions by. providing an array of
expertise needed for high-priority tasks. -For F"84,- 20
centrally-funded (S&T/AGR) projects provided direct or indirect support
to agricultural research in Africa. Annual support was approximately $2
million in eight areas: crop productibn:($0..3 million), livestock
production and health ($0.3 million), pest management ($0.1 million),
post-harvest loss ($0.4 million), soil and water management ($0.3
million), bio-technology ($0.1 million), fisheries and aquaculture ($0.2
million), and economic policy and planning ($0.4 million).









B. Faculties of Agriculture

AID supports faculties of agriculture through participant training,
bilateral projects, and CRSPs. The Agency funds approximately $20 million
in support of faculties of agriculture in Africa annually.

1. Participant Training

AID currently provides approximately $6.8 million for long-term
training for 250 additional Africans each year pursuing B.S., M.Sc., and
Ph.D. degrees in the various disciplines of agricultural sciences. This
represents an increase in numbers of trainees of almost 40 percent since
1979.

2. Bilateral Projects

For FY 1984, AID obligated $12.7 million for strengthening
institutions involved in higher education in agriculture. Three
institutions offering degrees in agriculture at the B.S. level and
higher received $9.2 million (Cameroon, Uganda, and Zimbabwe).- In
addition, three post-secondary institutions offering technical training
(including certificate and diploma levels) received $3.5 million (Kenya,
Lesotho, and Liberia).

3. CRSPs

Several CRSPs are active in universities in several African
countries. The degree training in-the-CRSP contributes to improved
research capabilities and leadership at the national program levels.



IV. Discussion

For the past 15 years or more, AID and other donors have attempted to
reverse the declining per capital food production in sub-Sahara Africa. The
Agency has been investing in agricultural research capacity development by
providing technical assistance, training, and other physical support to
national research institutions. This support has been given to some 25
African nations addressing scores of different commodity and factor-specific
research problems. However, these investments have been erratic and the
results have been disappointing because they have not built adequate African
agricultural research capacity nor have they generated the farmer-relevant
technology needed.

The Africa and S&T Bureaus are rethinking approaches to technology and
manpower development in Africa to improve the effectiveness of investments in
agricultural research and faculties of agriculture. Our past experience in






-8 -


Africa provides strong guidance for shaping future investments. The following
broad points are crucial:

1. We need explicit objectives for agricultural research.

2. We need focused program priorities to emphasize selected countries,
commodities, and problems.

3. We need to give greater support to commodity research.

4. We need to concentrate on food crop research, recognizing that food crop
Production can contribute significantly to income and export growth.

5. We need to improve the complementarity among AID's various mechanisms
\ for undertaking investments in agricultural research and faculties of
agriculture.

6. We need to make a long-term commitment toward the development of
agricultural research and higher education.
-^y
7. We need to assist countries to develop their management and
5' administration capabilities in research.

8. We need to be willing to finance a portion of recurrent costs of
research programs and faculties of agriculture, where appropriate.

9. We need to cooperate with other donors in planning and carrying out
these investments.-


A. Need for Clear Objectives

AID's overall objective is to assist African countries to develop
improved technologies for farmers which can increase agricultural
production and incomes. Africa's nations differ substantially with regard
to population, size, economic stability, commitment to agricultural
development, institutional capacity, and a number of other factors that
influence a nation's ability to benefit from donor assistance. Moreover,
some countries are simply too small or too resource-poor to provide the
base needed to develop and sustain full-fledged agricultural research
systems. In recognition of this,_AID intends topursue a dual strategy.
In those countries having the natural and economic base to develop basic
d adaptive researcher Agen will make investments to--FTI-- thi---
capacity so that the technology generated can be used at home and
transferred through networks to neighboring countries. In a second group
of countries that lacks the economic resource base to develop and finance a
large national agricultural research service, investments will be made to
strengthen the manpower capacity of the research service to borrow
technologies generated in other countries and research centers and to adapt
the technologies to local needs and conditions. This basic division will
be discussed below.








B. Need for Focused Program Priorities


To assure that AID's investments are in areas of high potential and
payoff, a set of criteria has been developed to make sound decisions in
allocating limited research resources.

1. Country Criteria (Technology Producing Countries)

At present, AID provides resources to strengthen national research
institutions in about 25 countries. Project investments have supported
a wide range of commodities, as well as provided a number of expatriate
scientists. This broad-gauged support was considered necessary because
of the weak scientific manpower base in most small countries, but the
effect has been to fragment and reduce the impact of our agricultural
development resources. So far, the payoff in terms of relevant
technology has been disappointing.

Therefore focus will be given to a limited number of key countries
with a high payoff potential for generating new technology. The
technologyproducin, countries would each meet the following criteria:

(1) Cultivated area of at least 100,000 hectares in each commodity for
which research assistance is planned.

(2) A research staff of 100 or more scientists (it takes a minimum of 8
to 12 scientists to make progress on one commodity).

-(3) Three or more functioning research stations located in the important_
agricultural areas-of the country.-

(4) A national research system pursuing prioritized commodity and
problem solving research.

(5) A national research system having working relationships with IARCs,
CRSPs, neighboring national programs, and regional programs.

(6) A national agricultural research budget that demonstrates a history
of steady support and reasonable per-scientist funding.

(7) A faculty of agriculture with capacity to teach and do research,
providing B.S.-level graduates qualified to pursue graduate study at
universities in Africa or under the aegis of U.S. participant
training programs and producing (or with potential to produce) M.Sc.
graduates who have capacity to do research.

In countries that satisfy these criteria, AID will provide support for
ot technology generation and adaption/utlization. It will support
acultes o agriculture in those countries where opportunities for
training M.Sc.-level graduates exist.







- 10 -


2. Country Criteria (Technology Adapting Countries)

Countries with small national research-programs will be provided
assistance to strengthen their capacities to screen, borrow, and adapt
technology from technology producing countries, regional networks,
IAR.Cs, and CRSPs. The Agency will make investments .in technology
adapting countries which meet the following criteria:

_ (1) Cultivated area for priority crops of about 100,000 hectares.

(2) An agricultural research staff of 20 to 80 scientists, which could
be organized int- commodity teams of eight to twelve professionals
capable of adapting technology from the IARCs, CRSPs, and regional
networks. 7- --h -. d ,, rl- -- JL-

(3) Two or more operating research stations. I

(4) A national research system willing to establish research priorities.

(5) A national research system interested in and willing to establish
regularized working relationships with IARCs and other research
institutions outside the country.

(6) National leadership that indicates a willingness to consider funding
recurrent and operational costs of national research institutions
and to provide reasonable per-scientist research support.

(7) A faculty of agriculture with some-capacity to provide-B.S.-level
graduates to serve on research commodity teams and to qualify as
participants for graduate training.

In countries meeting these criteria, AID will provide support for
technology adaptation/utilization. If a specific national commodity
research team requires a particular discipline (soil fertility or
agronomy) to strengthen its capacity to borrow technology from a
regional network, consideration would be given to providing the needed
professional assistance. Participant training will be used to build the
numbers and quality of trained researchers. Countries failing to meet
these minimum criteria will receive limited assistance for agricultural
research, primarily participant training.


3. Commodity and Problem Research Criteria

Any research allocation system, regardless of how intuitive or how
formal, cannot avoid making judgments about two major questions. The
first question is: what are the possibilities of producing scientific
and technical advances if resources are allocated to research on a
particular commodity, a particular resource problem, or a particular
disciplinary or scientific field? The second question is: what will be
the value to society of the new knowledge or the new technology if the





- 11 -


research effort is successful? To help ensure that the Agency's
research investments will have a technological and production impact,
investments will be focused on aandfulbf key staple foods and related
problems which are central to Africa's food needs. The criteria by
which commodities and research problems will be selected include:

(1) The extent to which the commodity contributes to present and
projected (taking into account future demand) calorie intake in
rural and urban populations.

(2) The likelihood that improved farmer-relevant technology can be
developed to increase production, given-the expertise and
state-of-the-art in the U.S. and the IARCs. < \

(3) The availability within the national rese hs~ytm of a minimum
cadre of four Mc_ Jh.D. scientists staff of
eight B.S. level specialists to work on ty sear problems.

(4) The comparative advantategQfthLe _S. in m' available
knowledgeable scientists nd relevant technol-r that can be
incorporated into ongoing national research programs.

In general, AID intends to increase support to commodity research.
However, the objective of this commodity research should be to develop
_higheryiLgdigi ies based on management and input intensities
appropriate to African circumstances. Besides increasing genetic
potential, due attention must be given to economic and cultural problems
such as labor availability and to disease and pest resistance,
germination/maturation, soil and-water management, and other matters-
that are particularly significant in the African setting.

There is general agreement that livestock production plays an
important role in African agriculture. Livestock raising is carried out
under mixed farming (crop/livestock) and range-type conditions.
Interventions have characteristically been focused on range management,
disease control, and improved nutrition. Lessons learned in the last 10
to 15 years of experience demonstrate that western range management
approaches have been found ill-suited to the African context.
Consequently, initiatives in livestock research should be promoted
owl and should focus on animal health and nutrition in mixe-dfarming
systems where animal traction and income generation through improved
production are the central thrusts. In the absence of major animal
diseases, nutritional stress is the major constraint to efficient
livestock production. The solution to this problem lies in either
increased fodder from food crops or improved grasses and forages.


C. Need for Commodity Research

The magnitude of food production increases required to meet Africa's
overall population growth of about 3.5 percent annually suggests that some
combination of a large number of marginal production improvements and a few
major breakthroughs in staple foods are urgently needed.







12 b .

The very promising new sorghum variety in the Sudan and the prospects
for biological control of mealy bugs and green spider mites (major cassava
pests) are examples of extended, continuous research cooperation that are
bearing their fruits now. A major technical breakthrough can only come
about by improving the genetic characteristics of crops and knowledgeof
soil and 4ater management relationships. Dramatic improvement in genetic
materials and soil and water relationships requires a time frame of ten to
fifteen years. In the short term, the outlook for many major technical
breakthroughs is limited because of the long lead-time required to develop
und research program. Hence, it appears that during the nex five to
Steyears productionn increases must result primarily from marginal
productionn improvements. These margin improvements will most likely be
ac heved through improved agronomic practices and est control.

Consequently, commodity research plans need to be focused on dual
objectives: (a) ^modes)continued investment in the short-term to take
advantage of whatever marginal production improvements can be generated and
(nt tme _ongeneticimprvem and soil and water
rela lonships for the long-term. A continue pasIa marginal
p-roduction irovements will helped scientific knowledge base and
-Trovi e-opportunitiesfor newltrainedscentists to gain practical
experience, thus rovidfing_abase for the long-term emphasiis on commodity
work which will eventually lead to major technical breakthroughs. Major
pt r on i reakthroughs are needed, eventually, to gain the required
confidence of African governments and convince them that increased
investments in agricultural research are justified over the long-term.

-[arming systems research is not an end in itself, but rather a means of
improving th overall technogy_generation and diffusion process
contributing to production improvements. A knowledge 'ap exists between
on-statin cmmodity research work, the technology-transfer mechanisms, and
the farmers as end-users of technology. Information on farming systems is
needed in each commodity area-t-obtter understand the production system,
the diversity and interrelationship of crops grown, the farmer's
decision-making process, and potential areas where technological changes
are most needed in the farming system. Farming systems research, by which
Swe mean on-farm research with a farming systems perspective, offers a
' cost-effectiv means to fill this knowledge gap.

On-farm research should be aimed specifically at strengthening the
on-station research being conducted by national institutions. Cost
effectiveness is achieved by emphasizing a few priority enterprises, by
bringing biological and socio-economic concepts together early in the
research process, by implementing much of the research on farm, and by
linking experimental station work and technology transfer activities to the
research. Balance between commodity and farming-systems research must be
sought in any national research program.

There is general agreement that agro-forestry will play a role in
agricultural development in most African nations. Agro-forestry has
already been an accepted practice by farmers in many countries;







- 13 -


interventions include alley cropping, shelterbelts, random tree plantings,
and tree border plots. AID assistance to agro-forestry research should
support and complement research on the priority commodities using tree
planting technology already developed at the IARCs for soil and water
conservation. The priority commodity and agro-forestry work should be
carried out at the farm level through national on-farm testing activities.


D. Need for the U.S. to Concentrate on Food Crops Research

Growth prospects for African agriculture depend ultimately on response
to commercial opportunities. Nearly all farmers in Africa are engaged in
some form of commercial agriculture. Farm families participate in
commercial transactions through sale of food commodities, export crops,
livestock, labor, and in other ways as well. Exports generate foreign
exchange to import production inputs -- fertilizers, pesticides, and
petrochemical fuels -- for food crop production. Sales of crops generate
income to purchase food. Thus, there is a need to understand, at the
national level and at the household level, how farm families participate in
commercial transactions and how this influences food crop production.

The U.S. has a comparative advantage in food crop research. We have a
base of knowledge about most of the major food crops grown in Africa and we
also have the capacity for training scientists to research food
commodities. Other donors, particularly the European countries and the
IBRD, we believe, have a comparative advantage in providing technical
assistance for research on many traditional African export crops (e.g.,
coffee, tea, and oil palm). Therefore,-it seems appropriate over the next
twenty to twenty five years for AID to focus on food crop research with the
expectation that the private sector and other donors will also support food
crop research as well as traditional export crop research. Such assistance
should be coordinated to strengthen national research systems.

In suggesting this division of responsibility, several observations
should be borne in mind. First, food crops can contribute significantly to
cash sales, including exports. For example, many small farmers market part
of their food crop production, and several of the surplus-producing
southern Africa countries export maize to neighboring countries. Second,
there are several ways, in addition to research, that AID can encourage
commercial agriculture. For example, policy changes through exchange rate
adjustments and improving efficiency of marketing parastatals can be
powerful export stimulants. Third, private sector activity can be
promoted. Firestone, Uniroyal, Del Monte, and United Brands, to name but a
few, have research knowledge and capabilities of value for Africa in food
and cash crops. Satellite farming -- agribusiness organizing small
farmers to produce high-value cash crops by providing inputs, credit,
technical advice, and, most importantly, a market -- shows considerable
potential.







- 14 -


E. Need for Integrating AID Inputs
AID relies on bilateral projects, international agricultural research
centers (IARCs), collaborative research support programs (CRSPs), and
regionally and centrally-funded projects to provide its support. Each
mechanism has strengths and weaknesses, and the relative advantages and
disadvantages of these mechanisms are continually evolving.

The bulk of Africa Bureau funding for research is provided through
bilateral projects, mostly implemented by Title XII institutions.
Bilateral projects enable AID to respond directly to host country needs and
give the on-the-ground presence required for sound institution-building.
During the past decade, U.S. universities have made progress in developing
cadres of scientists knowledgeable about agriculture and working conditions
in Africa and about AID operations. They have a comparative advantage in
(1) education and training of research personnel and (2) institution
building. They provide the major means of training Ph.D. level researchers
for Africa at present. However, the effectiveness of this mechanism is
reduced by (a) the generally short duration of projects; (b) frequent
contractor staff turnover; (c) difficulty in obtaining fully-qualified
staff including deficiencies in French language capability; and (d)
tendency for project formats to distort and/or fragment host country
research programs.

IARCs provide access to worldwide stores of germplasm, to a small but
very significant group of international agricultural scientists whose
collective LDC experience is invaluable, and to specialized non-degree
- training. They have a comparative advantage in (1) technical backstopping
with long-term field staff, (2) on-the-ground network coordination, and (3)
linkages with other international centers. But the.IARCs tend to give
attention to elite as opposed to local breeding materials and focus on
input and management-intensive yield improvement rather than on
labor-conserving technologies and other desirable plant qualities.

CRSPs focus on research with a long-term payoff and provide access to
high-level expertise and training. However, integration into national
programs and coordination with bilateral projects and IARCs could be
improved.

Regionally and centrally-funded projects provide access to specialized
technical skills and help develop U.S. institutional capacity. However, it
is sometimes difficult to coordinate the use of these resources when
financed by different AID/W offices, and, as a result, confusion can exist
among host country counterparts and contractors regarding roles,
responsibilities, and program directions.

All these mechanisms provide resources that are important to African
agricultural research and development. The effectiveness with which these
resources are deployed should be improved by refining and adjusting their
roles in an evolutionary way based upon the lessons of experience. AID
intends to:






- 15 -


-- Improve coordination in the delivery of assistance -- by giving
increased support to the development of coherent, balanced, long-term
national research plans into which diverse inputs can be fitted and by
ensuring clear program direction for regionally-funded and centrally
funded projects;

-- Improve the quality of Title XII participation by giving sustained and
stable support to four~to sixU.S. institutions that are best placed to
, M support our commodity and country priorities, thus enabling the
institutions todveTlop~thr technical staff, managerial capacity, and
base of knowledge of African agriculture needed to effectively implement
bilateral projects;

-- Expand the capacity of the IARCs to support national program development
by establishing and funding special projects -- especially where these
projects incorporate a regional networking component; and

-- Improve the integration of CRSPs into the national and university
research programs in Africa.


F. Need for Long-Term Commitment

There is now substantial empirical evidence that agricultural
development in Africa is a slow, evolutionary, stepwise process.
Similarly, agricultural research is a long-term process that should be
conceptualized in time spans of decades rather than years because:

Even if major efforts are initiated now, it will take a minimum of 20 to
25 years, depending on the country, to train and upgrade an adequate
level of human capital for the major agricultural institutions.

It takes an average of 10 years between the initiation of expenditures
on agricultural research and the availability of new technology and
another 5 to 10 years to gain widespread adoption.

It will probably take a period of 5 to 10 years in most countries to
build the political support for a fundamental redirection in development
strategies to give increased financial support to agriculture.

A long-term commitment must alsoQbelmad_ to U.S. institutions to enable
them to participate more effectively in an effort to strengthen
agricultural research and faculties of agriculture in Africa. This would
enable the U.S. institutions to hire additional permanent faculty for the
particular purpose of interacting professionally with selected African
institutions in such a way that the interaction is compatible with, in fact
is supportive of, the U.S. academic incentive system.

Long-term commitments to research, training, and donor relationships are
mutually reinforcing. AID should begin planning now for a sustained
commitment of a minimum of 20 to 25 years to African agricultural research







- 16 -


systems and faculties of agriculture in key countries where the potential
for technological payoff is high. Once a long-term commitment is made to a
country, AID should not act precipitously to terminate that support for
short-term political or other reasons.


G. Need for Stronger Management and Administration Capabilities

In most African countries there must be significant improvement in the
management and administration of agricultural research programs so that
national systems can handle increased levels of support and so they can
improve the effectiveness with which funds and staffs are utilized.
Evaluations of our current generation of agricultural research activities
indicate that poor management and administration are frequently
constraining the available technical talent. Although specific country and
organizational needs will vary considerably, strategies to improve
management and administration will need to be built upon some combination
of the following interventions: upgrading the managerial capacity of key
individuals; improving the financial planning and budgeting process to
align financial resources with research objectives; setting in place
cost-effective systems to evaluate effectiveness of research expenditures;
improving personnel management systems, performance incentives, and career
paths to retain and make the best use of scarce staff; and making managers
and scientists accountable for results or lack thereof.

In addition, explicit attention must be given to establishing reliable
relationships between research organizations and other organizations upon
which-they depend (e.g., Finance Ministries, Planning Ministries, and Civil
Service Commissions) as well as to establishing sound avenues for the
exchange of information with groups they are expected to serve (extension
workers and farmers). This is a broad but indispensable agenda that must
be pursued in AID projects to build a technology development or adaptation
capacity in African nations.


H. Need for Financing Recurrent Costs

Renewed attention to management and administration will go some way
towards addressing the troublesome issue of recurrent funding by making
better use of existing resources. But in the future agricultural research
activities should explicitly tackle the recurrent cost issue by (a)
ensuring that host countries are placing adequate priority on funding for
agricultural research organizations; (b) taking advantage of opportunities
to generate revenues (e.g., through user-fees or contributions in labor or
in-kind); and (c) exploring opportunities to contract out ancillary support
activities (e.g., maintenance of facilities) that might be done more
efficiently by the private sector.

However, missions should be prepared to finance the recurrent budget of
essential agricultural research activities provided that there is (a) an
acceptable set of country policies (or movement toward these) so that ihe





- 17 -


effectiveness of recurrent support is not in doubt; (b) an assurance that
recurrent cost support has higher development impact than new investments;
and (c) a clear inability of the host country to undertake recurrent cost
financing. Even so, recurrent cost financing must be provided in the
context of a carefully phased plan to shift the entire burden to the host
country over a period of time not to exceed ten years. AID's Policy Paper
on Recurrent Costs provides guidance on this complex area.


I. Need for Donor Cooperation

With many donors working in Africa, duplication of effort is a serious
problem. If donors meet prior to project planning, conflicts of interest
and duplication of effort can be minimized. Also, donors can work together
and share costs in order to allocate sufficient donor resources to
large-scale problems. For example, a logical division of resources would
be for the U.S. to use its grant funds for technical assistance and
training to complement financing from other donors for buildings, other
infrastructure, and equipment. Similarly, the U.S. might direct support to
research on food crops to complement research assistance on traditional
export crops by European donors or the private sector. Special initiatives
should be undertaken by AID missions to work with and strengthen
collaborative efforts among countries. The responsibility to nurture
regional collaboration is of primary importance to ensure that the
contributions of IARCs, CRSPs, and centrally- and regionally-funded
activities are fully utilized in achieving Agency agricultural development
objectives. Donor coordination can help prevent the fragmentation of
national programs that results when diverse projects are put in place
without considering redundanceand complementarities.

Cooperation for Development in Africa (CDA) -- an informal association
of the seven major bilateral donors to Africa who provide 65 per cent of
direct development assistance -- represents one organized effort of donors
to cooperate. Within CDA, AID, the largest donor to agricultural research
systems, serves as overall coordinator of assistance in agricultural
research. AID and the World Bank have agreed to cooperate in exploring
development of faculties of agriculture in Africa. AID is supporting World
Bank initiatives to promote IARC-led commodity networks in Africa. AID
also works through World Bank Consultative Group meetings, UNDP Round Table
meetings, and other opportunities.

AID believes that, in the last analysis, donor cooperation will only be
successful when host country governments take the lead in establishing
coherent programs into which donor resources may be placed. Hence, AID
will work with African colleagues and counterparts to establish strong
national research strategies or plans and seek to use them as the framework
for coordinating donor assistance to research and faculties of agriculture.







- 18 -


V. Program Plan

AID support in Africa for agricultural research and faculties of
agriculture should adhere to five guiding principles, which are key to
effective agricultural technology development in Africa.

1. Explicit Program Objectives and Priorities We will focus the bulk of
our resources on a relatively limited set of countries, commodities, and
research problems (particularly on soil and water relationships to the
key commodities) where sustained assistance is most likely to achieve
high payoff in producing new technology and income streams for producers,

2 Balanced and Integrated Commodity and Socio-Economic Research' We will
give increased attention to the development of strong commodity research
programs, while refining the role of farming systems research to ensure
that on-station research programs respond to the real concerns of
African farmers. This includes renewed attention to the problems and
potentials of commercialization of agriculture and to labor availability
and utilization.

3. Sustained and Stable Support for U.S. and International Institutions We
will increase the capacity of several lead Title XII institutions to
support Agency country, commodity, and problem priorities. We"will also
encourage and assist IARCs to establish a stronger presence in the
development of African national research systems as well as regional
commodity networks.

4. Long-Term Commitment We will adopt a-period of 20 to 25 years as the
minimal acceptable planning period for assistance to African
agricultural research systems and faculties of agriculture as well as
our support for the U.S. and international institutions upon whose
expertise we depend.

5. Donor Cooperation We will continue to facilitate donor cooperation in
African agricultural research and faculties of agriculture. Our efforts
will have two emphases: effective collaboration among donors and
development of long-term national agricultural research strategies or
programs into which diverse donor resources can be effectively placed.


A. Agricultural Research

Strengthening agricultural research capabilities will be based on a
two-pronged approach to national agricultural research systems and zonal
research networks.

1. National Research Systems

The dual task of capacity building and technology development will
be addressed in two distinct ways depending upon the potential for
payoff.






- 19 -


a. Technology Producing Countries

A few countries already have relatively strong bases in the
areas of manpower, financial resources, area planted in priority
food crops, and other-donor support. The following countries are
top priority where agricultural research can be expected to have the
largest potential and earliest payoff for development: Cameroon,
Kenya, Malawi, Senegal, Sudan, Zaire, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. While
still meeting the criteria for technology producing potential, the
following countries should receive lower priority due to relative
economic, social, and political considerations: Tanzania, Uganda,
Ghana, Ivory Coast, and Nigeria. In order to benefit from active
networking, at least one technology producing country should be
located in each CDA-designated ecological zone. The proposed match
is as follows: Sahel Senegal; Cogaal-WstAfrica Cameroon;
Sudan Sudan; East Africa_- Kenya_and Malawi; Zaire Basin Zaire;
and Southern Africa Zambia and Zimbabwe. Missions in these eight
countries are encouraged to assist the countries in developing
strong national food crop research programs.

Within these programs, the short-term_abjectives will be to
train scientists, build institutional capacities, and operationalize
onal networks o produce improved technologies. Agency investments
will focus on two to four food crops that are predominant in the
zone in which the country is located and which meet priority
commodity criteria.

The long-term objective will be to produce improved technologies
on a sustained basis. This will require several-components. Each
national system should develop sound management plans and long-term
research agendas. Collaborative zonal networks will help to make
research more cost-effective, reduce country-by-country duplication
of effort, and improve testing and dissemination among scientists of
research information. M.Sc. and Ph.D. participant training programs
should take into account the scientific manpower needs of the
selected country as well as the broader manpower requirements of the
zone. In those countries where opportunities exist, AID will
support development of faculties of agriculture to train M.Sc.
scientists in specific disciplines needed to meet the commodity
research objectives of the country and, to the extent possible, zone.


b. Technology Adapting Countries

The technology adapting countries generally need assistance to
strengthen their capacities to import technology and adapt it to
local micro-environments. The technology adapting countries tend to
group into two categories. The countries with natural and human
resources a roaching~minimal research requirements include Burundi,
Madagascar, Mali,_Tgo,_era Leone, Libeia, Nger, Rwanda,
Burina Faso, The Gambia, Botswana,'Lesotho, and Swaziland. In a









- 20 -


second category of relatively less promising countries are Chad,
Benin, Somalia, Mauritania, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Central African
Republic, Cape Verde, and Djibouti. Within each category, the
countries are not listed in any order of priority. There is a
presumption in favor of program and project assistance to the first
group of technology adapting countries where it is feasible to
consider long-term commitments to agricultural institutions. For
the time being, our assistance to the second group of technology
adapting countries will concentrate primarily on participant
training.

Wijin the ro rams, th short-term objective will be to
concentrate on building mu 1-isciplinaryteamsof_8 to12
scientists who will develop commodity research-pogr ams in one or
S two staple foods. The-cobiimiadiles to be researched will-be the
predominant food crops in the particular ecological zones, e.g.,
sorghum, millet, and edible legumes in arid and semi-arid regions,
maize in the eastern and southern zones, upland rice in the western
coastal zones, and roots and tubers in the humid zones. Participant
training initiallywill be focused on increasing the numbers of
M.Sc. level scientists. Training graduate-level scientists at
neighboring faculties _f_ &riculture will be encouraged at the M.Sc.
level, Bu Ph.D. training will be supported in the U.S. for the next
I0 to 15 years. Little, if any, investments will be made to develop
faculties of-agriculture in the technology adapting countries.-._

The long-term objective will be to build minimum-size national
research institutions capable of planning and managing at least two
to three commodity programs. Attention will be given to
cost-effective management to promote technology transfer through the
research networks. A research institution in an adaptive research
country may have special capacities to conduct research in
particular areas, e.g., biological nitrogen fixation, as well as to
screen plant materials for disease or pest resistance in
collaboration with IARCs, CRSPs, or centrally-funded projects.
M.Sc. participant training will be phased out as rapidly as possible
in the U.S. as African faculties of agriculture expand their
capacity to offer relevant, stable, and cost-effective training.


c. Commodity and Problem Research Priorities

Commodity and problem priorities are determined by the crops
most important in the caloric intake of the rural and urban
population, land area sown to particular crops, and current and
prospective demand for the food crop in each respective ecological
zone. The following commodities have highest priority for Africa:
maize, sorghum, millet, upland rice, roots and tubers (cassava and
potatoes), and edible legumes (beans and cowpeas). Relative
importance would differ by ecological zones. Forages and trees are
considered important in mixed farming situations, i.e., mixed food




- 21 -


crop and livestock farming and agro--forestry. AID will not provide
support for research on other crops (e.g., groundnuts, soybeans,
horticultural crops) that are important in some local circumstances
but which are relatively unimportant in terms of Africa's overall
food needs.


2. Research Networks

Because of the large number of small countries in Africa, it is not
cost-effective to approach agricultural research problems entirely on a
country-by-country basis. Most of the national agricultural research
systems in small countries are thinly-staffed and poorly-financed.
Agricultural research is costly. A "critical mass" of scientists is
needed to produce new knowledge through basic and applied research. In
many cases they are not always available at the national level. It is,
however, possible to build a critical mass of scientists through the
collective joining of scientific manpower in the small countries and
focusing their work on a specific problem. Problems that transcend
national borders or even regional groupings often may be addressed more
effectively by institutions that are interregional or global in nature.
These-instituitions, in turn, can provide support for national programs
in specific program areas.

AID will facilitate agricultural research cooperation on a zonal
basis to complement national research efforts. The major national
research institutions producing new technologies will be encouraged to
help implement collaborative networks with other national research
systems and regional and international research centers. These
collaborative networks will be inter-country working relationships
facilitating the planning and coordination of research and the
backstopping of national programs. In most instances, the IARCs will
take a leadership role in development of networks. In some cases, it
may be necessary to support small African regional institutions to
coordinate with IARCs to lead network development. Over time, strong
African national agricultural research systems must assume leadership
roles in these scientific networks.

The development of networks in sub-Saharan Africa will plan
strategic components of research to solve problems, foster the exchange
of scientific knowledge, and facilitate cost-effectiveness; they will
not be means for building large operational staffs or physical
facilities. Several topics are especially promising for collaborative
networks. On-farm research with a farming systems perspective is one of
these- In addition, we plan to support, initially, four to six
commodity networks, each in one or more zones. The following appear to
have highest potential:

o Maize Eastern Highlands, Western Coastal, Zaire Basin, and
Southern Zones





- 22 -


o Sorghum and Millet -- Southern, Sahelian, Sudanian, and Eastern
Highlands Zones

o Roots and Tubers -- Zaire Basin and Western Coastal Zones

o Edible Legumes (particularly beans and cowpeas) -- Eastern
Highlands, Western Coastal, and Sahelian Zones

o Upland Rice -- Western Coastal Zone and Madagascar

o Forages in Mixed Farming Systems -- Sahelian, Sudanian, Eastern
Highlands, and Southern Zones.


B. Faculties of Agriculture

We propose to improve the quality and increase the numbers of trained
scientists to carry out research by supporting faculties of agriculture in
four to six technology producing countries. The focus will be upon
university building in higher agricultural education at graduate degree
levels through the provision of support to university research, teaching,
and linkages to agricultural production. Concentration will be upon
agricultural sciences, other sciences related to agricultural production,
agricultural and rural social sciences, food utilization, and university
administration and management.

The ultimate objectives of support to higher agricultural education are
twofold: first, to-develop institutions of higher education and research
that are responsive to commodity research priorities and agricultural
production problems; and second, to produce a critical mass of
well-trained, practically-oriented scientists willing and equipped to work
on high-priority commodities and research problems.

Types and amounts of support will vary from institution to institution
depending on their relative levels of development and areas of expertise
and may include staff development and long-term training; classroom,
laboratory, and dormitory facilities; curriculum and administrative
development; research support; library development; support for networking
with other professionals; and linkages to agricultural production. This
will require a minimum of a 20 to 25 year commitment of support for each
institution.

The following criteria will be considered in selecting faculties of
agriculture:

a) Relative institutional strength in terms of quality of education offered;

b) Institutional recognition of the need for links among research,
teaching, and agricultural production;







- 23 -


c) National budgetary support with a demonstrated history of steady support
and reasonable per-faculty funding;

d) Potential for collaborating with and supplementing national agricultural
research services and independent research institutes;

e) Potential for playing a leadership role in the country and region and a
national policy which supports it.

The focus on faculties of agriculture is complementary to agricultural
research and therefore the criteria also should take into consideration an
attempt to strengthen at least one faculty of agriculture in each
ecological zone; the zonal priorities for commodity and problem research;
and the potential of selected faculties of agriculture to establish
themselves to prepare professional resources to serve research needs at
both national and regional levels, e.g., if maize research has been
identified as a priority in Southern Africa, an AID-funded training
institution in that region should provide professional support to such
research.

Disciplinary priorities will be identified to support the commodity and
problem priorities identified for each institution as well as the teaching
function and agricultural production linkages of the university. Specific
departments and units to be strengthened in each institution will vary from
country to country. However, the following criteria will be applied in
determining priorities upon which to focus support:

a) Priority attention will be given to development of those departments in
scientific agricultural fields which most clearly meet the commodity and
problem priorities identified for the institution, e.g., agronomy, soil
science, plant pathology.

b) Choice of content focus will also be aimed at strengthening the
institution's capability to conduct research and link that research to
the agricultural production systems of the country and the region.
Therefore, such departments as statistics and computer science may
require strengthening in order to support viable research efforts while
departments such as agricultural economics, rural sociology, and rural
education may require strengthening to ensure linkage to agricultural
production and farming systems research.


C. AID Funding Levels

Funding requirements for the plan to support agricultural research and
faculties of agriculture in Africa can be separated into four components:
(1) national agricultural research systems and zonal research networks; (2)
faculties of agriculture; (3) IARCs, CRSPs, and other centrally-funded
projects; and (4) a small set of U.S. Title XII institutions.






- 24 -


AID's experience in supporting national research systems and regional
research networks in Africa provides some guidance in determining the
funding requirements for these components, at least with respect to the
Africa Bureau's and the S&T Bureau's roles in providing technical
assistance, training, and essential equipment and commodities. For
national programs, we plan to commit $50-75 million annually and $800
million over the next 15-year period. Of this amount, a relatively large
proportion will be spent on (a) major efforts to establish a technology
producing capacity in a handful of countries where this is warranted; and
(b) major efforts to establish a technology adapting capacity in a handful
of promising countries that are currently without such capacity. In other
countries (the majority of cases), lesser amounts will be spent on training
or making improvements to existing capacities to produce and/or adapt
agricultural technology. For the zonal networks, we plan to commit $2-3
million per year for each of five networks, for a total of $10 to $15
million annually and $200 million over the 15-year period. In sum, a
commitment of $60 to $90 million annually and $1 billion over the next
15-year period is planned for these two components. For the most part,
these funds will be found through reallocations of resources.

About $20 million annually, or $300 million over the next 15-year
period, will be provided to support the work of the IARCs, CRSPs, and other
centrally-funded projects in Africa.

The anticipated cost of developing the faculties of agriculture in four
to six countries is approximately $30 million per institution for the first
5 years with decreased-support for the nest_15 years or a total of $25 to
$35 million annually for all the faculties over the first 5 years and -
perhaps $10 to $15 million annually over the remaining period or-a total of
$250 million over the 15-year period.

We do not have estimates yet of support to Title XII institutions.

We emphasize that these estimates are by no means the total resource
requirements of research and faculties of agriculture in Africa. For
example, we have not completely estimated the costs of participant training
in the U.S. or more than the most minimal research investments in the
moderate-to-low potential countries and lower priority commodities and
problems. This underlines the importance of achieving major improvements
in donor cooperation and the urgency of improving host country capacities
to formulate and adhere to strong national research objectives and
priorities.


D. Implementation of This Plan

This plan clearly implies some degree of restructuring of our assistance
to African agricultural research. This restructuring is to be achieved in
an evolutionary way, in the ordinary course of program and project
development. For ongoing activities, the provisions of the plan will be
incorporated into the scopes of work of teams undertaking mid-term








- 25 -


evaluations and developing second-phase projects. Such evaluations will
then be done with an eye toward the priorities developed in the plan. For
new starts, the provisions of this plan will be factored into reviews of
CDSSs and ABSs. This will ensure that programs and projects that are
congruent with plan priorities receive appropriate support in the process
of Africa Bureau and S&T Bureau resource allocation, and it will also
ensure that inconsistent proposals are identified early at a time when
differences of emphasis can still be effectively reconciled.

AID's policy paper on Institutional Development states that projects of
this type may be authorized for ten years. This has important implications
for the development of African capacities to undertake agricultural
research and to improve faculties of agriculture because long-term
commitments of this sort will engender fully supportive responses on the
part of host country administrators and will call forth equally supportive
responses from the U.S. Title-XII community and other involved
institutions. Thus there is a presumption in favor of ten-year
authorizations for future AID assistance to Africa in the areas of
agricultural research and faculty development.



VI. The Bottom Line: Food Self-Reliance

The ultimate objectives of U.S. assistance in food and agriculture are to
enable African countries to become self-reliant in food, assure food security,
and achieve economic growth.

There is no certainty that these objectives can be achieved by African
countries. However, there is certainty that the objective will not be
achieved unless fundamental efforts are initiated now.

Technology alone cannot do the entire job. Institutional innovations,
policy supports, and infrastructure investments must occur if agriculture is
to develop and benefits are to spread widely among rural populations.
However, without improved agricultural technologies, resulting from research,
few development programs will move very far or have lasting effect.








AFRICAN RESEARCH FUNDING


S IN MIUON
20 -




150 -


00c -


n-H


76 80 84
CGMA SYSTEM


76 80 84
BILATERAL


I


Annex A.


MAJOR CROP ZONES


76' 80 84
MULTILATERAL


*1976 multilateral data incomplete
1984 bars are estimates based on partial 1984 reporting
Sources: World Bank, IFPRI, CGIAR









Major Crop Zones and Supporting Data


Predominant Agricultural Number of Food
Agroclimatic Total Population Average Yield Emergency
Key Condition and Total Agricultural Density per ha of Primary Countries in
Geographical Population Population of Cultivated Cereals Total Countries
Food Crop Zone Location (millions) (millions) Area (kg/ha) for Each Region

.. Wheat Mediterranean Winter
Rainfall 95.91 45.24 1.77 1219 1 of 5

Sorghum/Millet Semi-Arid Thopics-
Sahelian Belt 141.08 88.88 1.42 544 9 of 11

Roots/Rice Humid Tropical-Coastal
West Plus Madagascar 29.84 22.92 2.07 1416 5 of 7

Roots/Maize Humid Tropical-
Equatorial Lowland 81.29 53.14 1.82 692 5 of 11

( Maize Sub-Humid YTopics--
Central and Southern 24.11 16.26 1.43 1187 2 of 7

j1 Maize/Pulses Modified TIopical-
Equatorial Highlands 93.48 74.00 2.49 1585 6 of 6
M&tbh. 19as
Source o Data: World Ban. IPRI. FAO and lADS. 1982 or latest avaiijble data.
Source: News from CGIAR, Volume 5, Number 1, March 1985


u .. .l Ii .I







Annex B.


Production of Major Crops

Average annual change in volume percentb
Average annual volume 1969-71 1977-79 1969-71
(thousands of metric tons) to to to
Crop' 1969-71 1977-79 1980-82 1977-79 1980-82 1980-82
Cereals
Maize
Sub-Saharan Africa 12,132 13,438 13,774 1.3 0.8 1.2
Oil exporters 1,691 1,814 1,904 0.9 1.6 1.1
Other countries 10,441 11,624 11,870 1.4 0.7 1.2
Millet
Sub-Saharan Africa 8,875 9,178 9,615 0.4 1.6 0.7
Oil exporters 2,870 3,083 3,299 0.9 2.3 1.3
Other countries 6,005 6,095 6,316 0.2 1.2 0.5
Rice (paddy)
Sub-Saharan Africa 4,735 5,936 6,248 2.9 1.7 2.5
Oil exporters 380 856 1,268 10.7 14.0 11.6
Other countries 4,335 5,080 4,980 1.9 -0.7 1.3
Sorghum
Sub-Saharan Africa 8,591 9,768 10,834 1.6 3.5 2.1
Oil exporters 3,632 3,768 3,783 0.5 0.1 0.4
Other countries 4,959 6,000 7,051 2.4 5.5 3.2
Wheat
Sub-Saharan Africa 1,243 1,220 1,369 _-0.2 3.9 0.9
-Oil exporters 33 31 35 -0.8 4.1 0.6
Other countries 1,210 1,189 1,334 -0.2 3.9 0.9
Total cereals
Sub-Saharan Africa 35,576 39,550 41,840 1.3 1.9 1.5
Oil exporters 8,606 9,552 10,289 1.3 2.5 1.6
Other countries 26.970 29,998 31,551 1.3 1.7 1.4
Oil and oilseeds
Coconuts
Sub-Saharan Africa 1,451 1,563 1,528 0.9 -0.8 0.5
Oil exporters 86 90 90 0.6 0.0 0.4
Other countries 1,365 -1,473 1,438 1.0 -0.8 0.5
Groundnuts-in shell) -
Sub-Saharan Africa 5,194 4,826 4,325 -0.9 -3.6 -1.7
Oil exporters 1,699 503 625 -14.1 7.5 -8.7
Other countries 3,495 4.323 3,700 2.7 -5.1 0.5
Palm kernels
Sub-Saharan Africa 711 664 743 -0.9 3.8 0.4
Oil exporters 306 310 362 0.2 5.3 1.6
Other countries 405 354 381 -1.7 2.5 -0.5
Palm oil
Sub-Saharan Africa 1,112 1,321 1,372 2.2 1.3 2.0
Oil exporters 579 718 734 2.7 0.7 2.2
Other countries 533 603 638 1.6 1.9 1.7
Other crops
Pulses
Sub-Saharan Africa 3,861 4,207 4,709 1.1 3.8 1.8
Oil exporters 925 923 %3 0.0 1.4 0.4
Other countries 2.936 3,284 3,746 1.4 4.5 2.2
Roots and tubers
Sub-Saharan Africa 66.694 77,026 81,026 1.8 1.7 1.8
Oil exporters 27,674 31.488 32,056 1.6 0.6 1.4
Other countries 39,020 45,538 48,970 1.9 2.4 2.1
Seed cotton
Sub-Saharan Africa 2,279 1,867 1,705 -2.5 -3.0 -2.6
Oil exporters 268 195 113 -3.9 -16.6 -7.6
Other countries 2,011 1.672 1,592 -2.3 -1.6 -2.1
Sugar
Sub-Saharan Africa 2,303 2.806 3,203 2.5 4.5 3.0
Oil exporters 179 109 139 -6.0 8.4 -2.3
Other countries 2.124 2,697 3,064 3.0 4.3 3.4
a. Major crops that are totally or nearly totally exported (such as coffee, tea, cocoa, and rubber) are shown in table 24, which
covers exports of agricultural commodities.
b. End point growth rate.


Source: The World Bank, Toward Sustained Development in sub-Sahara Africa.
World Bank, Washington, D.C. September 1984.








Annex C.


Population Growth and Projections
Hypothetical Assumed
Atvrage annual growth size of year of
of population Population stationary reaching net Population
(percent) (millions) population reproduction ,momentum
1960-70 1970-82 1980-2000 1982 1990- 2000 (millions) rate of 1 1980
Low-income economies 2.4 w 2.8 w 3.3 w 217 t 278 t 386 t
Low-income semiarid 2.5 w 2.6 w 2.7 w 31 t 37 t 48t
1 Chad 1.9 2.0 2.5 5 6 7 22 2040 1.8
2 Mali 2.5 2.7 2.8 7 9 12 42 2040 1.8
3 Burkina Faso 2.0 2.0 2.4 7 8 10 35 2040 1.7
4 Somalia 2.8 2.8 2.4 5 5 7 23 2045 1.8
5 Niger 3.4 3.3 3.3 6 8 11 40 2040 1.9
6 Gambia, The 2.2 3.2 2.3 1 1 1 3 2045 1.9
Low-income other 2.4 w 2.9 w 3.4 w 186 t 241 t 338 t
7 Ethiopia 2.4 2.0 3.1 33 42 57 231 2045 1.9
8 Guinea-Bissau 2.3 1 1 1 4 2045 1.8
9 Zaire 2.0 3.0 3.3 31 40 55 172 2030 1.9
10 Malawi 2.8 3.0 3.4 7 8 12 48 2040 1.9
11 -Uganda 3.0 2.7 3.4 14 17 25 89 2035 2.0
12 Rwanda- 2.6 3.4 3.6 6 7 I1 47 2040 1.9
13 Burundi 1.4 2.2 3.0 4 5 7 27 2040 -1.9
14 Tanzania 2.7 3.4 3.5 20 26 36 117 2030 2.0
15 Benin 2.6 2.7 3.3 4 5 7 23 2035 2.0
16 Central African Rep. 1.6 2.1 2.8 2 3 4 13 2040 1.9
17 Guinea 1.5 2.0 2.4 6 7 9 28 2045 1.8
18 Madagascar 2.2 2.6 3.2 9 12 16 54 2035 1.9
19 Togo 3.0 2.6 3.3 3 4 5 17 2035 2.0
20 Ghana 2.3 3.0 3.9 12 17 24 83 2030 2.0
21 Kenya .3.2- 4.0 4.4 18 26 40 153 2030 2.1
22Sierra Leone 1-7 2.0 2.4- 3 4 -5- 16 2045 -1.9
23 Mozambique 2.1- 4.3 3.4 13 17 24 -82 2035 2.0
Middle-income oil importers 2.7 w 3.3 w 3.3 w 57 t 74 t 101 t
24 Sudan 2.2 3.2 2.9 20 25 34 112 2035 1.8
25 Mauritania 2.3 2.3 2.6 2 2 3 8 2035 1.8
26 Liberia 3.2 3.5 3.5 2 3 4 12 2030 1.8
27 Senegal 2.3 2.7 3.1 6 8 10 36 2040 1.9
28 Lesotho 2.0 2.4 2.8 1 2 2 7 2030 1.8
29 Zambia 2.6 3.1 3.6 6 8 11 37 2030 2.0
30 Zimbabwe 3.6 3.2 4.4 8 11 16 62 2030 2.1
31 Botswana 2.6 4.3 3.6 1 1 2 6 2025 1.9
32 Swaziland 2.7 3.2 3.9 1 1 1 5 2030 2.0
33 Ivory Coast 3.7 4.9 3.7 9 12 17 58 2035 2.0
34 Mauritius 2.2 1.4 1.6 1 1 1 2 2010 1.8
Middle-income oil exporters 2.4 w 2.6 w 3.4 w 111 t 144 t 203 t
35 Nigeria 2.5 2.6 3.5 91 119 169 618 2035 2.0
36 Cameroon 2.0 3.0 3.5 9 12 17 65 2035 1.9
37 Congo, People's Rep. 2.4 3.0 3.8 2 2 3 10 2025 1.9
38 Gabon 0.4 1.4 2.6 1 1 1 3 2035 1.7
39 Angola 2.1 2.5 2.8 8 10 13 44 2040 1.9
Sub-Saharan Africa 2.4 w 2.8 w 3.3 w 385 t -496 t 690 t
All low-income countries 2.3 w 1.9 w 1.7w 2,269t 2,621t 3,097t
All lower middle-income
countries 2.5 w 2.5 w 2.4 w 673 t 816 t 1,023 t
All upper middle-income
countries 2.6 w 2.3 w 2.1 w 490t 588 t 718 t
Industrial market economies 1.1 w 0.7 w 0.4 w 723 t 749 t 780 t
Note: For data comparability and coverage see the technical notes.
a. For the assumptions used in the projections see the technical notes.



Source: The World Bank, Toward Sustained Development in sub-Sahara Africa.
World Bank, Washington, D.C. September 1984.






Annex D


Agricultural Research


Commodity

Cereals

Roots/
tubers

Pulses
(legumes)

Oilsds/
Hort
Animals

TOTALS


Regi
Regi
$000

18,82C

54C

2,50C



54C

22,40(


AID Annual Funding Levels per Commodity FY 1984
(Obligations)

onal Bilateral IARCs Cent-Fund C
%) $000 ( %) $000 ( %) $000 ( %) $0O

(84) 35,410 (70) 5,330 (37) 840 (42) 2,3

( 2) 3,730 ( 7) 2,300 (16) 180 ( 9)

(11) 2,250 ( 4) 1,870 (13) 140 ( 7) 1,6

1,200 ( 2) --290 (-2) 160 (-8) __5

( 2) 8,410 (17) 4,610 (32) 680 (34) 8

) 51,000 14,000 2,000 5,3


RSPs

30 (
30 (


40 (

10-(

00 (

00


Total Ann
%) $000 (%)

44) 62,730 (72)

6,750 ( 6)


31) 8,400 ( 7)

10) 2,180 ( 2)
15) 15,040 (13)

95,100


Source: Africa Bureau and Science and Technology Bureau, AID




Annex E


External Funding for Agricultural Research to Africa 1976-80 1/
(Constant 1975 U.S. 000 dollars deflated from 1981 IMF Yearbook)


1976 198(

Australia ..-
Belgium 2/ n.a. 5,55;
Canada 11,877 6,932
Denmark 5
Finland 11 5
France 30,589 42,090
Japan 32 297
Netherlands 3/ 2,824 5,289
New Zealand ..
Norway 52 1,918
Sweden 608 1,737
Switzerland 3,4/ 567 234
W. Germany 4,5/ 4,827 4,827
United Kingdom 4/ 978 302
United States 4/ 5,800 72,000

Total Bilateral 58.165 141.242


EEC
IBRD
IDB 5/
-UNDPTFAO 4,5,6/

Total Multilateral

Total Bilateral and Multilateral

CGIAR System

Overall Total


n.a.
2,660

-- n.a.


2,660

60,825



60,825


0
2


8,700
18,500
--
23,300

50,500

191,742



191,742


1/ Does not include base costs of technical assistance organizations of donor
countries or agencies.
2/ Data provided for 1980 only.
3/ Includes contribution to core budgets of CGIAR.
4/ Includes some global projects not identified by region.
5/ Five-year total pro-rated by year.
6/ UNDP data for regions apply only to FAO; additional allowance for non-FAO
projects included in 1976 and 1980 UNDP totals.


Sources of data: Country reports to FAO and/or IFPRI; World Bank, UNDP, FAO data
supplied to IFPRI, IDB data supplied to IFPRI, Bilateral Agency.Reports, Marches
Tropicaux (France). Compiled by Peter Oram of IFPRI.


-----




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs