Institutional Reform of the Mozambican Agricultural Research System:

1
Institutional Reform of the Mozambican
Agricultural Research System

• The running chameleon.
• Prepared by M. Harun R. Costa and W. Peterson
• FARA MEETING 2002
• 18th March 2002
• Maputo,

2
I - INTRODUCTION

• What is happening in Mozambique regarding
  National Council for Agricultural Research
  
• Participation of no public entities
  (stakeholders).

3
AGRICULTURE IN MOZAMBIQUE

• A. DATA AND GROWTH INDICATORS
• - Mozambique with an area of approximately
  786.000 km2
  
• 80 of the population (of which 91 are women and
  70 men),
  
• and generates - 80 of revenues from export.

4
(No Transcript)
5
AGRICULTURE IN MOZAMBIQUE

• Figure 1 Crop production

6
AGRICULTURE IN MOZAMBIQUE

• Figure 2 Average Yield of the major Crops

7
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• A. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

8
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• Before independence
• two autonomous
• Mozambican Agronomic Research Institute 1965
• crop and animal husbandry and forestry,
• three regional research centres

9
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• A. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
• Mozambican Veterinary Research Institute 1966
• animal pests and diseases, and artificial
  insemination.

10
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• After independence in 1975
• the autonomy was abolished
• National Agronomic Research Institute
• Directorate of Agriculture (DINA)
• National Veterinary Research Institute
• Directorate of Livestock (DINAP).

11
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• Artificial Insemination Centre (CEFRIA) 1981
• Animal Production Research Institute
• Directorate of Forestry and Wildlife (DNFFB)
  (1985)
  
• Forestry Experimental Centre

12
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• B. AGRICULTURE RESEARCH SYSTEM SET UP
• The three formal public research institutes were
  given legal identities
  
• INIA 1987
• INIVE 1987
• IPA 1988
• to operate as subordinate institutions of MADER
  with administrative and financial autonomy.

13
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• B. AGRICULTURE RESEARCH SYSTEM SET UP

14
(No Transcript)
15
Table 2 List of research programs.
16
(No Transcript)
17
(No Transcript)
18
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• C. RESOURCES AVAILABLE
• Human resources
• The human resource base is very weak and only a
  few persons have research training (PhD degree, 6
  out of 111 researchers (Figure 3)).

19
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• C. RESOURCES AVAILABLE
• Figure 3. Available staff in research
  institutions under MADER, 2000

20
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• C. RESOURCES AVAILABLE
• Financial resources

21

• Are heavily dependent on external support

22
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• C. RESOURCES AVAILABLE

23

• Figure 4 Agricultural research funding (actual
  expenditure) to INIA, IPA, INIVE and CEF in
  1993-1999 period (Recurrent budget, investment
  budget and projects).

24
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• D. MAJOR CONSTRAINTS
• Human resources
• Shortage of qualified management and scientific
  staff in the system
  
• Opportunity cost for senior staff higher outside
  the public sector
  
• Research staff concentrated in Maputo
• No continuity in management staff

25
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• D. MAJOR CONSTRAINTS
• Financial resources
• Governments low priority for research (low of
  Agr GDP for research)
  
• Year-to-year fluctuations in resource allocation
• Cumbersome disbursement procedures

26
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• D. MAJOR CONSTRAINTS
• Infrastructure resources
• Poor country coverage and location of research
  buildings infrastructure
  
• Under investment in research equipment

27
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• D. MAJOR CONSTRAINTS
• Research management
• Poor organisational management procedures
  (planning, implementation, monitoring and
  evaluation, impact assessment, accountability and
  transparency problems)
• Weak research planning and priority setting
• Weak researcher time management (mainly in
  Maputo)
  
• Poor communication and co-ordination between
  research programmes
  
• Poor research result dissemination and publication

28
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• D. MAJOR CONSTRAINTS
• Research planning and stakeholder participation
• Poor priority setting procedures (Central Maputo
  planning)
  
• Knowledge gap between farmers and researchers
  knowledge
  
• No forums for effective stakeholder participation

29
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• D. MAJOR CONSTRAINTS
• Donor communication and coordination
• Research agenda dominated by different projects
  and less attention to government objectives and
  institutional development
  
• Poor donor confidence in public research system
• Lack of awareness of research results and problems

30
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• D. MAJOR CONSTRAINTS
• Government policies
• Restructuring proposals have not been
  implemented
  
• Stakeholder control over public resources not
  accepted
  
• Research council politicised

31
THE AGRICULTURE RESEARCH IN MOZAMBIQUE

• E. MAJOR RESULTS
• Research recommendations

32

• documents
• extension booklets and leaflets).
• Some adoption studies

33
THE INSTITUTIONAL REFORM PROCESS IN THE CONTEXT
OF PROAGRI
34

• A. WHERE WE ARE COMING FROM
• The institutes have been characterized by
• weak communications between farmer and research,
  
  
• centralized decision making and planning,
• insufficient stations for country coverage,
• lack of coordination between the institutes,
• heavy constraints due to insufficient
  investments,
  
• and lack of producer/stakeholder participation in
  decision making.

35
THE INSTITUTIONAL REFORM PROCESS IN THE CONTEXT
OF PROAGRI

• B. WHERE WE NOW ARE
• In a phase of transition toward a more effective
  and responsive system.
  
• Establishment of the research governing council
  (CTIA),
  
• some improvements in communications between
  stakeholders and the institutes have occurred in
  the last 3 years.
  
• Decisions have been taken in the last year to
  re-structure, re-organize
  
• and decentralize research to four Agro-ecological
  Zonal Centers.

36
THE INSTITUTIONAL REFORM PROCESS IN THE CONTEXT
OF PROAGRI

• C. WHERE WE ARE HEADING

37

• Design of good governance entities/mechanisms
  which allow
  
• the effective participation of the stakeholders,
  building partnerships for research and technology
  flow,
  
• decentralization of the research agenda to the
  agro-ecological zonal centers
  
• and providing more adequate and stable funding.

38
THE INSTITUTIONAL REFORM PROCESS IN THE CONTEXT
OF PROAGRI

• C. WHERE WE ARE HEADING
• The major goal of the institutional reform is
• to rationalize the scarce resources for research
  
  
• and build an effective and efficient NARS which
  is responsive to clients needs and play a role in
  poverty reduction.

39
THE INSTITUTIONAL REFORM PROCESS IN THE CONTEXT
OF PROAGRI

• D. THE RUNNING CHAMELEON
• the slow motion steps
• toward establishing the new organization of the
  NARS.
  
• large investments to strength some research
  institutes with little impact on performance of
  the institutes

40
THE INSTITUTIONAL REFORM PROCESS IN THE CONTEXT
OF PROAGRI

• D. THE RUNNING CHAMELEON
• There is a perception that
• The reform process for the agricultural research
  system is not moving due to resistance to change
  
  
• and lack of political commitment.

41
THE INSTITUTIONAL REFORM PROCESS IN THE CONTEXT
OF PROAGRI

• D. THE RUNNING CHAMELEON
• four activities were considered crucial for
  beginning the process of strengthening the
  agricultural research system
  
• Strengthen the role of existing CTIA
• Start a feasibility study
• Establishment of programs at selected
  agro-ecological Zonal Research Center and
  
• Establishment of a Competitive Agriculture
  Research Fund.
  
• a speed of a running chameleon.

42
THE INSTITUTIONAL REFORM PROCESS IN THE CONTEXT
OF PROAGRI

• E. THE NEW OPTION FOR ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
• Challenging issues
• genuine autonomy
• good governance, without causing major disruption
  for the research institutes ongoing activities.
  
  
• The proposal of statutes and other legal
  documents
  
• endorsement and approval by the policy makers.

43
THE INSTITUTIONAL REFORM PROCESS IN THE CONTEXT
OF PROAGRI

• E. THE NEW OPTION FOR ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

44
(No Transcript)
45
SUSTAINABILITY OF THE PROCESS OF INSTITUTIONAL
REFORM

• A. AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH IN A CHANGING CONTEXT
• external environment.
• trade liberalization, market globalization and
  increased competition

46
SUSTAINABILITY OF THE PROCESS OF INSTITUTIONAL
REFORM

• B. OWNERSHIP OF THE CHANGE PROCESS
• Sustainability of the changes
• is greatly dependent on ownership by
• the stakeholders (the institutes, donors and
  partners in research and development).
  
• decisions must be owned in this sense by national
  staff as well as partners,

47
SUSTAINABILITY OF THE PROCESS OF INSTITUTIONAL
REFORM

• AGREED POLICIES AND DECISION MAKING
• decisions concerning the institutional reform of
  the agricultural research system are within the
  PROAGRI framework
  
• Research priorities focused on adaptive and
  applied research in a farming systems context

48
SUSTAINABILITY OF THE PROCESS OF INSTITUTIONAL
REFORM

• AGREED POLICIES AND DECISION MAKING
• Stakeholders representation at National
  Agricultural Research Council and Zonal Research
  Council level
  
• Linking research, extension and training
• Financing of research through a plurality of
  sources
  
• Provision of research through a plurality of
  institutions public and private.

49
SUSTAINABILITY OF THE PROCESS OF INSTITUTIONAL
REFORM

• RESOURCES AND PLANNING
• the PROAGRI common funding mechanism
• has shown to be below standards
• The research managers are overwhelmed with
  planning and with funding related issues

50
KEY PRACTICAL REFORM ISSUES AND CONCLUSION

• A. EXPERIENCES WITH REFORM
• it is important to plan the steps and know the
  roles of the key players
  
• (policy makers,
• research community
• and stakeholders in the process of change.

51
KEY PRACTICAL REFORM ISSUES AND CONCLUSION

• B. VISION FOR RESEARCH
• demand driven agricultural technologies that
  enables the intensification of agricultural
  production of the poor resource farmers.

52
KEY PRACTICAL REFORM ISSUES AND CONCLUSION

• C . RESEARCH/TECHNOLOGY ADVOCACY AND SUPPORT
• advocacy for science and research.
• to support the research system on many fronts,
  including

53
KEY PRACTICAL REFORM ISSUES AND CONCLUSION

• C . RESEARCH/TECHNOLOGY ADVOCACY AND SUPPORT
• Weaknesses and inadequacies that needs government
  attention and decisions
  
• Reduced numbers of qualified scientific
  management staff
  
• Research career development, adequate salary and
  incentives, promotion, and human resource
  relocation policy
  
• Funding policy of research in general and
  agricultural research in particular.
  
• Training of scientific staff policy.

54
KEY PRACTICAL REFORM ISSUES AND CONCLUSION

• C . RESEARCH/TECHNOLOGY ADVOCACY AND SUPPORT
• Guide and not be guided on research funding
  allocation and coordination
  
• Improve quality and capability of Extension
  services (demand driven services schemes of
  outsourcing, and contracting )
  
• Definition on the balance between attention to
  resource poor producers and commercial high input
  producers as a mean to define national research
  priorities and government budget.

55
KEY PRACTICAL REFORM ISSUES AND CONCLUSION

• C . RESEARCH/TECHNOLOGY ADVOCACY AND SUPPORT
• Weaknesses that need institutional attention
• Poor organizational management procedures
• Lack of institutional planning development
• Weak definition of prioritization in project
  portfolio
  
• Non accountability, monitoring and evaluation
  practices

56
KEY PRACTICAL REFORM ISSUES AND CONCLUSION

• C . RESEARCH/TECHNOLOGY ADVOCACY AND SUPPORT
• Lack of research integration (planning,
  communication, collaboration within and between
  Programs, Departments and institutes )
  
• Donor program/project dependency
• Weak/ non consistent client demand driven
• Low integration with Extension service and other
  NGOs partners.