Author:
Meinke Holger,Ash Andrew,Barrett Christopher B.,Smith Allison Grove,Graff Zivin Joshua S.,Abera Fetien,Garcia Magali,Just David R.,Obokoh Nompumelelo H.,Kadiyala Suneetha,Negra Christine,Torrance Lesley,Beaudreault Amy R.,Boulanger Pierre
Abstract
AbstractIn this perspective, we offer insights into the evolution of CGIAR’s research and innovation portfolio from 2019 to 2023, underpinning the transformative journey towards One CGIAR. With this contribution, we aim to strengthen the social and environmental sustainability components of allied, future Research for Development (R4D) portfolios. We explore three interlinked operational frameworks—Quality of Research for Development (QoR4D), Comparative Advantage (CA) Analysis, and Inclusive Innovation—and present practical tools and lessons for enhancing the quality and impact of R4D initiatives. This work is based on insights gained by the Independent Science for Development Council (ISDC) during the review of proposals for the current One CGIAR research portfolio. QoR4D’s four dimensions (relevance, scientific credibility, legitimacy, and effectiveness) guide research strategy, portfolio development, evaluation and performance standards, fostering intentional design and transparent assessment. CA Analysis leverages organisational strengths, facilitating purposeful partnerships, and strategic resource allocation. Inclusive Innovation emphasises stakeholder inclusivity, amplifying legitimacy, relevance, and effectiveness. Insights are drawn from the application of these frameworks, highlighting the importance of collaboration, the need for a mindset shift and institutional reform, specialisation, and impact maximisation. By adopting these lessons, CGIAR and allied organisations can collectively address global food system challenges more effectively, driving sustainable agricultural innovation and societal transformation. This article aims to contribute to advancing sustainable agriculture and underscores the significance of systemic collaborations in creating more resilient and equitable food systems.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference56 articles.
1. McCalla, A. F. CGIAR Reform—Why So Difficult? Review, Reform, Renewal, Restructuring, Reform Again and Then “The New CGIAR”—So Much Talk and So Little Basic Structural Change—Why?. UC Davis: Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7h04960c (2014).
2. Leeuwis, C., Klerkx, L. & Schut, M. Reforming the research policy and impact culture in the CGIAR: integrating science and systemic capacity development. Glob. Food Sec. 16, 17–21 (2018).
3. CGIAR System Council. One CGIAR: A Bold Set of Recommendations to the System Council. CGIAR System Council 9th Meeting, Chengdu, China. https://storage.googleapis.com/cgiarorg/2019/11/SC9-02_SRG-Recommendations-OneCGIAR.pdf (CGIAR System Council, 2019).
4. CGIAR System Organization. CGIAR 2030 Research and Innovation Strategy: Transforming Food, Land, and Water Systems in A Climate Crisis. Montpellier, France, https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/handle/10568/110918/OneCGIAR-Strategy.pdf?sequence=6&isAllowed=y (CGIAR System Organization, 2021).
5. Lele, U. J. The CGIAR at 31: an Independent Meta-evaluation of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research. The World Bank, Washington, D. C., United States of America, https://doi.org/10.1596/0-8213-5645-3 (2004).