I would like to add to Alain's comment, with which I agree in principle. I have worked a lot at the "interface" of IFAD and the CGIAR (through IWMI as directly with IFAD). I think that moving to an effective partnership that really promotes innovation and scaling up innovative ideas would require quite drastic changes in the culture and incentive systems of both institutions. Both share basic values and goals as Alain notes; but the CGIAR is not yet at a point where large-scale application of research results is seen as high priority investment; and IFAD is overly focused on committing and spending the funds allocated for each country. It has a flawed process of project development and implementation which I documented in a report a few years ago. This is compounded by over-burdened and under-resources country program managers who are not necessarily rewarded for innovation as a high priority. I think the two institutions would need to engage in depth to find a way to partner effectively over a longer term, and both sides would need to be willing to be self-critical and make real changes in how they do their complementary businesses.
I would like to add to Alain's comment, with which I agree in principle. I have worked a lot at the "interface" of IFAD and the CGIAR (through IWMI as directly with IFAD). I think that moving to an effective partnership that really promotes innovation and scaling up innovative ideas would require quite drastic changes in the culture and incentive systems of both institutions. Both share basic values and goals as Alain notes; but the CGIAR is not yet at a point where large-scale application of research results is seen as high priority investment; and IFAD is overly focused on committing and spending the funds allocated for each country. It has a flawed process of project development and implementation which I documented in a report a few years ago. This is compounded by over-burdened and under-resources country program managers who are not necessarily rewarded for innovation as a high priority. I think the two institutions would need to engage in depth to find a way to partner effectively over a longer term, and both sides would need to be willing to be self-critical and make real changes in how they do their complementary businesses.