European Commission

EVALUATION OF RESEARCH ORGANIZATIONS IN BANGLADESH

Technical Paper # 4

National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme

The National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme (NFPCSP) was initiated to enhance national capacity to implement the National Food Policy (NFP) and the ensuing Plan of Action. The NFPCSP is implemented jointly by the Food Planning and Monitoring Unit (FPMU) under the Ministry of Food and Disaster Management (MoFDM), Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh (GoB) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), with financial assistance from the European Commission (EC) and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The programme aims at strengthening the capacity of FPMU and the policy wings and planning units in partner ministries to effectively implement and monitor the Plan of Action of the NFP in order to improve food availability, enhance physical, social and economic access to food, and ensure safe and nutritious food. It also aims at expanding and deepening the civil society capacity to conduct high quality research on food security, and to establish an effective platform for dialogue between government policy officials and civil society researchers to better inform the elaboration and implementation of the NFP as well as its Plan of Action.

Copies of this publication can be downloaded from www.nfpcsp.org or requested from: _________________________________________________________________________________ NFPCSP Email: info@nfpcsp.org Khaddya Bhaban Web site: www.nfpcsp.org 16, Abdul Ghani Road, Dhaka-1000 Bangladesh

EVALUATION OF RESEARCH ORGANIZATIONS IN BANGLADESH

Prepared by: Stanley R. Johnson
Former Vice Provost of Iowa State University, USA Distinguished Professor of Economics Emeritus at Iowa State University, USA Assistant to the Dean for Special Projects, College of Agriculture, Biotechnology and Natural Resources, University of Nevada, Reno USA Director and CEO of the National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy, Washington, DC

Technical Paper # 4

National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme Dhaka, Bangladesh April 2007

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention or omission of specific companies, their products or brand names does not imply any endorsement or judgement by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Executive summary
The summary comments are of two types, and respond to the Terms of Reference reproduced in Annex 2. The first objective was to gain a fuller appreciation of the capacities of the food security policy and civil society organizations operating in Bangladesh. This included an organizational description, review of projects that they have and are completing, linkages with international and national organizations, budgets, and types of activities they undertake in addition to research. The second objective was to assess the organizations relative to taking a “leadership” role in the second phase of the National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme (NFPCSP) with specific reference to the program funded research. That is, to develop a set of recommendations on the advisability and of transferring the leadership for the implementation of the program funded research to one or a set of civil society and food security policy research organizations in Bangladesh, and the capacities for leadership of the research organizations and how to make this transfer, if the decision is taken to somehow share the leadership for this part of the NFPCSP. In addition, there are issues that are revealed by the data that were collected and the other recommendations that are made throughout the text, and on which we will comment. These relate to training, the staff, budgets, publications and the research and civil society organizations themselves. We initially address the recommendations of the Evaluation Report relative to the second objective of the terms of reference, assessing the capacity of the food security policy research organizations for a leadership role in the implementation of the program funded research of the NFPCSP.

Preparing the research and civil society organizations for a leadership role in the NFPCSP For the objective of preparing the research and civil society organizations for a leadership role, the recommendations are presented in brief form. More detailed discussion of these recommendations is provided in Section 8. Relevance of research focus on food security: The research activities of the organizations could be better focused on food security policy. This is partly due to the multiple policy research issues in Bangladesh, and to the fact that food security policy has not been well defined for and by the research community.

• Recommendation #1: Attention needs to be given to the development and use of national surveys and other national data that can provide a complete picture of the food security problem, and to identify gaps in understanding the candidates for research—an improved national food security monitoring system.

• Recommendation

#2: Research and civil society organizations need to be focused on selected national surveys and related data sets, and be encouraged to undertake research based on these surveys and other national data rather than conducting so many ”one off” specialized surveys on highly specific food policy issues.

• Recommendation #3: The NFPCSP could assist in the development of a consensus on food security monitoring and policy intervention system plan anchored on the comprehensive policy framework provided by the National Food Policy (2006). It cannot deal with the pulls of other donors on the research organizations. The government in

iv

collaboration with NFPCSP needs to support the research and agree on what are the priority issues for a successful food security monitoring and policy intervention system.

• Recommendation

#4: Policy advocacy orientation is an aspect on which the research organizations as a whole should be encouraged and perhaps directed by some type of seminar that focuses on the elements of the National Food Policy (2006) and related monitoring and intervention systems, and how to communicate this to the public and policymakers. This will assist better understanding of the essential elements of a national food security policy, the monitoring and intervention system.

Quantity, quality, availability, and relevance of qualifications of technical staff: Technical staff is generally capable and well trained. Research and civil society organizations are doing good work on rather complicated research projects addressing various aspects of the food security problem in Bangladesh.

• Recommendation • Recommendation

#5: The NFPCSP should rely more on conditions for contracts and grants that demand evidence of the capabilities of the researchers (and their organizations) for making sustained contributions to food security policy research. #6: There is availability of solid researchers in Bangladesh and they should mobilize to carry out food security policy research in Bangladesh. Government agencies and donors need to invest in the survey and other national data sets that are the “public goods” to support a more productive national food security policy research program.

Quality and timeliness of delivery: The issue here is more a function of the contracting methods than the qualifications of the research and civil society organizations. The one issue is to have them not overcommitted relative to the food security policy research being proposed.

• Recommendation #7: Make Requests for Proposals (RFPs) for grants and contracts, or at least on a part of these grants and contracts, require institutional rather than individual researcher bids. This should be especially the case for food security policy research that requires research organization and contractor investments in the large survey and other national data sets.

• Recommendation #8: Contractors should be aware of the size of the usual budgets of the food security policy and civil society research organizations. Make the contracts fit the capacities of the research organizations in terms of contract size and length of time for performing the tasks. Links with other research centers of Bangladesh, national and international: Many of the organizations have links with centers both national and international. But the deepest of these are largely with the international donors. They need to develop deeper and more cooperative linkages with both national research centers and government agencies as well.

• Recommendation #9: Enhance the seminars or other sessions that get the research and civil society organizations, government agencies and even other donors together on a regular basis (See Section 9). The government agencies should be engaged along with researchers in such fora to know that the research organizations are doing work that can help them and vice versa.

v

• Recommendations #10: There is need to strengthen linkages and clarify with donors and the government on priorities for the food security policy research and food security monitoring system.

Record of joint work with other research organizations, inside and outside of Bangladesh: The record is good especially with projects supported by donors. However, joint food security policy research with national research organizations is not common.

• Recommendation #11: The NFPCSP project could lead in making requests for proposals that encourage joint work among Bangladesh research and civil society organizations.

• Recommendation #12: Resources used for short term training of government staff could be used to place the government officials with very capable government and organizations with food security mandates world wide.

Leadership capacities of the research and civil society organizations: In general, the capacity exists in Bangladesh for taking leadership in the research component of the NFPCSP, but getting it into place will require specific training and other support.

• Recommendation #13: If there is a decision to move to a leadership contract for the food security policy research effort to national research organizations, the NFPCSP should seriously consider hosting a training session on the contracting mechanism.

• Recommendation

#14: The bidding or other arrangements for letting the food security policy leadership/contract should be designed to encourage joint or group competition for the award.

• Recommendation #15: Include a careful itemization of duties and substantive work to be completed by the food security policy research and civil society organization(s) awarded the contract.

• Recommendation • Recommendation

#16: The term of the agreement/contract should be for a period of years, possibly three. #17: In terms of managing the bidding for the food security policy leadership contract, there should be post rather than pre qualification of bidders. As well and especially for Bangladesh, a two step bidding process should be considered, with the first stage being a short (less than 10 page) concept piece, and the second stage being a complete bid from the organizations that had concept pieces selected in the first round. Training for the food security policy research organizations participating in the bidding to win the contract for leadership in the NFPCSP. This could also include orientation or preparatory modules for potential research organization contractors for bidding in the next phase or tranch of funding.

• Recommendation#18:

• Recommendation#19: On-the job type of training for government officials responsible for food security policy and research and civil society organization staff to food security relevant government departments/agencies in other countries that have outstanding

vi

programmes so as to get practical updates on issues of food security management and monitoring related research.

Findings and recommendations based on comparison of Food Security Policy Research Organizations The evaluation of food security policy research organizations by making cross comparisons generated some useful observations that are summarized in the findings below, along with a set of recommendations for possible consideration: Heterogeneity of organizations: The budget and staffing calculations show that research organizations have different pay scales (international and national) and are differently organized (with permanent and part time staff). The major implication is to give the NFPCSP information on the likely cost of conducting research in different organizations, which could be useful both in negotiating contracts for directed and in competitively awarded research projects for the NFPCSP. Different research organizations have different costs of conducting the same types of research—and we have some basic parameters to use in negotiations for contracts. Research needs areas: An exercise was completed to determine the strengths of the food security policy research in the five areas identified in the research needs assessment carried out by NFPCSP. The exercise produced two of the five research needs areas that were self evaluated as strengths or priorities for each of the eighteen research organizations evaluated. Publications: Publications surveyed showed that many organizations have different classifications of publications making it difficult to provide a summarization on the organization’s publications. Accordingly, the organizations were contacted again with a questionnaire for added specific information. Still, the major conclusion is that most of the research organizations have active publication programs. The publications per staff member in different research organizations turned out to be surprisingly similar. One of the reasons is that the publication outlets for national and international food security policy research organizations are different. International organizations tend to publish more in refereed journals than national organizations which tend to publish more in books and chapters in books. All organizations appear to have very active more popular publication policies designed to have direct influence on current policy dialogue. Collaborations: The self reported research collaborations with other research organizations national and international, reported in the follow-up questionnaire were greater than was estimated on the basis of the initial survey. Perhaps this was due to a lack of emphasis on this question in the survey. Size of budgets: The budgets of the research organizations are comparatively small. Many of the organizations are operating with a budget of less than US$ 35,000 thousand per year. A lesser number have budgets in the US$ 200,000 to $350,000 range. Only a few have budgets over US$ 1 million. This means that many of the organizations are stretched to accept and effectively utilize NFPCSP contracts of US$ 50,000.

• Recommendation#20:

Methods of making multiple year contracts should be explored, giving the food security policy research organizations longer time periods to spend the funds, but with intermediate reports on progress.

vii

Staffing: Staff of the research organizations seemed large relative to their budgets. This is especially true for support staff.

• Recommendation#21:

The research contracts let as a part of the next tranch of funds should require the lead researcher and institute to name staff to be involved in the research.

As well, there are many research organizations with a string of consultants. These consultants are not normally completely involved in the research programmes of the organizations.

• Recommendation#22: Care should be exercised in letting contracts to organizations that plan to use consultants as principals in major components of the contract work. A related issue is the capacity of the organizations to “add value” while completing the research projects. If they are just a collection of consultants there is essentially no value to the affiliation with the organization. The organizations need to add value in terms of capabilities with large data sets, models that are kept and improved over time, laboratories, etc. Until this is done, they will be rather loose and highly personal in terms of the capacity to complete projects. A related issue is the capacity of the directors of the organizations to anticipate food security policy issues that will require attention by researchers. This is an art more than a science, but critical to the success and growth of the food policy research organizations. If this is not the case, the research organizations will be largely reacting to issues that are put forward by the donors or the government—the research organizations need to have participation in project design and development.

• Recommendation

#23: The research organizations should consider utilizing the large survey data and other data bases for a national monitoring system, so as to contribute to adding value to the capacity of the research organizations. In this regard, it is necessary to construct an annual “baseline” (to be distinguished from a more complex monitoring system) for food security in Bangladesh. This baseline would be prepared by the research organizations and the government agencies that are responsible for the survey data sets and availability information as a common exercise, and presented at a national conference. The baseline would give a “snap shot” of the food security situation in Bangladesh for the year, and be updated annually. This also would get better over the years as organizations come to understand the exercise more fully. It also would give a baseline against which to evaluate the various interventions that are being considered as special research projects, and link the research organizations and the government more closely by focusing their attention on the critical issues and giving them some feel as to their relative importance.

viii

Contents
Executive summary Glossary Acknowledgements ___________________________________________________________________________ 1. Introduction 2. Evaluation Objectives 3. Evaluation Process 4. Organizations Surveyed 5. Major Findings 5.1 Research Themes 5.2. Collaborations 5.3. Staffing of the Organizations 5.4. Approximate Annual Budgets 5.5. Publications and Other Forms of Communication 6. Comparing Organizations 6.1. General Assessment of Organizations` 6.2. Food Security Monitoring and Policy Research Systems 6.3. Findings from the Comparisons Exercise 7. Contracting of Organizations 7.1. Possible Organisation of Future Research Collaboration 7.2. Selecting the Organization(s) to Take Leadership 7.3. Special Issues 8. Recommendations on contracting 8.1 Recommendations Relative to Questions in the Terms of Reference 8.2. Leadership Capacities 9. Recommendations to NFPCSP 9.1 Possible Guidance for the NFPCSP 9.2 Interventions to Improve Food Security 9.3 A Baseline and the National Nutrition Monitoring and Intervention System 10. Conclusions and recommendations 10.1. Conclusions 10.2 Recommendations ___________________________________________________________________________ Annexes Annex 1. List of Contacts iv xi xii 1 1 2 3 5 6 18 20 22 23 26 26 27 33 34 34 37 41 42 42 46 47 47 50 51 51 51 52 54 54

ix

Annex 2. Terms of Reference, Evaluation of Organizations Annex 3. Implementation Plan Annex 4. Evaluation Survey Instrument and Questionnaire Annex 5. Results of Interviews by Organization

57 58 59 62

Tables
Table 1. Information supplied by organizations 5 Table 2. Areas of food security policy research undertaken by organizations surveyed 6 Table 3. Food availability summary 10 Table 4. Physical and social access to food summary 12 Table 5. Economic access to food summary 14 Table 6. Utilization of food for nutrition summary 16 Table 7. Cross cutting and overarching themes summary 17 Table 8. Types of organizational and individual linkages, a summary 19 Table 9. Staff categories and strength 21 Table 10. Approximate annual budgets (US $) of organizations surveyed 22 Table 11. Research publications of the research and civil society organizations 24 Table 12. Selected indicator publications from the organizations participating in the survey 26 Table 13. Staff/Budget relationships per year (USD) 28 Table 14. Research priorities for the organizations 30 Table 15. Publications to staff relationships for the organizations 31 Table 16. Self Reported Collaborating Research Organizations; National and International 33 Table 17. Ranking of alternatives for the agreement or contract for organization(s) taking leadership for food security policy research. 40

x

Glossary
BAN-HRDB BARC BARI BARRI BER BIDS BRAC BRRI BUP CASEED CIRDAP CPD CTA DAE EC FAO FIVIMS FPMU GoB HDRC ICDDR, B IFPRI IFST INFS ISO ISRT MoFDM NARS NFP NFPCSP NGOs NIPORT PoA PPRC RED RFP TAT US USAID Bangladesh Applied Nutrition and Human Resource Development Board Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute Bangladesh Rice Research Institute Bureau of Economic Research Bangladesh Institute for Development Studies Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council Bangladesh Rice Research Institute Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad Center for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship Development Center for Integrated Rural Development for Asia and the Pacific Centre for Policy Dialogue Chief Technical Advisor Department of Agricultural Extension European Commission Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Food Insecurity and Vulnerability Information and Mapping Systems Food Planning and Monitoring Unit Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh Human Development Research Centre International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh International Food Policy Research Institute Institute of Food Science and Technology Institute of Nutrition and Food Science International Organization for Standardization Institute of Statistics Research and Training Ministry of Food and Disaster Management National Agricultural Research System National Food Policy National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme Non-Governmental Organizations National Institute of Population Research and Training Plan of Action Power and Participation Research Centre Research and Evaluation Division (BRAC) Request for Proposal Technical Assistance Team Unnayan Shamannay United States Agency for International Development

xi

Acknowledgements
The compilation of this Evaluation of Research Organizations was a project in which all of the NFPCSP staff and selected members of the FPMU, Ministry of Food and Disaster Management participated. Attempts to thank everyone for their support are therefore sure to miss some persons who contributed. First, expressions of appreciation should go to the sponsors and implementers of the NFPCSP in Bangladesh: the Ministry of Food and Disaster Management, GoB, USAID, EC, and FAO. Without their support we would not have had this project or the study reported herein. Next we wish to thank the management of the NFPCSP: Ad Spijkers, FAO Representative in Bangladesh; Dr. Ayub Miah, Secretary of the Ministry of Food and Disaster Management; Ciro Fiorillo, Chief Technical Advisor NFPCSP; and Kostas Stamoulis, Chief, ESAE, FAO, Rome; Mr. Pranab Chakraborty, DirectorGeneral, FPMU. These are the people and organizations that made this effort possible. Closer to the activities of the Evaluation of Research Organizations was the NFPCSP staff: Marie Jo A. Cortijo, Socio Economist; Nur Ahamed Khondaker, National Research Grants Administrator; and Nathalie Milbach-Bouche, Economist. Three others from NFPCSP staff were more directly involved in the Evaluation of Research Organizations, and real partners in the activity. These NFPCSP staff are: Lalita Bhattacharjee, Nutritionist; Harun K. M. Yusuf, National Utilization (Safe and Nutritious Food) Advisor; and Rezaul Karim Talukder, National Physical and Social Access Advisor. These three staff assisted in developing the survey instrument and follow-up questionnaire, participated in and even conducted survey interviews, followed up with the organizations getting information for the report, and most importantly wrote parts of the report and read many drafts. Ferdous Alam, National Economic Advisor assisted with the follow up survey at BARI and BRRI. It would be an error not to include Ciro Fiorillo, Kostas Stamoulis and Christian Romer-Løvendal in this group as well. A special thank you is owed to these close collaborators in the preparation of the report. The research organizations that participated in the survey and follow-up activities should be credited with our most serious appreciation. Directors of these organizations and high level staff kindly made themselves available for the survey interviews and gave generously of their time and intellect to the survey. We learned much in addition to the answers to the survey questions during these interviews, and we express our special thanks to them all. Finally, this survey is a new effort in Bangladesh and is designed to assist in discovering the capacities of the research organizations for conducting food security policy research and for taking a leadership role in the future evolution of the research programme of NFPCSP. In this report some liberties were taken in terms of developing background for how the leadership could be selected and offering a provisional framework for food security policy research. It is hoped that these contributions will be useful as the NFPCSP moves forward. Several sets of recommendations have been made on the process for the food policy agenda and the national research organizations that may be prepared to take future leadership for research in the next phase of the NFPCSP. All of these expressions of appreciation aside, the responsibility for any errors of omission or commission is with the author.

xii

1. Introduction
This report provides an evaluation of Bangladesh research civil society organizations for their capacities related to food security policy research, and for their capacity to undertake a leadership role in the NFPCSP funded research. This task was accomplished by conducting a survey and following it up with a supplemental questionnaire. The survey design was guided by lead-up activities involving consultations with the NFPCSP Technical Assistance Team (TAT) staff members and their government counterparts in the FPMU (including the Director General). The survey was conducted during the period mid August and September of 2007. The follow-up questionnaire was sent to the research organizations during October and November of 2007, with fair success in terms of compliance. The Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC) was not asked to complete the follow-up questionnaire, due to its size and the scope of its activities. In addition, two organizations were surveyed in January of 2008, at the request of the NFPCSP staff -The Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI) and the Bangladesh Rice Research Institute (BRRI). Those organizations not responding to the follow-up questionnaire had given most of the information required in the initial survey. Information from the survey and follow-up questionnaire should be viewed as adding to the results of continuous discussions with the government and NFPCSP staff about the research needs assessment completed earlier in the year, discussions with members of the FPMU, and reviews of the documentation that existed within the NFPCSP on food security monitoring support and the general effort to improve food security research and policy. This evaluation report summarizes these discussions and the results of the survey and follow-up questionnaire. It is stressed that the survey was with the directors/heads of the research organizations and yielded more than the answers to a limited set of questions. The directors were very willing to discuss the issues for food security policy in Bangladesh, and where they felt the nation was in addressing the high priority research agenda for food security policy. The evaluation report has a number of sections which may be read independently. The essence of the evaluation - recommendations for leadership, are contained in Section 8. The findings on the capacities of the organizations for food policy research are in Sections 5 and 6. There is something of a digression on contracting in Section 7. Components of a food security policy system are suggested in Section 9. Conclusions, including the idea of a food security monitoring baseline, are presented in Section 10. Detailed notes on each of the research organizations surveyed are provided in Annex 1. Other sections of the report are on the background for the evaluation and the approach used to development of the survey (and follow-up questionnaire).

2. Evaluation Objectives
The “terms of reference” for the evaluation of research organizations are provided in Annex 2. There are two principal issues to be evaluated. The first is to gain a fuller appreciation of the capacities of the food security policy research and civil society organizations currently operating in Bangladesh. This was understood to include an organizational description, review of projects that they have and are completing, linkages to international and domestic organizations, budgets, and the types of activities that they undertake in addition to research.

1

These added activities of the organizations included the training, communication, demonstration, and policy dialogue projects routinely conducted by these research and civil society organizations. This added background information will contribute to the capacity for assessing the capabilities of the organizations to successfully complete the research projects that have and will be proposed during the second phase of the NFPCSP, and inform other donors considering projects with food security research organizations in Bangladesh. The second objective is to assess the organizations relative to their capacities to take a leadership role in the second phase of the NFPCSP. To shed some light on this issue, in Section 7, the contracting approaches in general are reviewed and an approach is proposed for evaluating the various forms of contracting mechanisms for the NFPCSP. For each organization, the leadership capacities are assessed relative to strengths and weaknesses with respect to the following issues (as specified in the terms of reference): • • • • • Relevance of research focus to food security, Quality and quantity, availability, and capability of their technical staff, Quality and timeliness of delivery of research outputs, Links with other research centers, nationally and internationally, and Record of joint work with other institutions, nationally and internationally.

This required information was developed primarily from the survey and follow-up questionnaire. In addition to the survey and questionnaire data, we obtained key publications of many of the research organizations related to food security policy. These were reviewed for their quality, and for their incorporation and effective use of modern research methods. This information was as well incorporated in the recommendations on leadership capacities.

3. Evaluation Process
The evaluation process proceeded with preliminary meetings with national and international staff of the NFPCSP TAT and the Food Planning and Monitoring Unit. These meetings were useful in gaining a fuller understanding of the NFPCSP, the proposed food security policy monitoring and implementation system, and in obtaining an explicit understanding of the research needs assessment and how the major research themes identified from this activity could guide the evaluation. After these meetings, an “implementation plan” was developed to provide further parameters for guiding the evaluation. This implementation plan is supplied in Annex 3. It does not depart from the terms of reference for the evaluation, but provides added structure for designing the survey. It was used as a set of operational guidelines for designing and conducting the survey, and assembling the evaluation report. With the previous two documents available, a survey instrument was developed to guide the interviews with “selected” research organizations involved in food security policy in Bangladesh. The evaluation survey instrument is provided in Annex 4. This survey instrument was intentionally short in recognition that the survey was to be with the director level of the research organizations. The survey instrument was pre-tested with several of the research organizations initially surveyed to evaluate its length, and whether or not the questions being asked could and would be answered by the directors in a reasonable time. A short follow-up questionnaire was administered to the surveyed research organizations to get added clarification on selected issues.

2

The personal interviews, when possible, were conducted together with a member of the NFPCSP project staff. As it turns out, many of the directors of these organizations are professional friends of the NFPCSP staff. Having the staff members along during the interviews was valuable in the sense of breaking down the hesitancy that is often the case in interviews relative to getting direct answers to the sensitive organizational questions. In most instances, directors simply agreed to e-mail or send information that they did not have on hand. After the pre-test, the survey instrument was also sent by e-mail to the directors as a way of preparing them for the visit. This practice seemed to work well. Staff members involved in conducting the surveys were: Dr. Lalita Bhattacharjee, Prof. Harun K. M. Yusuf, and Prof. Rezaul Karim Talukder. After the surveys were completed, the consultant, with the assistance of the NFPCSP staff (who participated in the actual interviews), made a write up for each of the related research organizations. These two to four page documents and the completed follow-up questionnaires are included in Annex 5 of this evaluation report. The documents give added information to that assembled in tables in Sections 5 and 6 about the organizations and their capacity for food security policy research. These write-ups were circulated to the directors of the research organizations surveyed, giving them a chance to correct and add critical information that may have somehow been left out in making the summaries or in conducting the interviews. This occurred at the time when completion of the follow-up questionnaire was requested from the research and civil society organizations (except for the two research organizations interviewed in January of 2008).

4. Organizations Surveyed
Organizations surveyed included academic and research institutions, government agencies, international and national research institutions, think-tank type institutions and policy centers, and non-governmental organizations. A list of these organizations was developed through conversations with the NFPCSP staff, their FPMU counterparts, and on the basis of discussions with research and civil society organizations visited. The objective was to get a good representation (not the total population) of the major organizations conducting food security policy research. A total of 20 organizations was surveyed, all in Dhaka (details on the organizations listed in Annex Table A.1.1). The breakdown of the surveyed organizations is: • • • • • Academic Government NGOs International Private Institutions linked to Research 3 5 9 2 1

The academic organizations were all affiliated with Dhaka University. In the case of government organizations, the above count may be misleading. For example, the Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC) is responsible for 10 major research institutes under the National Agricultural Research System (NARS). The reason for visiting BARC was to get the input of these institutes, all involved in agricultural research and operating under one organizational structure. The BARC oversees research institutes from Ministries of Agriculture, Fisheries and Livestock, Environment and Forests, and Commerce.

3

Of course, there are additional organizations in Bangladesh that carry out food security policy related research. But generally, these organizations tend to focus on less basic and more applied research. They often have fewer dedicated human resources (See Annex 1 for a list of these organizations). Finally, many of these research organizations have carried out more action-oriented research on more narrowly defined aspects of food security policy and/or have provided supportive inputs to the organizations surveyed. Personal visits were made and interviews were scheduled (usually) with the directors/heads of research organizations. Interviews lasted from one to three hours. These interviews were followed-up with the added questionnaire, telephone discussions, e-mails, and return visits as required. Each interview was detailed, covering issues related to the organizational profile, the survey questions, and directors ideas about food policy research. In addition to the interviews, the research organizations supplied other material that was used to complete the write-ups contained in Annex 5. An overview of these materials is provided in Table 1. These documents are available with NFPCSP to those who may wish to look further into the capabilities of the organizations surveyed. For example, most organizations supplied brochures from which information was taken for drafting their brief histories. It is emphasized that this pre-published information was augmented by the general comments provided during the survey, and the emphasis given to parts of the organizational history by those interviewed. As is apparent from Table 1, most of the organizations had websites. Annual reports were less available and often for two or more years in one volume. Several of the organizations had journals published for national and international audiences, and to which their members contributed. The director and several of those assembled to be interviewed were asked for copies of their curricula vita. These were in most cases generously supplied. They were especially helpful for the smaller organizations where the director and close senior staff were responsible for almost all of the publications. The one thing that this information does not fully supply and that is not well covered in this report is the other activities of the organizations. University organizations allocated more than one-half or more of their staff/faculty time to teaching. Several organizations had large programs of “public outreach”, which were in general designed to influence policy. As well, several of the organizations have directors who are active contributors to the press in various ways and key members of the “policy reform community”. Another factor that was somewhat surprising was the predominance of training programs in these food security policy research organizations. Most of the organizations had training programs, some with explicit design to influence policy by involving officials in high level meetings. Other training was to educate the workers who assisted in their research projects, for example in the enumeration of surveys. Generally, the organizations appeared to be highly involved in sets of activities which had as their objective the influence of national food security policy, and other national issues related to social economic policy in Bangladesh.

4

Table 1. Information supplied by organizations
Organizational Annual Brochures, Materials Reports Academic and Research Institutions/University Departments Institute of Nutrition and Food X Science (INFS), Dhaka University Bureau of Economic Research (BER) Organization Institute of Statistical Research and Training (ISRT), Dhaka University International Non-Governmental Organizations ICDDR,B X Centre on Integrated Rural Development for Asia and the X Pacific (CIRDAP) Government Units/Institutions Institute of Food Science and X Technology (IFST) Bangladesh Agricultural Research X Institute Bangladesh Rice Research Institute X (BRRI) Bangladesh Agricultural Research X Council (BARC) National Institute of Population X Research and Training (NIPORT) Non Governmental Organizations Bangladesh Institute of X Development Studies (BIDS) BRAC RED X Human Development Research X Centre (HDRC) Bangladesh Foundation for X Development Research (BFDR) Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) X X Unnayan Shamannay Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad X (BUP) Power and Participation Research X Centre (PPRC) Center for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and X Entrepreneurship Development (CASEED) Private Intuitions Linked to Research X DATA X X X X X X Research CVs of Journals Websites Publications Key Staff X X X X X X

X X

X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X

X X

X X X X

X

X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X

X

X X X X X

X X

X

X

X

X

X

X

5. Major Findings
In this section, descriptive information from the surveyed food security policy research organizations is summarized. First, the focus is on the food security policy themes identified in the research needs assessment. Second, the focus is on a set of broader issues related to characteristics of these research organizations. The research needs identified by NFPCSP was given high attention in each of the interviews. The results for the organizations summarized by major research themes below provide a general view of their general food security focus (Table 2). Specific focus was then given to the components identified under each of the five research themes. Information on the components of the five research themes is presented in Table 3 through Table 7. More

5

general information about budgets, staff, publications and organizational linkages is provided in Table 8 through Table 13.

5.1 Research Themes
In reviewing Table 2, note that the food security policy research organizations are rather easily separated into 1) those conducting social-economic and behavioral research, and 2) those conducting health and nutrition research. In general, the “health and nutrition” research is conducted primarily by: Table 2. Areas of food security policy research undertaken by organizations surveyed
Research Dimensions Organization Production Physical & & Social Availability Access Economic Access Utilization & Nutrition Cross cutting Issues Other areas

Academic and Research Institutions/University Departments Institute of Nutrition and Food X X X Science (INFS) Bureau of Economic Research X X (BER) Institute of Statistical Research and Training, Dhaka University International Non-Governmental Organizations ICDDR,B Centre on Integrated Rural Development for Asia and the Pacific (CIRDAP) Government Units/Institutions Institute of Food Science and Technology(IFST) Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute Bangladesh Rice Research Institute Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPORT) Non-Government Organizations Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) BRAC RED Human Development Research Centre Bangladesh Foundation for Development Research Centre for Policy Dialogue Unnayan Shamannay Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) CASEED X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

X

X X Market performance Mostly a teaching organization Health policy, clinical care & services Rural development

X

X X

X X X X

X X X

X X X

X X X X

X X X

Food analysis, testing, & product development Largest multi crop Research Institute Emphasis in Rice Varieties A technology research organization

X

Health statistics, health & services access

X X X

X X X

X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Large research organization In- house programs & research evaluation Policy communication & advocacy Not a research Org. Synthesis, Coordination & networking Policy communication & advocacy Policy communication & advocacy Public opinion surveys Local governance, policy communication Works closely with action NGOs Surveys & data analysis

Private Institutions linked to Research DATA

6

- Institute of Nutrition and Food Science (INFS) - ICDDR, B - Institute of Food Science and Technology (IFST) - National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPORT) - Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC) - Center for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship Development (CASEED) In assembling these organizations and making this nutrition designation, there has been some aggregation. The institutes doing nutrition research related to human food intake and availability are INFS and ICDDR, B. INFS does this on a population basis, while the ICDDR,B investigates nutrition on more a clinical basis. NIPORT gathers health statistics that in part reflect nutritional status. BARC reigns over a set of research institutes that do agriculture research, which relates to technology, and the food supply and some assessments of the products for nutrient content. IFST does research on food quality and the development of new food technologies, and CASEED does nutrition research related to food quality (ISO) and in connection with partnerships they have with NGOs working on action research programs in local communities. Among the organizations doing research on socio-economic determinants of food security there are essentially two clusters, those which work on agriculture technology, production, supply and markets for basic and food products, and those which do research that is focused on household food availability and different concepts of access and food use. For agriculture technology, production, supply and markets, the organizations with primary emphasis are: - Institute of Food Science and Technology (IFST) - Bureau of Economic Research (BER) - Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI) - Bangladesh Rice Research Institute (BRRI) - Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC) - Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) - BRAC Research and Evaluation Division (RED) - Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) - Unnayan Shamannay, - Center for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship Development (CASEED) - Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Of these, the ones that really concentrate on technology, production, and supply are BARC Council, BARI, BRRI, BRAC and CASEED. BARC manages institutes with a broad focus on technology and production issues, while BRAC and CASEED are more specifically focused on individual technologies and production systems. The other organizations conduct research on food security policy that relates mostly to availability and access at the household level, although this separation is not completely consistent. The research organizations with more broad and household focused research objectives relative to the NFPCSP themes are: - Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) - BRAC Research and Evaluation Division (RED) - Bureau of Economic Research (BER)

7

- Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) - Center for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship Development (CASEED) Four organizations have been left out of this group because they have research that is less focused on food security. Their research is on food security and in addition, on other policy and governance issues for the Bangladesh economy, but their research programs are of good quality. These are: - Human Development Research Centre (HDRC) - Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) - Unnayan Shamannay - Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) CASEED is somewhat different than the others because it works mostly on applied research at regional and local levels, serving many times as a consulting organization on specialized and local NGO projects. In the cross cutting and overarching themes, one that resonated with the organizations surveyed was environment. Several organizations have extensive programs related to environment and food security. These are: - Unnayan Shamannay, - Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) - Center for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship Development (CASEED) - Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Almost all organizations give attention to issues of transparency of policies and accountability of institutions managing the implementation of food security policy. The attention to this issue implies a perceived need for much more transparency and broadly available indicators of food security (insecurity) of general and regional populations, and for particular at risk populations, than is available and accessible in Bangladesh today.

5.1.1. Food Availability Three specific sub-themes were identified under the major category of food access. The first of these sub-themes is “access to inputs for food production”. Here we found several organizations involved in related research, although with very different orientations. The organizations that identified inputs as critical to food security are: - Institute of Nutrition and Food Science (INFS) - Institute of Statistics Research and Training (ISRT) - Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI) - Bangladesh Rice Research Institute (BRRI) - Institute of Food Science and Technology (IFST) - Bangladesh Institute for Development Studies (BIDS) - BRAC Research and Evaluation Division (RED) - Human Development Resource Center (HDRC) - Center for Policy Dialogue (CPD) - Unnayan Shamanay - Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) - Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC)

8

- Center for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship Development (CASEED). Of these organizations, BRAC RED and CASEED addressed the issue more on a market level, while the others related more specialized issues like availability due to government or other policies. Others address the issue more from availability at the household level. Some focused on communities and their abilities to affect food availability. ISRT specializes in assisting researchers from the Dhaka University with statistical aspects of their work. “Land use patterns and long term relationships to food security” was noted to be a priority topic. Organizations with an emphasis on this sub-theme are: - Bangladesh Institute for Development Studies - Institute of Nutrition and Food Science - Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute - Bangladesh Rice Research Institute - Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council - Center for Integrated Rural Development for Asia and the Pacific - BRAC Research and Evaluation Division (RED) - Human Development Research Centre - Centre for Policy Dialogue, - Unnayan Shamannay - Power and Participation Research Centre - Center for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship Development - Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Much of this research was related to the landless farmers and seasonal occupational pattern shifts that affected their household food security. Other research related to land laws in selected regions of the country. Finally, BARC has institutes which focus explicitly on forests and other research areas that implicitly involve different land use patterns. For “effectiveness of the extension system”, a number of organizations indicated that this was an area of their research interest. These are: - Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council - Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute - Bangladesh Rice Research Institute - ICDDR,B - BRAC Research and Evaluation Division (RED) - Institute for Nutrition and Food Science - Human Development Research Centre - Center for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship Development These organizations indicated that they worked with the Department of Agricultural Extension (DAE) as a national organization or government organizations on a community basis - along with non governmental organizations committed to giving communities increased responsibility and power to support food security. CASEED is focused directly on the Agricultural Extension system and its evolution. The interview with BARC revealed that there is a new and strong effort to link research on agricultural production and extension. INFS and other government institutions such as the Bangladesh Applied Nutrition and Human Resource Development Board (BAN-HRDB) under the Ministry of Agriculture provide

9

technical support to the DAE on nutrition related training at national, district and community levels, as required on a periodic basis For the “other issues” category, responses were highly varied in terms of focus. Some of the areas that resonated among the organizations were globalization, imported foods, technology packages for agricultural production, supply and demand for food, new technologies, and health and food availability. Table 3 gives the summary of these findings on the food availability dimension of food security. Table 3. Food availability summary
Access to Land Use Patterns & Inputs for Academic and Research Institutions/University Departments Institute of Nutrition and Food X X Science (INFS) Organization Bureau of Economic Research (BER) Institute of Statistical Research and X Training International Non-Governmental Organizations ICDDR,B Centre on Integrated Rural Development for Asia and the Pacific (CIRDAP) Government Units/Institutions Institute of Food Science and Technology(IFST) Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute Bangladesh Rice Research Institute Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC) National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPORT), Dhaka Non-Governmental Organizations Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) BRAC RED Human Development Research Centre Bangladesh Foundation for Development Research Centre for Policy Dialogue Unnayan Shamannay Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) Centre for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship Development (CASEED) Private Institutions Linked to Research DATA X X X X X X X X Effectiveness of Extension X Others Availability from (NFCS) Food Consumption Surveys National

Trade & Demand and Food supplies Selected Topics Availability, health Land use development living & standards non and

agricultural

X X X X X X X X X

Availability as impacted by technology Management approaches Rice production increases New effort with Extension No research in this area

X X

X X X

X

X

X

Impacts of globalization & regional food supplies Advanced rice varieties & other agricultural technologies, related to other divisions of BRAC Looks at food in a broader context, Extension is a part of the group of institutions More of a general policy research synthesis group, have done work on poverty & relation to food security Supply & demand for food Regional poverty and availability Local governance & safety nets The projects are more applied research, Extension is a major area of research A specialized firm providing survey services

X

X

X

10

5.1.2 Physical and Social Access to Food The first major sub-theme under physical and social access to food is “communities in local power structures and safety net provision”. Organizations with established research programs in this area are: - BIDS - BRAC RED - Human Development Research Centre (HDRC) - Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) - Centre for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environmental and Entrepreneurship Development - ICDDR, B, These programs are related to income possibilities for the poor and implications of various community action and government organizations for supporting food security in local regions and nationally. There was a feeling among these research organizations that community action groups can and should do more to address food insecurity. One constraint to this activity is the capacity of local governments to finance these efforts. “Best practices in food distribution” were studied by almost all organizations in one way or another. Those which identified best practices as a specific area of research are: - Institute of Nutrition and Food Science (INFS) - Institute of Statistical Research and Training (ISRT) - Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI) - Bangladesh Rice Research Institute (BRRI) - BIDS - Bangladesh Unnayan Panishad (BUP) - Unnayan Shamannay - Center for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship Development(CASEED) - DATA In many cases the specific research programs involved comparing the effects of alternative feeding or distribution policies, e.g., cash versus food and community feeding programs. Some of these efforts were related to food safety and distribution in specific regions or with specific ethnic populations in the nation. “Storage facilities, options for remote areas and poor communities” were studied with different focuses by different organizations. Those that identified this area are: - Institute of Food Science and Technology (IFST) - Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI) - Bangladesh Rice Research Institute (BRRI) - Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC) - BIDS - Human Development Research Center (HDRC) - Power Participation Research Centre (PPRC) IFST had a very different interpretation of the category and related research. They were interested in consumer welfare related to the quality of imported and domestic foods. One issue related to this focus was the weak enforcement of laws related to food quality. BARC

11

had various programs related to storage technologies. The three others had programs in remote communities in which effective storage was one of the important food security issues. In the catch all “other” category there were several responses. Emphasis on community level policies and local food security efforts was a frequent response. Cash-for-Food and specialized community feeding programs were also mentioned, along with promoting special crops and technologies to combat food insecurity. In the case of vegetables and specialized crops, the issue was diversity and its contribution to food security. Micro credit was also studied for implications for food security. See Table 4 for a summary on physical and social access to food. Table 4. Physical and social access to food summary
Communities & Best Practices Local Power in Food Organization Structures & Food Distribution Safety Academic and research Institutions/University Departments Institute of Nutrition and Food X Science (INFS) Bureau of Economic Research (BER) Institute of Statistical Research X and Training (ISRT) International Non-Governmental Organizations ICDDR,B CIRDAP Government Units/Institutions Institute of Food Science and Technology(IFST) Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute Bangladesh Rice Research Institute Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC) National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPORT) Non-Governmental Organizations Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) BRAC RED Human Development Research Centre Bangladesh Foundation Development Research for X Storage Facilities; Options for Remote Areas & Poor Communities Others

No direct research

Emphasis on community food security No direct work X X X X X X Shelf life for foods Multi cropping systems Storability of rice Little work No direct work

X X X

X

X

Vulnerable groups Promoting Maize Community & local power structures Community power structures in a broad context Social safety net research is being undertaken Cash for food is being studied Micro Credit and Food Security Micro credit & money management, disaster preparedness strategies Growing fish & complete distribution systems Only surveys & generation & analysis data

X

Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) Unnayan Shamannay Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) CASEED Private Institutions Linked to Research DATA X X X X X X

12

5.1.3 Economic Access to Food “Self employment, wage employment, and income generation” was very popular as a research area for the research and civil society organizations surveyed. Nearly all of the organizations surveyed suggested that this was a major area of study for their food security research programmes. Exceptions to this prevalence of focus in this area were: BER, BRRI, ICDDR,B, BARC, NIPORT, and the BFDR. Most of the organizations were studying income generation and food security, and food security as provided through local programmes. IFST addressed this issue by developing new technologies for producing foods and licensing them for use in production. “Livelihood and coping strategies for the ultra poor, including disadvantaged groups” was also an area of concentration for research programmes. Here there were at least two angles that emerged. CASEED and other organizations focusing on production were investigating systems of food production and strategies how to include the ultra poor. The other angle was to focus on poor households and strategies that they had adopted to deal more successfully with food security. This difference between a local or community focus and a focus on households distinguished these and other programmes. There were also programmes that deal with food security problems of minorities. There is a question in the economic access theme as to whether the organizations focus on households or market outcomes. Many seem to have difficulty determining whether the issue is at the market/macro level or at the household level. Thinking should be encouraged on what the economic nature of the food security problem is in Bangladesh, and what aspects of it can be investigated at the household level and what aspects are more related to markets and macro economic aspects of the problem “Price stabilization, market integration and consumer welfare” was an area of activity by a number of institutes. Specifically, organizations identifying this area are: - Bureau of Economic Research (BER) - Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI) - Bangladesh Rice Research Institute (BRRI) - Bangladesh Institute for Development Studies (BIDS) - BRAC Research and Evaluation Division (RED) - Human Development Research Centre (HDRC) - Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) - Unnayan Shamannay - Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) Interestingly, here the emphasis was largely related to the impacts and in particular related to unstable prices and the poor households. One of the organizations, HDRC, was studying the stability of food supplies and other livelihood needs in local communities. Others were particularly interested in supply response and the failure of markets to respond to price signals, indicating some type of syndicated or cartel behavior. There was little study of the markets themselves and their systematic (or unsystematic) responses to national and international conditions affecting market supply, demand and price. The catch all category, “other”, raised different issues including income and livelihood patterns of landless workers, margins between retail and farm level markets, health as an economic barrier to food security, and implications of community structures and governance for food security. Retail to farm margins were studied for their magnitude and for factors responsible, transportation, information, and the influence of cartel type organizations.

13

Interestingly, there was little study of possible political influences which have proven to be a major influence on supply response in other developing countries. In short, many of these factors have to do with the “supply response” of agricultural production in Bangladesh which has not seemed to come along with agricultural and food market liberalization—a major reason for support of market liberalization. These findings are summarized in Table 5. Table 5. Economic access to food summary
Organization Self-Employment, Wage Employment & Income Generation Livelihood Patterns & Coping Strategies for the Ultra Poor Price Stabilization, Market Integration & Consumer Welfare Others

Academic and research Institutions/University Departments Institute of Nutrition and Food X Science Bureau of Economic Research (BER) Institute of Statistical Research and Training (ISRT), Dhaka University International Non-Governmental Organizations ICDDR,B Centre on Integrated Rural Development for Asia and the Pacific (CIRDAP) Government Units/Institutions Institute of Food Science and Technology(IFST) Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute Bangladesh Rice Research Institute Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPORT) Non-Governmental Organizations Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) BRAC RED Human Centre Development Research for X X

X X Special studies No direct research

X

Health related consequences Mostly related to development & agricultural industries

rural non-

X X X X X

New technologies & employment results New technologies for poor farms Yearly availability No direct work

X

Health related impacts

X X X

X X X

X X X

Chronic poverty Vulnerability of ultra poor Structural relations between food insecurity & poverty Mostly in a development context Emphasis on price stabilization & market integration Consumer welfare & food quality Price stabilization & the nonfunctioning of markets

Bangladesh Foundation Development Research Centre for Policy Dialogue Unnayan Shamannay

X X X X

X

X X

Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) Centre for Agriresearch Sustainable Environment Entrepreneurship Development and and

X X X

X

X

Establishing local institutional arrangements Much about income generation & livelihood patterns of landless agricultural workers Much survey data collected & analyzed for IFPRI

Private Institutions Linked to Research DATA X

5.1.4. Utilization of Food for Nutrition This category of themes relate to the organizations that focused on food and nutritional security. The organizations responding here were: - Institute for Nutrition and Food Science (INFS)

14

- Institute of Statistical Research and Training (ISRT) - Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI) - Bangladesh Rice Research Institute (BRRI) - Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC) - Institute for Food Science and Technology (IFST) - ICDDR B, - BRAC RED - Unnayan Shamanay - Center for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship Development (CASEED) Rather than try to classify, a review is made by organization: • INFS is involved in three areas: the food consumption survey and indicators of nutritional status, food composition tables (which need to be completed), and food additives and containments that are studied in special laboratories (iodine deficiency disorders, for example). ISRT takes on consulting projects related to nutrition and other research projects of the Dhaka faculty. BARC, BARI, and the BRRI are involved in diversification of crops and implications for food quality and /nutritional security. IFST is involved in food quality and contamination testing and in new technology and new product development. ICDDR,B is mostly involved in clinical research and in the study of at-risk populations, children, and pregnant mothers. It also has programs on food contamination and adulteration and work on food composition tables. BRAC RED has programmes related to nutrition of the ultra poor and institutionalization of street food systems. Unnayan Shamanay is interested in nutrition and performance relative to jobs. CASEED is focused on improving the diets and food quality in local communities by introduction of new products and with the organization of production systems that are ISO certified.

• • • • • • •

These are all critical to food security, especially the household surveys and the food composition tables. In this area two issues emerged that merit comment. The first is that food consumption surveys are periodic, once in five years for example. First, there is a feeling that since these and other surveys are periodic and not frequent, not much can be said from them on food security between the surveys. These surveys produce high quality estimates of diets and nutrition of the poor households and of the general population. These diets can be moved in time with national and local market prices of the component foods much as the case with consumer price indices. Such information can be orientated to income class, location, or other national and local measures for different populations, and contribute significantly to food monitoring systems and food policy research. A second area that merits comment is the food composition tables. Selection of perhaps 50 priority foods would likely cover the diets of most of the low income households in Bangladesh. Calculations for the priority 50 or some subsets of the foods in the total food supply for Bangladesh, and then borrow the remainder of the composition tables from other countries, e.g., India, for the rest could be considered for food composition research. This type of strategy would put Bangladesh in much better shape in terms of food security research and with a monitoring system to reflect food security on a national and sub national basis.

15

Table 6 provides a summary of these responses to the themes focusing on utilization of food for nutrition. Table 6. Utilization of food for nutrition summary
Food Composition Institutionalization & Tables with Specific Capacity Building Organization Reference to for Street Food Indigenous Foods Systems Academic and research Institutions/University Departments Food Contamination & Food Adulteration Institute of Nutrition Food Science (INFS) and X X Others

Major surveys on household food availability – analysis of food content, iron No direct research Statistical Consulting

Bureau of Economic Research (BER) Institute of Statistical Research and Training X (ISRT) International Non-Governmental Organizations

ICDDR,B

X

X

Many nutrition research projects—breast feeding, child nutrition, obesity, nutrition of pregnant women, etc. No direct research

CIRDAP Government Units/Institutions Institute of Food Science and Technology(IFST) Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute Bangladesh Rice Research Institute Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPORT) Non-Governmental Organizations Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) BRAC RED Human Development Research Centre Bangladesh Foundation for Development Research Centre for Policy Dialogue Unnayan Shamannay Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) CASEED

X X X X X X X

Major focus testing, in addition to new technologies Multi cropping and diet Focus in specific rice varieties Examination of composition for new cultivars Health policies & food security

No direct work X Supplementary feeding & nutrition Population surveys under measure nutrition No direct work No direct research Consumer welfare & food quality and nutrition No direct work No direct work X X X Adulteration management by using ISO standards Many surveys on nutrition with collaborators

X

Private Institutions Linked to Research DATA

5.1.5. Cross Cutting and Overarching Themes This is a category or theme that is difficult to summarize (see Table 7). Most institutes had programmes related to “transparency of policies and accountability related to food security”, but the focus of these programmes was very different. The same is true for the category on issues of “measurement of food security, vulnerability and poverty”. Many organizations had activities but they were very different in terms of populations of focus, locally based versus national orientation, and the types of measurements made. Going back to the last table,

16

without food composition tables there is in fact, little that can be said about food insecurity except perhaps for the portion of the population that is not getting enough food as evidenced by diets, health or very specific survey statistics. Power, transport, commercialization, irrigation, and storage for food security were mentioned by few of the organizations studied. This is likely because of a strong focus on households and individuals in food security policy research. But several of the broader policy research organizations had focused on this category, electric power in rural areas and irrigation are examples. One of these is the BUP which had recently completed a survey on electric power in rural areas. The major issue identified from this set of themes was environment and its relationship to food security. Here, there was both a household or individual focus, and a focus on geographic areas or a macro approach. In the latter case, climate change was emphasized as a research area with important implications for Bangladesh. Organizations that have adopted programmes on environment and food security will likely increase this emphasis as the linkages with food security become clearer. Table 7. Cross cutting and overarching themes summary
Transparency of Issues of Policies & Measurement Academic and research Institutions/University Departments Institute of Nutrition and X X Food Science (INFS) Bureau of Economic Research (BER) Institute Statistical Research and Training X (ISRT) International Non-Governmental Organizations Organization ICDDR,B Centre on Integrated Rural Development for Asia and the Pacific (CIRDAP) Government Units/Institutions Institute of Food Science and Technology(IFST) Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute Bangladesh Rice Research Institute Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPORT), Dhaka Non-Governmental Organizations Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) BRAC RED Human Development Research Centre Bangladesh Foundation for Development Research Centre for Policy Dialogue Unnayan Shamanay Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) CASEED X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Power, Transport, Commercialization, X X Long-term Eventual Degradation & Food Other Nutrition & gender issues

Clinical studies of children and women X poverty links to local governance

X X X X

X X X X X

Technologies and policy for food safety Environment and Multi cropping Sustainability Increasing work on environment No direct work

X X X

X X

X

X X

Gender & special populations—elderly Food security in neonatal care Markets & corruption conferences Conferences to support policy change Water, electricity, renewable energy Major emphasis on environment Community empowerment & social mobilization Stressed again the importance of ISO certification Measurement

X

X

X

X

X

Private Institutions Linked to Research DATA

X

17

5.2. Collaborations
Collaboration was an issue stressed in the survey instrument. There is a feeling that the food security research needs more focus in Bangladesh, and that one of the ways to achieve this is through collaborations of research organizations. Thus, this evaluation looks at whether or not such collaboration already exists and is common in Bangladesh.

5.2.1 Linkages of Research Organizations in Bangladesh Table 8 shows that there are in fact many linkages between research organizations in Bangladesh. But, beneath the promising looking information, the fact is that these current collaborations are fairly shallow. Prior to discussion of Table 8, the structure and intent of the columns needs to be explained. The first column in Table 8 refers to whether or not the research organization hires consultants. The second column relates to weather or not the arrangements are primary contractual arrangements. The third and fourth columns relate to whether the contractual arrangements are sub-contracting arrangements. The last defines whether or not the arrangements with other research organizations are more substantial than consultative. To illustrate, consider the entries for the INFS. They use consultants, but do not use them in entering into primary contractual arrangements, internationally or nationally. They do subcontract with international and national organizations, and these sub-contracting arrangements involve relationships that are more formal than consulting arrangements. The rest of Table 8 can be read similarly. The purpose is to give an overview of the types of contracting arrangements that the research organizations primarily utilize. Notice that the second and third columns have few entries, indicating that the research organizations enter into primary contracts only occasionally with national and international agencies. Reviewing Table 8, the most common type of arrangement appears to be the hiring of individual consultants. Many organizations have working relationships with a string of often common consultants as the primary linkage to other research and civil society organizations, and in particular with the cadre of university professionals in the country. They get contracts and supplement their staff with consultants that give them the capability to complete the research sponsored by government and donor agencies. A drawback to this consultant type of collaboration is that the research and civil society organizations tend to be in a reactive mode. Good directors of research organizations anticipate the policy issues and prepare their organizations to do the research on the important related issues before they come to light. This is in fact an “art” in the management of research organizations. It would often be better if the organizations were to collaborate, institutionally, and share in making plans for and completing future research projects. That is, research organizations should specialize and work together rather than try to be competitive in a wide variety of areas. This would make them more effective players in the determination of the agenda for food security policy research in Bangladesh. Table 8 which was developed from the initial survey also shows that there are in fact few of the food security policy research and civil society organizations that have made the jump from consultants to deeper types of organizational collaboration. This collaboration extends

18

to cases when the joint work involves developing or managing contract or grant research. Few instances of joint writing of research proposals or the systematic subcontracting involving sharing of funded research project with other research organizations were encountered. This is an area that should be stressed in the next phase of NFPCSP funding. Informal but structured collaborations are a way to develop research organization joint work that has the capacity to improve the research capability of Bangladesh research organizations. Research organizations should be encouraged to collaborate more deeply, perhaps through a continual set of seminars attended by government officials and donors as well as research and civil society organizations. This will be a key component of the leadership models discussed in Section 8. Table 8. Types of organizational and individual linkages, a summary
Organization Primary Contractual Consulting Arrangements International National Sub-contractual International National Non-consultative Arrangements

Academic and Research Institutions/University Departments Institute of Nutrition and Food X Science (INFS) Bureau of Economic Research X (BER) Institute of Statistical Research X and Training, Dhaka University International Non-Governmental Organizations ICDDR,B X X CIRDAP X X Government Units/Institutions Institute of Food Science and X Technology(IFST) Bangladesh Agricultural Research X Institute Bangladesh Rice Research X Institute Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC) National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPORT) Non-Government Organizations Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) BRAC RED Human Development Research Centre Bangladesh Foundation for Development Research Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) Unnayan Shamanay Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) Center for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurial Development (CASEED) Private Institutions linked to Research DATA X X

X

X

X

X

X X X

X

X X X Reviews by scholars Connected internationally government funding & large grants from the World Bank X

X X X X X

X X X

X X

X

X

X X X X X X X X

X X X

X X X

X X X

X X X

X X X

X

X

X

X X

X

X X

X X

X X

X

X

X

X

X

X

19

5.2.2 Strongest presence in the field of food security policy research Organizational participation in collaborations by the food security policy institutes and centers is summarized in non tabular from. There are several organizations that have introduced more institutionalized collaboration. They are: - Bangladesh Institute for Development Studies (BIDS) - Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI) - Bangladesh Rice Research Institute (BRRI) - INFS - BRAC RED - Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) - Center for Policy Dialogue (CPD) These are in most cases the likely research and civil society organizations that would team with themselves or with others, perhaps nutrition organizations, to take leadership roles with the NFPCSP. This does not mean that other research organizations are closed out. The contract could be structured to encourage joint organizational participation; perhaps involving smaller research organizations, in whatever the mechanism is that is selected, given the local organizations’ leadership. There is great room for added collaboration among the food security policy research organizations in Bangladesh. The NFPCSP could encourage this by participation, again, with training sessions about issues in food security policy that include these organizations, government and donors. These sessions will have to be substantive and require the participation of the leaders of the research organizations and government ministries. The task is difficult but could have great pay off in terms of building the capacity of the research organizations and the government agencies and encouraging collaboration.

5.3. Staffing of the Organizations
The staffing of the food policy organizations is summarized in Table 9. As will be apparent, the organizations are quite different. The staff of the research organizations was first separated by names or types of researchers using data from the survey. This unfortunately did not work well. Thus, the organizations were again contacted in the follow-up questionnaire and information on staff collected in terms of educational level—PhD (or equivalent), Masters Degree holders and all other staff. Ten of the 20 provided a completed follow-up questionnaire. This is not as unfortunate as it sounds. Many of the research organizations gave satisfactorily complete information in the survey. The input from the survey was approximated or developed for those research organizations that did not complete the follow-up questionnaire. This follow-up information made it more possible to get results that permitted comparisons between research organizations. These definitions are used here and later in the report for recording staff, and making ratios for comparing the research organizations, e.g. staff to budget. Reviewing Table 9, notice first the differences in consultants used by the research organizations. The range is from 0 to 300. The university research centers use their faculty to teach and for work on specific research contracts. Thus, they could be placed in a consultancy staff as well. The difference is that the faculty participate together in carrying out the teaching mission of the university. Thus they are in fact, together as a team even though they work part time on research contracts.

20

There is a major difference in size of the research organizations, ranging from ICDDR,B to smaller research institutes which do work mostly when contracts for doing it are secured. The NGOs have staff ranging from approximately forty to around five. There is as well a major difference between the education levels of the staff. The NGOs have a balance that favors PhDs and Masters training, compared to government and other research organizations. The following observations supported by material in Annex 5, the write-ups on the research organizations from the survey and the questionnaire results, came from the discussions with the directors. Newer or younger research organizations tend to have greater numbers of consultants compared to regular staff. Budgets were another factor that related to the use of consultants—those with larger budgets had larger ratios of regular staff to consultants. International NGOs had a great range in staffing, largely due to differences in regular budgets (as will be shown subsequently). The capacity to draw on faculty that work together gives the university research organizations an advantage—they have part time staff but the staff are together in departments and know each other well and often share common research methods. Table 9. Staff categories and strength
Category of Staff (Numbers) Organization PhD or Equivalent Masters Degree Holders All Other Staff

Academic and research Institutions/University Departments Institute of Nutrition and Food Science (INFS) 24 3 100 7 46 (15 part Time) 3245 2

Depends on Projects Bureau of Economic Research (BER) 30 Institute Statistical Research and Training 56 9 (ISRT), Dhaka University International Non-Governmental Organizations 737 ICDDR,B 59 Centre on Integrated Rural Development for 2 1 Asia and the Pacific (CIRDAP) Government Units/Institutions 4 Chief and 10 Institute of Food Science and 20 Senior Principal Scientific Technology(IFST) Officers 7 Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute 11 106 Bangladesh Rice Research Institute 58 Very large Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council organization National Institute of Population Research and 5 1 Training (NIPORT) Non-Governmental Organizations Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies 6 and 11 Senior 19 (BIDS) Fellows 16 BRAC RED 10 17, 7 full-time consultants, 38 part-time Human Development Research Centre 4 Bangladesh Foundation for Development 6, 8 Part Time 1, 3 Part Time Research 35 5 Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) 24, 40 Part Time 5 Unnayan Shamannay 20 Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) 1 Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) Centre for Agriresearch and Sustainable 10, 100 Senior 10, 170 Environment and Entrepreneurship Professionals Development Private Institutions Linked to Research 18 DATA 2

26 Scientific 26 485

10

13 47 16 6, 6 Part Time 10 15 17

5, 5 Part Time

2

21

5.4. Approximate Annual Budgets
Approximate annual budgets of the organizations are shown in Table 10. Just as with the staff members of the organizations, there is a significant difference in the approximate annual budgets. In many cases this is because the organizations expand or contract with the arrival of different contracts. This expansion and contraction is accomplished mostly with the addition of consultants. A problem with this approach to organization is that the research organizations may be lead to bid on projects for which they do not have a sufficient internal capacity or a knowledge base. As one director indicated, “we need resident staff in the areas where we compete for projects; otherwise, we do not know the area well enough to develop a credible bid or to organize the work”. Table 10. Approximate annual budgets (US $) of organizations surveyed
Organization Annual Budget ($) Academic and research Institutions/University Departments Institute of Nutrition and Food Science (INFS) Bureau of Economic Research (BER) Institute of Statistical Research and Training (ISRT), Dhaka University International Non-Governmental Organizations ICDDR,B Centre on Integrated Rural Development for Asia and the Pacific (CIRDAP) Government Units/Institutions Institute of Food Science and Technology(IFST) Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute Bangladesh Rice Research Institute Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC) National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPORT), Dhaka Non-Governmental Organizations Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) BRAC RED Human Development Research Centre Bangladesh Research Foundation for Development 30,000 15 Small consulting on specific projects 20 million 10,000 Remarks Research institute with substantial teaching responsibilities Many faculty but little participation in the Bureau except for small projects funded by the Bureau Mostly a teaching budget Large NGO with many other divisions than the nutrition division Small centre that looks for grants to fund projects

30,000 7 million 13.7 million Very large 35,000

Does not include substantial expenses of updating labs Includes many who might not be classified as researchers Includes many who might not be considered researchers Government and World Bank support Budget for research activities not the basic surveys

5 million 450,000 4 million 10,000 Not available 30,000 360,000 250,000 30,000

One of the larger institutes Part of a larger organization that assumes some of the accounting & other responsibilities Centre with major USAID & other contracts Supported by funds from the endowment & periodic contributions from donors; trustees give up to 1,450 US $ each and donors 145 US $ each A policy institute with broad interests Something of a one man show Broad policy research institute Local governance issues Just starting operation under new leadership, two years

Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) Unnayan Shamannay Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) Centre for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship Development (CASEED) Private Institutions Linked to Research DATA

200,000

Mostly sub-contracting with organizations like IFPRI

Note: converted at 70 taka to 1 $

The food security policy research and civil society organizations with the larger budgets are the well known to international NGOs: ICDDR, B, BIDS (as mentioned earlier an NGO but with strong links to the government) and BRAC RED. One surprise was the HDRC which has an approximate budget of $4 million annually. This Center has started-up an office in the U.S.A., which may account for this larger budget.

22

The BARC is a large government research organization, with an annual budget much larger than any of the others surveyed. BARI and the BRRI also have substantial budgets. Four have approximate budgets in the $200 thousand to $450 thousand range. The remaining research organizations have annual budgets that are below $35,000 per year. This may be of use in determining the level of the contracts let under the second phase by the NFPCSP. In the first set of NFPCSP research grants some of the food security policy research organizations received contracts with a value greater than the annual budgets. Stretching contracts out for more than 18 months or giving contracts more sized to the budgets of the research organizations and their regular staffs are ways to reduce the stress on the research organizations. Finally, some of the government organizations gave their staff budgets rather than the total budget. The IFST is, for example, remodelling labs that cost much more than was given as the annual budget. Still, the most important overall observation relates to the rather small annual budgets of many of the research organizations.

5.5. Publications and Other Forms of Communication
Most organizations had substantial levels of research publications output. The differences in terms of output recorded relate to how the organizations chose to report their publications. Some had more of a tendency to publish in books and research reports than in refereed journal articles. Others published issue papers to be shared with officials in major policy reform events. Still others published their research reports in journals, often published by their own organization. These and other differences made it difficult to gather the publications information in a common form for reporting from the survey/questionnaire. We therefore present the publications in an aggregated way as: - Peer reviewed Scientific Journals, books and chapters in books - Research Reports, and - Other Publications. The results summarized in Table 11 show clearly that the research organizations are active publishers and have as members a set of productive scholars. The fact that the publication pattern with more books for the national NGOs we believe reflects the way that is best to get the research into the policy debate in Bangladesh. The major conclusions were first that university and international NGO research organizations tended to publish more in refereed journals than the other surveyed organizations. National NGO research organizations had more publications in books and chapters in books. This may reflect the fact that these sources of publication go along better with publications designed to support dialogue and policy discussions. Government organizations appear to have lower publication rates than NGOs, perhaps because the incentives are different. Many government researchers depend on internal records of activity for their incentives. Still the publication rates are surprisingly strong.

23

Table 11. Research publications of the research and civil society organizations
Peer Reviewed Scientific Journals Academic and research Institutions/University Departments Institute of Nutrition and Food Science (INFS) 24 Mostly papers published as Bureau of Economic Research (BER) a result of small grants Institute of Statistical Research and Training 23 (ISRT) International Non-Governmental Organizations ICDDR,B 318 Centre on Integrated Rural Development for Asia and the Pacific (CIRDAP) Government Units/Institutions Organization Institute of Food Science and Technology(IFST) Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute Bangladesh Rice Research Institute Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council National Institute of Population ResearchTraining (NIPORT) Non-Governmental Organizations Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) BRAC RED Human Development Research Centre Bangladesh Foundation for Development Research Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) [one year] Unnayan Shamannay Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Power Participation Research Centre (PPRC) Centre for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship Development (CASEED) Private Institutions Linked to Research DATA* 17 28 32 Major Publications Program 0 3 0 Research Reports 5 Other Publications 3

8 4 3

3 20

0 21 4

3 Patents 49 3

21 49 18 33 27 16 20 10 10

180 59 25 7 23 21 20 6 0

3 30 20 5, 2 videos 46 30 20 10 0

2

5.5.1. Other Forms of Communication It is emphasized that many of the research organizations had other communication activities that were not well covered by the survey. Examples include policy dialogue, newspaper articles, consensus group reports, training manuals, and other types of reporting on their activities. These forms of publication in Bangladesh are important in terms of developing an understanding of how to successfully promote improved food security policy, and the development of a national monitoring and intervention system for food safety and food security. This policy advocacy orientation is an aspect of the research organizations as a whole that could be encouraged and perhaps directed by some type of seminar that focuses on the elements of a national food security policy and monitoring and intervention systems, and how to get them supported by the public and policymaker’s. Such a seminar might assist in understanding of the essential elements of a national food security policy, the monitoring and intervention system, which at present does not seem to be completely understood or funded in Bangladesh.

24

5.5.2. Key Publications and Food Security Policy Research The research organizations were asked in the survey to provide three major research projects/publications carried out during the last two years. Table 12 lists the major research projects (when given) carried out by the organizations. There is some judgment here, as we sometimes selected from those offered by the research organizations. We attempted to select the projects/publications that would convey an impression of the research focus of the organization. Notice that relative to food security policy and a national food security monitoring and intervention system, there are few publications. This is, in part, because the major data bases from which such publications would come are not available, except for—the Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey (BDHS) of NIPORT, the Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) of BBS and the Nutritional Surveillance Report (NSP) of HKI. Other data sets are not available including the household food consumption survey and the food composition tables, which are critical parts of the national monitoring and intervention system, and the work to be completed on the development of a focused food security policy within Bangladesh. Most organizations provided the three publications requested, or provided them in the CVs of the research organization’s directors or other lead people. They are listed in the write-ups on the organizations in Annex 5, and provide a more complete overview of the research activities of the organizations. Reviewing the publications listed in Table 12, note that 16 of the 20 research organizations provided research publications. They break down approximately as follows: - Poverty (BIDS, HDRC, BFDR, CPD) - Food Security (INFS, IDCCR,B, BRAC, DATA) - Food Safety (IFST) - Health (NIPORT), and - Others (Unnayan Shamanay, BUP, PPRC, CASEED). Note that only four of the research organizations were doing research on what might be called narrowly, food security policy research. Four were doing research on poverty, a major cause of food insecurity. One was on health and one on food safety which relate to food security as well. Finally, four were doing research on such things as Extension, micro credit, community empowerment, and environment, which relate to food security but also to many other aspects of human welfare. No research institution was doing work on the food security monitoring system, for example. This review of significant publications of the research organizations points up the need for focusing on the monitoring system and interventions suggested by analysis of this system as a major effort in food security policy research.

25

Table 12. Selected indicator publications from the organizations participating in the survey
Organization Peer Reviewed Scientific Papers Academic and Research Institutions/University Departments The Chakari Food System Study in collaboration with Institute of Nutrition and Food Science (INFS) Cornell University, U.S. Bureau of Economic Research (BER) No research reports supplied None available/none essentially Institute of Statistical Research and Training (ISRT) International Non-Governmental Organizations Need to integrate Nutrition: Mainstreaming Nutrition ICDDR,B Initiative in collaboration with World Bank Centre on Integrated Rural Development for Asia and Institutional Mechanisms in Rural Development the Pacific (CIRDAP) Government Units/Institutions Institute of Food Science and Technology(IFST) Examination of Formalin in Fish Dynamics of Income Generation in Resource Poor Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute Households in Bangladesh Access to Quality Rice Seed be Resource Poor Farmers in Bangladesh Rice Research Institute Bangladesh Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council National Institute of Population Research and Training Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey (BDHS) in (NIPORT) collaboration with MoHFW Non-Governmental Organizations Programme for Research on Chronic Poverty in Bangladesh Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) in collaboration with CPRC, DFID and University of Manchester BRAC RED Food Fortification for Complementary Feeding collaboration with MI and Hospital for Sick Children, Canada Study of the People (Particularly Poor, Landless, and Vulnerable) Having Livelihoods Based on Agricultural & Marketing in the Eastern Cast Region in collaboration with CARE The Multi-Dimensional Nature of Poverty in Bangladesh: Issues, Evidence, and Future Directions Dynamics of Livelihood Systems in Rural Bangladesh: Generation of Information Facilitating Dialogue on Strategies and Policies Pertaining to the Elimination of Poverty in collaboration with IRRI People’s Report 2004-2005, Bangladesh Environment in collaboration with Ministry of Environment and UNDP Socioeconomic and Indebtedness–Related Impacts of Microcredit in Bangladesh Unbundling Governance, Indices, Institutions, Processes and Solutions Systems in

Human Development Research Centre

Bangladesh Foundation for Development Research

Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD)

Unnayan Shamannay Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC)

Centre for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment Study of Agricultural Extension Support and Entrepreneurship Development (CASEED) Bangladesh, draft report Private Institutions Linked to Research DATA

Relative Efficiency of Food and Cash transfers in Improving Food Security and Livelihoods of the Ultra Poor in Bangladesh in collaboration with IFPRI

6. Comparing Organizations
6.1. General Assessment of Organizations`
Food security policy research is but one of the critical policy issues in Bangladesh. This multiplicity of policy issues and the diversity of policy related work are evident from the

26

survey results reported in Section 5. Many organizations are working on related and unrelated policy issues, funded primarily by donors or internally. Donors have different agendas themselves, and the policy issues in Bangladesh are so broad that food security policy issues often take a back seat compared to funding of other policy projects. The issue is that they are taken in many different directions by the donors and not well supported by the government agencies that are responsible for food security policy. The results of the survey indicate that there is the capacity to do research and develop a sound and comprehensive food security policy. The issue is the understanding of what a good food security monitoring and policy intervention system is, and the multitude of pulls on the relatively small number of capable organizations. The NFPCSP could assist in the development of a consensus on food security monitoring and policy intervention system plan anchored on the comprehensive policy framework provided by National Food Policy (2006) It cannot deal with the pulls of other donors on the research organizations. The government needs, as well, to support the research and come to agreement on what are the priority issues for a successful food security monitoring and policy intervention system. In Section 6, some comparisons of the research institutions are made that suggest their relative capacities, and as well how stretched they are to address more fully the food security issues in Bangladesh. These comparisons amplify the above assertions about the research organizations and the many pulls that they have on their capacities.

6.2. Food Security Monitoring and Policy Research Systems
The data assembled in this section are from Section 5 and organized to give an indication of the comparative capacities of the research organizations and more generally, the capacities of the organizations taken together. It is stressed that the data should be taken only as indicators of capacity and strength of the research organizations, and that these data should be updated as the NFPCSP goes forward. But the types of ratios obtained can be used to evaluate of the strengths and capacities of the research organizations. Even in their unrefined form these ratios suggest some differences between organizations and capacities in terms of conducting food security policy research.

6.2.1. Staff and Budgeting Relationships In Table 10 and Table 11 above are summarized the staff and budgets of the research organizations. This section combines these results and analyzes ratios of budget to staff for the research organizations. Specifically, the budget to total staff and the budget to PhD (or equivalent) staff is investigated to get a feel about how the research organizations allocate their budgets, and the level of total funding relative to staff. Among other things this should give an indication of how the research effort of organizations is managed—is one director supervising a set of junior staff or is the supervision more distributed among a set of senior researchers. The results in Table 13 provide evidence of a variety of budgeting models for the research organizations. There is a vast difference between the larger research organizations (that are in many cases related to international research and policy implementation) and research organizations that are more local and smaller in size. There are differences between research organizations that make substantial use of consultants and research organizations that have invested in permanent staff. Finally, there are differences between research

27

organizations that have numerous low level staff and research organizations that appear to hire more staff with Masters/PhDs. Table 13. Staff/Budget relationships per year (USD)
Organization Total Budget Per PhD or Equivalent Total Budget Per Masters Degree Holder 10,000 -Total Budget Per Total Staff

Academic and research Institutions/University Departments Institute of Nutrition and Food Science 1,250 (INFS) Bureau of Economic Research (BER) 500 Institute Statistical Research and Training Only small projects (ISRT) International Non-Governmental Organizations ICDDR,B 338,983 Centre on Integrated Rural Development 10,000 for Asia and the Pacific (CIRDAP) Government Units/Institutions Institute of Food Science and 2,142 Technology(IFST) Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute Bangladesh Rice Research Institute Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC) National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPORT), Dhaka Non-Governmental Organizations Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) BRAC RED Human Development Research Centre Bangladesh Foundation for Development Research Centre for Policy Dialogue Unnayan Shamannay Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) Centre for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship Development (CSEED) Private Institutions Linked to Research DATA 471,000 218,00 Very large/not included 35,000

236 405

27,137 5,000

5,077 2,000

1,500 652,000 1,75 million

555 139,000 179,000

5,833

2,187

1,250,000 45,000 1,000,000 10,000 Not available 6,000 360 125,000 3,000

200,000 28,125 166,666 1,666 1,250 18,000 13,888 1,500

131,578 6,164 108,108 769 661 9,473 10,000 1.2

100,000

10,000

9,090

The final difference is between organizations that have survey capacities themselves and research organizations that rely more on secondary data for their work. The enumerators for the surveys were not counted in the staff of the organizations because they use these people on an irregular basis. What is then seen are research organizations that are operated differently, some with international scales of payment and some with domestic payment scales. They operate differently in terms of staffing and they have different capabilities in terms of collecting basic data and utilizing more secondary data. It is difficult to make any general comments about the effectiveness of the organizations relative to the quality of research output, but there are differences in costs of research that could be taken into consideration when making directed research contracts—in short, data is available that should give a guide as to the costs of

28

conducting research with the various research organizations which could be valuable in determining the costs of getting various tasks completed. If the research organizations give the person months and the qualifications of staff that are to be assigned to projects, then there is a basis for determining whether or not the prices bid are in line with the past costs of doing the business with the research organizations.

6.2.2. Research Strengths; Organizational Responses Research organizations were asked to prioritize their research focus. A simple metric was used. First the organizations were asked to give a score of 10 points to each of the five general research themes identified in the research needs assessment. Thus, the research organizations had the possibility of recording a total of 50 points in the first round of the exercise. Then the research organizations were asked to take the total points from the first round and allocate them to the research themes in which they were the most competent or had completed the most research in the immediate past. For example, the research could have selected 3 areas in the first round giving it a total of 30 points. Then in the second round they could allocate the 30 points differently within the three themes depending on their competence and past work. A research organization with 30 points from the first round could for example, allocate the points 20, 6 and 4 to the three indicated themes reflecting their self assessment of capacities. There was a good response from the research organizations that completed this portion of the questionnaire. For those research organizations that did not complete the questionnaire, the survey notes had to be referred to and the allocations of points from the results of the interview and survey had to be approximated. The method used was to score each of the themes that they said that they conducted research in with a 10. Then, selection of the themes was done in which they had the greatest capacity by counting the individual responses (within the research theme) that had the most “yes” responses. Recall that within each of the five themes there were four choices relative to specific areas. On this basis the two that predominated were selected. To check this method for reliability, the same exercise was done for those research organizations that responded to the questionnaire and found to be a reliable predictor. Results of this exercise are reported in Table 14. Here was recorded the number of themes selected and the top two research themes as identified. Observing the results in Table 14, notice that often one of the first four themes, Food Availability, for example, is identified, and then the Cross Cutting and Overarching Theme is identified as the second. Generally these rankings provide a good indication of the research organizations general focus, and where one would expect to get the best work on particular types of food security policy contracts. These data could be used in identifying the research organizations for particular types of directed research or in evaluations for more open competitions from the research organizations. This gives added information to that in Table 2, where the research organizations reported their strengths under the five themes, and Tables 3-7 where they reported on the topics within the five major research themes. To give an example from Table 15, the INFS selected five themes for focus of their research, but it gave the priority to Utilization of Food for Nutrition and Food Availability as themes in which it had most capacity. In general, the surveyed research organizations gave responses that suggested pretty good coverage in terms of capacities for the themes identified in the research needs assessment.

29

Table 14. Research priorities for the organizations
Total Research Areas Academic and research Institutions/University Departments Organization Institute of Nutrition and Food Science (INFS) Bureau of Economic Research (BER) Institute of Statistical Research and Training (ISRT) International Non-Governmental Organizations ICDDR,B Centre on Integrated Rural Development for Asia and the Pacific (CIRDAP) Government Units/Institutions Institute of Food Science and Technology(IFST) Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute Bangladesh Rice Research Institute Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC) National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPORT), Dhaka Non-Governmental Organizations Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) BRAC RED Human Development Research Centre Bangladesh Foundation for Development Research Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) Unnayan Shamannay Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) Centre for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship Development (CASEED) Private Institutions Linked to Research DATA 5 2 5 Priority Research Areas (Two Highest Ranked) Utilization of Food for Nutrition and Economic Access to Food Economic Access and Cross Cutting and Overarching Themes Cross Cutting and Overarching themes and Food Availability Utilization of Food for Nutrition and Cross Cutting and Overarching Themes Economic Access to Food and Cross Cutting and Overarching Themes Utilization of Food for Nutrition and Physical and Social Access to Food Food Availability and Cross cutting and overarching themes Food Availability and Economic Access to Food Food Availability and Utilization of food for Nutrition Economic Access to Food Economic Access to Food and Cross Cutting and Overarching Themes Economic Access to Food and Food Availability Economic Access to Food and Food Availability Cross Cutting and Overarching Themes Economic Access to Food and Cross Cutting and Overarching Themes Economic Access to Food and Physical and Social Access to Food Cross Cutting and Overarching Themes and Economic Access to Food Economic Access to Food and Food Availability Food Availability and Cross Cutting and Overarching Themes Economic Access to Food and Food Availability

3 3

2 3 5 2 1

2 5 5 1 3 4 4 4 5

2

6.2.3 Publications per Professional Staff Member These data were difficult to obtain largely because the publication records of the research organizations are not standardized in Bangladesh (as is often the case in other countries). In addition, what is a refereed publication was of necessity made broader than would be the case in some other countries. Books and chapters in books are major means of publication in Bangladesh and were included in the scientific publications. It is estimated that perhaps half of the scientific publications were presented were in fact books and chapters in books rather than journal articles. This tendency is related to the limited number of refereed journals that are published in Bangladesh, and that receive wide national circulation. If you want to be heard in Bangladesh, the major avenues for publication of your work are books and chapters in books. Thus, the seemingly low publication rates for most of the research organizations are due to the fact that many of their publications are books and chapters in books.

30

It should be noted that the consultants were not included in the calculations for organizational staff used to measure the publication rate. It is known that some of the rather high rates relate to the use of consultants in contract research. BIDS for example is an organization that has used a large consultant pool to grow and contract with the availability of contract work. Table 15. Publications to staff relationships for the organizations
Organization Total Publications Per PhD or Equivalent Total Publications Per Total Publications Per PhD Equivalent and Total Staff Masters 1.2 0.25

Academic and research Institutions/University Departments Institute of Nutrition and Food Science 1.3 (INFS) Bureau of Economic Research (BER) Mostly reports (N.A)

Institute Statistical Research and 3.7. Training (ISRT) International Non-Governmental Organizations ICDDR,B 5.7 Centre on Integrated Rural Development for Asia and the Pacific 3 (CIRDAP) Government Units/Institutions Institute of Food Science and 1.6 1 Technology(IFST) Bangladesh Agricultural Research 9 Institute Bangladesh Rice Research Institute Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPORT) Non-Governmental Organizations Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) BRAC RED Human Development Research Centre Bangladesh Foundation for Development Research Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) 3 (one year) Unnayan Shamannay Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) Centre for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship Development (CASEED) Private Institutions Linked to Research DATA 0.6 N/A

0.53 0.4 1

0.3 0.08 0.6

0.7 5.5 0.24

0.46 2.25 0.06

0.5

0.2

34 13.8 18.5 45 19.2 13.4 60 18

8.6 5.3 2.4 6.4 2.4 2.3 2.8 1.8

5.3 2.2 1.7 3.8 1.9 1.5 1.5 1.4

1

0.5

0.4

1

0.1

0.09

The definition of research reports was rather loose. Research reports can be of many types and sizes. They can be interim reports for a single project or one report at the end of a project. Thus, the rates of publication indicated by Table 15 should be carefully interpreted, as it would have taken a much more detailed survey instrument to get this information in a

31

form that would have permitted more exact comparability of the publication rates of the organizations. Table 15 was constructed as follows: The first column is total publication divided by the PhD or equivalent staff, the second is the total publications divided by the PhD or equivalent staff and the Masters staff, and the last column is total publications divided by the total staff. The calculations were done in this way to reflect the fact that the classifications of staff might be difficult for the directors of the research organizations. Observe in table one that there is a great difference in the entries in the first column. This reflects in part the operating style of the research organizations. Those organizations which use many consultants or have a large support staff have the larger entries in column one. This begins to even out for the research organizations that have large support staff in column two. Finally, in column three the figures begin to even out, showing more evenness among the research organizations. How might this information be used by the NFPCSP? It in a way tells the NFPCSP the type of research organization that they might be contracting with for projects. The organizations that have the largest entries in column one are the organizations with the large support staff or with a large set of consultants. The research in these organizations would be more supervised by the senior staff than completed by them. The last column indicates whether or not the people actually doing the research are regular staff or consultants.

6.2.4. Self Reported Collaborating Research Organizations The Organizations were asked to supply additional information on collaborations in the follow up questionnaire. From those which complied with our request, we received added indications of collaborative relationships. Where the research organizations did not comply with our request to complete the questionnaire, we went back to notes taken in the interview survey and made an approximation. What presents itself in Table 16 is a much improved approximation of the collaboration that is under way among the organizations, nationally and internationally. Many of the organizations that were visited are already collaborating with each other in ways that may lead to specialization of the research organizations. This underscores the findings in the Table 8 above where information was gathered on the areas that the organizations collaborated in. Many research organizations reported several collaborations internationally and nationally. The names of collaborators provided by the research organizations can be helpful in getting an understanding in which the organizations are strong or have capacities that attract national and international partners, for following-up on the organizations if there is need to get third party information about their capacities.

32

Table 16. Self Reported Collaborating Research Organizations; National and International
Organization National International Academic and research Institutions/University Departments BBS, BIDS, BRAC, IFST,ICDDRB, Institute of Nutrition and Food Science (INFS) HKI, ICCDRB IPHN, HKI, Bureau of Economic Research (BER) N/A N/A Institute of Statistical Research and Training INFS CFTRI-India (ISRT), Dhaka University International Non-Governmental Organizations BRAC, Mitra and Associates, INFS, DU, ICDDR,B World Bank IPHN Centre on Integrated Rural Development for IFAD, Other CIRDAP Centres Intl Donors to CIRDAP Asia and the Pacific (CIRDAP) Government Units/Institutions Institute of Food Science and BRAC, CAB, ERD, BSTI CFTRI-India Technology(IFST) Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute BAU, BIDS, BRRI CIMMYT, BRAC BARI, BFRI, BLRI, BAU, BIDS, DU, Bangladesh Rice Research Institute BAE, IRRI CPD, BSMRAU International Agricultural Research Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council Many Collaborators Centres and CGIR Centres National Institute of Population Research and USAID, North Carolina Mitra Associates, Population Coincil Training (NIPORT), Dhaka University,UVFAP Non-Governmental Organizations Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies Consultants IFPRI,CMI (BIDS) BRAC RED BBS, BRAC, Hospitals in Bangladesh London School of Economics, Aga Khan Fdn., Micronutrient Initiative, Canada

Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Ministry of Education, CARE, Other World Bank NGOs Bangladesh Foundation for Development BUP, Bangladesh Enterprise Inst., CPD, Observer Fdn.-India Research BNPS,PRIP, Unnayan Samanny Most Ministries n Bangladesh concerned LDCs, IRRI, ICRISAT, BARI, DFID, FAO, Centre for Policy Dialogue (CDP) with health and Nutrition CGIAR, UNDP Unnayan Shamanay BIDS, PPRC, CPD CUTS-India 35 National and International Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Same Organizations CPD, PPRC, BIDS, BRAC, CARE, PKSF, Grameen Bank, World Bank Power Participation Research Centre (PPRC) Unnayan Samanny Centre for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship BAU-Res, BAU-Mymensingh, MIDAS Training and Technology Institute, NZ Development Private Institutions Linked to Research DATA Several Local Organizations IFPRI, World Bank Human Development Research Centre

6.3. Findings from the Comparisons Exercise
This comparison of research organizations was conducted to give added information to the findings recorded in Section 5. The results of this inter comparison of the organizational information on capacities provides added information that can be useful in better understanding the research organizations, and their potential leadership role within future NFPCSP activities. These results are recorded below: The budget staffing calculations show research organizations that have different pay scales (international and domestic) and are differently organized (with permanent and consulting staff). The major implication is to give information on operating mode of the research organizations, and the likely cost of conducting research with the different organizations. The latter could be useful in negotiating contracts for directed and competitively awarded research for the NFPCSP. Different organizations will have different costs of conducting the

33

same type of research—and we have some basic parameters to use in negotiation for contracts. An exercise was completed to determine the strengths of the research organizations in the five themes identified in the research needs assessment. This exercise produced two of the five research themes that were evaluated as strengths of the research organizations by their own assessment. This information gives a basis for deciding where to place the directed or competitively awarded contracts, based on a self assessment of the strengths of the research organizations. The publications per staff member turned out to be surprisingly informative. One of the reasons is that the publication outlets are different in Bangladesh than in many other countries. Much of what is described as refereed publications are, in fact, books and chapters in books. Refereed journal articles are seen to be less important as a research outlet in Bangladesh. Apparently, if the objective is to influence policy, books and chapters in books are the preferred outlet. Many of the research organizations had more popular approaches to influencing the policy dialogue; publications in magazines, actual dialogue sessions, and publications in news papers are examples. The self reported collaborations with other research organizations, national and international, were greater than was estimated on the basis of the initial survey. When we went back to the research organizations with a supplemental questionnaire we found that the collaborations were substantial even among the research organizations surveyed. These are some of the observations made on the basis of the comparisons among the research organizations surveyed.

7. Contracting of Organizations
7.1. Possible Organisation of Future Research Collaboration
One of the objectives of the consultancy was to assist in defining an approach that could be used (if such a decision were made) for transferring the leadership for NFPCSP to local organization(s). The way to consider this proposition is to use the basics of modern contracting mechanisms. According to the basics of contract theory there are four major issues that require addressing: purpose of the relationship, term of the agreement/contract or relationship, itemized duties, and exclusive relationships. The following is a review of each of these four issues in turn, making comments that are designed to be helpful in drawing up contracts, if moving to outside organization(s) is the action determined to be pursued by the NFPCSP.

7.1.1 Purpose of Contracts The purpose of the contractual relationship needs to be laid out very carefully. It should be succinct and clear with as little opportunity for misinterpretation as possible. Four purposes of designing the possible contract we suggest the following (in about the length and specificity that is suitable for such contracts). 1. To give leadership to food security policy research in Bangladesh.

34

2. To place (or provide assistance in placing) the grants and contracts offered by the NFPCSP. 3. To reduce overlap and duplication in food security research in Bangladesh. 4. To set an evolving national agenda for food security policy research in Bangladesh. 5. Support the development of a sustainable and renowned research institution in Bangladesh in the field of food security

7.1.2. Terms of Contracts The term of the contract should be indicated clearly. The recommendation is that the contract be for multiple years, since research takes time to complete and there will be learning on the part of all organizations during the contract period. Making the contract duration short will have undesirable impacts on the types of projects that are accepted and on the stability of relationship. The recommendation is that the contract be three years in length. This length of contract will permit sufficient time for the organization(s) that are selected to go through at least two annual cycles for placing the contracts that will be a part of their duties. An exit clause is appropriate since the organization(s) selected may for some reason not be in position to execute the contract successfully.

7.1.3 Itemized Duties for Contracts The real essence of the agreement or contract is in the itemized duties. A list is provided below for consideration by the NFPCSP partners. This list implies an annual cycle of activities, with the last task for one year feeding into the first task for the next year as the years roll by. The tasks include: 1. Coordinate and bring national attention to food security policy research. 2. Develop or update an annual research needs assessment. 3. Make (or assist in making) grants and contracts from available NFPCSP resources. 4. Manage (or assist in managing) the grants and contracts during the period of activity. 5. Monitor food security outcomes annually (or develop and manage a system to monitor), and recommend interventions. 6. Communicate the results widely to the population and to other research organizations. 7. Adhere to more specific conditions for use of the NFPCSP and partners funds, for example. 8. Report on progress in activities to the wider NFPCSP programme.

Each of the items will be commented on briefly. The first item really depends critically on the success of executing the remaining six. To coordinate and bring national attention to the food security policy, it is necessary to have something to report. The research needs assessment, grants and contracts awards, management of the grants and contracts, and the monitoring and interventions will give the organization(s) much to discuss with professionals and with the public. Hard facts are the real necessity for a successful national coordination and visibility effort.

35

The research needs assessment conducted last year by the NFPCSP will have to be updated each year. This can be an opportunity to get the professionals involved in the research together, and to think about the current priority issues for food security policy research. In addition to generating a set of needs that may be adjusted from year to year, it will be an opportunity to “thicken” the relationship between the researchers and policy makers. This task, by the way, should not include only researchers but the government agencies and policy makers responsible for implementing the food security program for the country. The assumption is that the NFPCSP project will have funds to provide research grants and contracts during its second phase. The idea is of course that the GoB and other donors will appreciate the organizational approach to managing the NFPCSP grants and contracts, and come to apply their funds to the pool available for grants and contracts for research on food security monitoring and interventions. Of course, the allocation of these funds will be competitive with Request for Proposal (RFP) content coming from the research needs assessment. It is assumed that FAO and its partners will provide detail here. If other donors join-in to offer funds as a part of the NFPCSP contract arrangement, they may have different rules for grants and contracts qualifications. These can be handled, but it is urged to make the grant and contract allocation as simple as possible. On the issue of managing the grants and contracts, the itemization will need careful attention. The organization(s) that accept the contractual relationship for managing the project research will have to have reporting periods that are designed to assure that the promised research is happening, of good quality and occurring in a timely manner. Quarterly reports, provided in writing and given orally in front of the other grant and contract receivers, are recommended. Peer pressure is a strong motivator for making those with the grants and contracts perform. The development of a monitoring system for making an “annual report” on the progress of food security is critical to the development of an improved food security policy for Bangladesh. The development of this monitoring system will take some thought and planning, but the first edition of the indicators should be available during the first year of the agreement or contract. This task is one that might be given to those organization(s) that are awarded the agreement or contract—as a directed contract. Most of those that apply or are somehow considered for the contract will need an incentive to enter the competition. Giving them this task will be a way to keep them in the food security policy game, since they will not be eligible (assuming that the awards process somehow goes to them) for the grants and contracts awarded under the NFPCSP project. This task would actually feed into NFPCSP on-going assistance with the monitoring of the National Food Policy (2006), which emphasizes establishing strategic linkages with and building-upon outputs of existing food security monitoring initiatives and systems, specially those relating to the monitoring of Bangladesh Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (2005) and the Millennium Development Goals, but also major initiatives such as the Food Insecurity and Vulnerability Information Mapping Systems established by FAO in collaboration with the Ministry of Planning (see Section 9.1). Communicating the results of the project to the researchers and public is important since it will influence the funds available for investment and the attitudes of the researchers and policy makers and policy implementers. The NFPCSP should have a clear communications plan developed at the outset with the contractors, and perhaps updated each year. Often organizations in developing countries and for that matter, in developed countries, do not fully

36

understand how good communications can assist in making their projects more successful and in attracting funds.

7.1.4. Exclusive Relationships in Contracts This is the place in the contract where it is possible to manage the organization(s) that may apply for the agreement/contract and manage the information associated with the NFPCSP activity. Clear statements of which organizations are eligible need to be developed. The suggestion is that no governmental agency be eligible to apply for the leadership of this NFPCSP activity. They can cooperate and be a part of the process, but have regulations and other restrictions that would make it difficult to take the responsibility implied by this contract. The receivers of the contract need to know what they can and cannot report, which should be determined in relation to information required for the success of the activity. As well, there needs to be a clear statement of the eligibility of individuals or organizations to apply for grants and contracts, relative to their relationship to the organization(s) that are awarded the leadership responsibility. Types of exclusive arrangements that may need to be specified include: 1. What organizations are eligible to take on the responsibility? 2. Relationship to grant and contract receivers as well as to the project/FAO. 3. Rights to disclose information – and to whom (public/internal)

7.2. Selecting the Organization(s) to Take Leadership
Here, and in other places in this report, it will be understood that the set of Bangladesh organizations involved in food security policy research is sufficient to generate one or a group of organizations that can manage the leadership responsibilities. Of course, there will be difficulties and learning with any contracting relationship that is selected. But the potential pay-off is high in terms of getting Bangladesh on a solid and systematic track to improve the knowledge of how to reduce and ultimately eliminating food insecurity. The options described below represent alternatives for placing the contract or agreement for the leadership in food security policy research. These options are evaluated relative to the issues that appear important to the success of the process. The options are: 1. Bid the agreement/contract for leadership, 2. Bid for a limited set of activities, retaining some control, 3. Create an Advisory Committee, 4. Appoint a leader and let the leader establish the Advisory Committee, 5. Organize a Task Force, 6. Select a core set of organizations and let them organize the leadership, and 7. Develop a Food Security Consortium—involving some contribution by the members. It will serve the purposes of this discussion to define these alternatives more carefully. They are very different as will be apparent. Bid the agreement/contract for leadership: This is often the preferred strategy in countries that have a stronger tradition of research and well-managed research organizations. The

37

plan is simple, set out the contract carefully. In this context, it would be useful to provide training on how to bid for the contract and what is meant by technical terms to all potential bidders and then invite the organizations to bid. This version implies a contract under which the leadership would be almost entirely turned over to the organization(s) that are the successful bidders. As already mentioned, the contract should be for a number of years with the possibility written into the contract for exit if the leadership role is not being preformed as itemized. One last observation is that if there is qualification related to bidders, do it post bid rather than per bid. This makes it possible to get more potential bidders and for the letting to be more open. Bid for a limited set of activities: This is a small variant of the bid option. The idea is to become a partner with the successful bidder in providing leadership for the NFPCSP. The partnership may be more difficult to define than the option of going for the full bid described above. What we are thinking of is perhaps sharing the research needs assessment task and the development of the monitoring system and having a final review right before the organizations are selected or informed as winners of the competition described in the request for proposals (RFP). As in the case of the complete bid, there will have to be clear itemization of responsibilities, which is more difficult the more involved the partnership is between the organizations winning the contract and the NFPCSP staff. Create an Advisory Committee: The advisory committee will have little authority—it merely gives advice about leadership. This could lead to a situation in which the NFPCSP staff are responsible for most of the leadership. The letting of contracts for example would run largely as for the first tranch of funds. There would be little way of getting the advisory committee to do more that provide comment on the procedures and practices developed for exercising the leadership role. One other issue is the fact that the number of qualified researchers is comparatively small. Taking the well qualified researchers on to the advisory committee would perhaps limit the number of well qualified research organizations that would respond to the RFP. Appoint a leader and let the leader establish the Advisory Committee: This is a variant on the advisory committee and is a way of assuring that the advisory committee is not hand-picked by the NFPCSP staff. It gives the advice of the advisory committee more independence and more credibility. Still, the advisory committee will have little power and authority because all it is not scene as authoritative by the research community. Set up a Task Force: This is an advisory committee with a little more ability to manage some aspects of the research needs assessment, monitoring system and the letting of the individual contracts. This is distinguished from the advisory committee options by the fact that there can be type of more definitive contract in setting up the Task Force. The name suggests that certain tasks will be given to the Task Force, and the Task Force will have responsibility for conducting these tasks. The issue is what kinds of tasks can be given the Task Force and not have it lapse into some type of a limited bidding arrangement. Examples of activities that could be given include perhaps running the research needs assessment, advising on the terms of the RFP, and advising on the development of the food security monitoring and intervention system. The problem is that these tasks are largely given to a set of individuals and not to research organization. Select a core of organizations and let them organize the leadership: Here there will have to be conditions and terms of the contract like the bidding options. The major difference is that the NFPCSP staff would pick the organizations that would give the leadership. In important ways this limits the authority of the core organizations. They are hand-picked and so the other organizations assume that they are in the pocket of the NFPCSP staff. Since the terms and itemization of the contract would have to be essentially the same as under the bidding options, the NFPCSP staff have the same work but an organization responsible for the

38

leadership that is not separated from the NFPCSP staff. This would not likely work to cause the remainder of the research community to treat the RFP that emerges the same as under the bidding options. The result might be that the system is flawed and there is a lack of credibility with the research community. Food Security Consortium: This option has another dimension that is attractive in selecting the leadership cadre. Under this option the organizations joining the consortium could have to put-up some resources themselves. That is there could be a threshold of support in terms of resources for becoming a member of the consortium. This could be an interesting possibility for selecting from among the potential organizations the ones to provide the leadership. The resource commitment would not have to be large and in fact, it could not given the financial resources of the organizations surveyed. Resources could come in terms of in kind support as an alternative. The attraction of this option is that the rules are set and the organizations decide whether or not to participate on the basis of their willingness to make the resource contribution. This gives the agreement/contract some added independence from the NFPCSP staff. The issue is what can the consortium do? Likely, they could do about the level of activity of the Task Force. It would not be possible for the consortium to carry out much of the work of the leadership task. For one reason, the consortium could be quite large depending on how many resources or kind of resources are required to become members. The organizational approaches need to be evaluated according to a set of criteria that defines the type of leadership of the NFPCSP research that is desired. 1. Authority, 2. Accountability, 3. Responsibility, 4. Capacity to organize and lead, 5. Capacity to place and manage contracts and grants, 6. Ability to carry out the needs assessment and monitoring, 7. Capability to communicate the monitoring results, and 8. Uncertainty of the outcome. Each of these terms will be discussed to assure agreement on what we are using the terms to represent. This is difficult but must be included to make the exercise useful. Authority: Refers to the ability to command that the other individuals and organizations undertake certain actions. This is a factor that depends on the contract and on the prestige of the organization(s) itself (themselves). Accountability: This refers to the capacity of the organization(s) to be accurate with funds, and to enforce accuracy of accounts of other organization(s). It as well means that the organization(s) are accurate and responsible in dispatching the duties for which they are tasked. Responsibility: Knowing and understanding the assigned duties and being reliable in carrying them out and reporting as requested. Capacity to organize and lead: The capacity to guide and orchestrate the performance of the set of research organizations that are clients of the NFPCSP. The capacity must extend as well to the to the policy makers and the public—giving credibility to the food policy issues

39

and the research programs to address them as well as to government programs to address the issues. Capacity to place and manage contracts and grants: This refers to the capacity to organize the competition for the grants or contracts and to manage them when they are awarded so that the outcomes promised are delivered. Ability to carry out research needs assessments and monitoring: These are technical tasks and require talented researchers as well as a capacity to develop metrics that are understood and agreed upon by research and other research organizations. Capability to communicate research needs assessment and monitoring results This capacity relates to the effectiveness of organization(s) in communicating to the public, policy makers, and to the research organizations. The food security policy should be well understood and have a high for all of the constituents. Uncertainty of outcome; This is the ability of the selected organizations to carry out the assigned tasks and meet the conditions of the leadership contract. In Table 17 below, each of the contracting or agreement options is ranked by the seven elements related to the performance of the alternative approaches. We will rank them by 1, 2, 3, with the rank of 1 being considered to reflect the highest probability of meeting the performance criterion. This is a ranking of the consultant and designed for illustration. It is recommended that the NFPCSP staff complete this ranking as an exercise to sharpen the capacity to select from among the ways to move the leadership from the NFPCSP to the research organization(s). As well, if there is a decision to move the leadership, and training occurs, the exercise should be given to the organization(s) that are candidates for the contract. Table 17. Ranking of alternatives for the agreement or contract for organization(s) taking leadership for food security policy research.
Agreement/ Authority Contract Option Bid Contract Bid with Restrictions Advisory Committee Leader/ Advisory Committee Task Force Select Core Organizations Food Security Consortium 1 2 3 3 2 3 1 Accountability 1 2 3 3 2 1 1 Responsibility Organize 1 2 3 3 2 3 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 2 Grants & Monitor Communicate Uncertainty Contracts 2 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 2 1

The rankings will be discussed in order, by contracting option. For the bidding alternative, the organization(s) will have the authority, accountability and responsibility that is necessary for carrying out the activity, suggesting a “1”. The issues relative to grants and contracts, monitoring and communication are given a “2”, since the process will be new to the organization(s). The big difficulty is the uncertainty relative to the organization(s) carrying out the tasks of the contract or agreement. This is the real downside of bidding-out the contractor agreement.

40

The second option is similar to the first except the organization(s) will likely have to rely more on the FAO for the authority, accountability and responsibility, giving a “2”. Grants and contracts will be better managed because it is assumed that the FAO/USAID/EC will retain some aspect of this decision. Monitoring and communication remain as “2’s” because there is little experience in the likely bidding organization(s) for doing this. Uncertainty is reduced by retaining some of the responsibility, accountability and authority with in the donor organizations. The advisory committee option is ranked low across the board. This is because it is difficult to give the committee clear authority, accountability and responsibility. As well, if there is responsibility for monitoring and communication, it will be difficult to assign. There will always be a tendency to blame the faults of the leadership contract on other members of the advisory committee or on FAO/USAID/EC. An Advisory Committee with an appointed leader seems to be an option better than the simple advisory committee option. It may be possible to appoint an authoritative person to this post but again, the person will have authority primarily related to personal credentials. The Tasks Force ranks slightly higher than the Advisory Committee options because the Task Force gives FAO/USAID/EC the option of being more specific about the itemization of duties. It is not good on authority, accountability and responsibility because the FAO/USAID/EC will retain the authority, accountability and responsibility, at least in the eyes of the Bangladesh organization(s). The appointment of core institutions has some attraction. But which institutions will be appointed? There will be a large responsibility for FAO/USAID/EC in selecting the core organization(s), and the organization(s) appointed may be larger than that required to manage the contract or agreement. The tendency, since it is difficult to make the appointment, will be to appoint a larger group than needed or is practical. As well, there is essentially no way of determining whether or not they can work together. The food security consortium is the last option and the one that would likely be considered in countries that have a better developed food security system. Here there is the opportunity to stipulate that the organizations contribute some of the cost of the contracts or agreements that are let. This puts the organizations on the line for both the quality and quantity of the work. The fact that some of the work could be assumed for the consortium is one way of making this possible even in a country where the research organizations are mostly hand to mouth types of firms.

7.3. Special Issues
Bangladesh may present special challenges for the process of setting the provisions for a contract for leadership for the NFPCSP. Institutes are relatively new in terms of experience with modern contract arrangements. In some sense they may view grants and contracts as simple transfers of resources and not with the requisite responsibility for properly completing the obligations. One way to handle this is to offer a course on contracts with the understanding that the RFP for leadership for the contract for the NFPCSP will be forthcoming. This training could go over the contract material and in fact, get useful observations from the participants about what type of leadership contract for the NFPCSP to offer. Often these types of training courses have benefits beyond the particular agreement or contract that is of interest.

41

Finally, there is the issue of how to elicit responses to an RFP. In one case with all the training that we have recommended and the determination of the type of contract to offer, the process of letting the contracts in response the RFP can be a one shot process. That is after all of the preliminaries, the organizations can be asked to submit proposals for the contract(s) specified in the RFP and decisions can be made on the organizations that will receive the contract(s). This is true for either the leadership contract or for a more general competition for NFPCSP contracts. Absent the exercises related to the training and the use of concepts outlined in this discussion of contracts of this section, this was how the process worked for the first tranch of NFPCSP funds. This seems to work well in carrying out food security research that is in line with the priorities for Bangladesh identified by the civil society organizations Another alternative that should be considered is a two step process for the RFP. In the first round the RFP could be for a concept paper. This paper could outline the research project planned and how it could contribute to improved food security in Bangladesh. In this first step of the process we could think of asking for proposals that could be perhaps 10 pages in length. The selection board could then review the proposals and go back to the organizations that had submitted concept pieces that were compelling in terms of addressing food security problems in Bangladesh, and ask for a complete proposal, as the second step in the process. Reasons that this two step RFP process might work in Bangladesh are numerous. First, as we have shown in Sections 5 and 6 above many of the domestic organizations have very limited resources. One of the reasons that so many proposals were received for the first call for research proposals by NFPCSP were disqualified is that it is very taxing for these organizations to prepare a complete proposal—given available resources. They can prepare concepts but the process of preparing a full proposal requires more resources that they can spare. This resulted in un-systematic preparation, and resulting disqualification of proposals Second, if the RFP is carefully structured, it may be possible to work with the organizations in the second stage to assist in preparing proposals that are complete and target the policy issues that have been identified more specifically. Generally, the proposals that make it through step one should be pretty much assured of funding—subject to the organization’s completing an acceptable final proposal. That is, the organizations should see the second round as one of sharpening the proposals and submitting them—a process that is theirs if they make responsible revisions and complete the proposal according to the specifications in the RFP. The contracting discussion above can be easily adapted to this two step process, which may be better for Bangladesh given the available resources of the research organizations and the inexperience with dealing with formal RFP processes.

8. Recommendations on contracting
8.1 Recommendations Relative to Questions in the Terms of Reference
The capacities for food security research were laid out in the terms of reference for the evaluation. These include: 1. Relevance of the research focus on food security, 2. Quantity and quality, availability, and relevance of qualifications of technical staff,

42

3. Quality and timeliness of delivery, 4. Links with other research centers, inside and outside Bangladesh, and 5. Record of joint work with other institutions, inside and outside of Bangladesh Each of these will be addressed below

8.1.1. Relevance of the Research Focus on Food Security The review and survey were encouraging in terms of the relevance of the research focus on food security. At the same time, there was evidence of a lack a systematic attack on the basic information necessary to obtain a consistent picture of the problem for Bangladesh. The organizations were doing interesting and valuable research but the research is not yielding a national assessment of the food security problem or evidence of the effectiveness of measures or interventions to deal with it. Instead there is evidence of a number of studies, all about food security and good, but not additive in terms of effectively addressing the food security problem in the country. Recommendation #1: Attention needs to be given to the development and use of national surveys that can provide a complete picture of the food security problem. For example the food composition tables (with most of the work being completed by the Institute of Nutrition and Food Science need to be completed and made available to the researchers conducting food security research. A possibility is to evaluate a priority of 50 foods for fewer than the standard number of nutrients. Perhaps just the macro and other nutrients known to be problems of low income households could be evaluated. Also there is need to share and exchange work on food composition being carried out among the key nutrition institutions and build upon the existing nutrient database available.

The national food consumption survey conducted by the INFS needs to be completed on a timely basis and be available to other researchers. The Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey needs to be conducted and available to researchers. The same is true for the Household Income and Expenditures Survey and other national surveys that can be put together to yield basic information about food security of the population. National availability data need to be assembled and verified as well. The recommendation is for the donors to focus on these national surveys and their use in getting an accurate picture of the food security problem and its intensity within vulnerable groups—a national monitoring system. Recommendation #2: Research organizations need to be focused on these national surveys and other data, and conducting research based on these surveys and their national data rather than managing many specialized surveys conducted for specific research projects. The organizations have the capacity to conduct this more integrated research, if given the proper incentives. Recommendation #3: The NFPCSP could assist in the development of a consensus on food security monitoring and policy intervention system plan anchored on the comprehensive policy framework provided by the National Food Policy (2006). It cannot deal with the pulls of other donors on the research organizations. The government needs, as well, to support the research and come to agreement on what are the priority issues for a successful food security monitoring and policy intervention system.

43

Recommendation #4: Policy advocacy orientation is an aspect of the research organizations as a whole that could be encouraged and perhaps directed by some type of seminar that focuses on the elements of the National Food Policy (2006) and related monitoring and intervention systems, and how to get them into the public and policymaker’s minds. Such a seminar might assist in understanding of the essential elements of a national food security policy, the monitoring and intervention system, which at present does not seem to be well understood or funded in Bangladesh.

8.1.2 Availability and Relevance of their Technical Staff The results of the survey show that the organizations have the qualified staff to conduct the food policy research necessary for getting a handle on the food security issues in the country. The researchers are producing quality publications and reports on food security. The issue is more with the focus and breadth of these publications than their quality. Still there are things that can be done to improve the situation. Recommendation #5: The NFPCSP should rely more on conditions for contracts and grants that give evidence of the capabilities of the researchers (and their organizations) for making sustained contributions to food security research. These qualifications should be largely organizationally based, rather than for the individual researchers. Organizations need to understand that they must present “value” for undertaking the research grants other than a set of researchers. Organizational qualifications and experience with related issues need to be stressed more heavily in the criterion for making the grants. Recommendation #6: The Government agencies should take the responsibility for getting the surveys and other national data completed on a timely basis and available to the researchers. These surveys and other national data, and the food composition tables, can partly be considered “public goods” that can, if available, make the research better and more useful for food policy.

8.1.3. Quality and Timeliness of Delivery There seems to be a tendency to treat research projects and the terms of grants and contracts lightly in Bangladesh. This is where the seminars suggested above could be of use. This is more a part of the research culture than the capabilities of the organizations. As mentioned above, some of the grants need to be made to organizations rather than to individuals. This is especially true for the grants that will be made for analysis of national surveys and national data, where individuals simply do not have the technical capacities to handle the large data sets. The organizations do. In addition, the possibility of timely delivery depends on the size of the contract and timing required relative to the budget of the organization. Recommendation #7: Make RFPs for grants and contracts, or at least in part these grants and contracts, require institutional bids. These would be for research related to the analysis of large data sets and using information like that in the food composition tables. Recommendation #8: The contractor should be aware of the size of the usual budgets of the food security policy and civil society research organizations. Make the contracts fit the capacities of the research organizations in terms of contract size and length of time for performing the tasks.

44

8.1.4. Links with Other Research Centers The major research centers investigated in the survey were highly linked to research institutions, nationally and internationally. The international organizations are critical to the budgets of the research organizations in Bangladesh. Nationally, the linkages are less developed. The organizations are mostly not as well linked to each other or to policy implementation organizations, and especially not the government. Recommendation #9: Start an enhanced set of seminars that get the organizations and government agencies together on a regular basis. These can be training events as well as seminars. The government agencies need to know that the research organizations are doing work that can help them. Research organizations that are starting to move in this direction include ICDDDR, B, BRAC and BIDS. Recommendations #10: Linkages with donors could be increased with an agreement by the donors on priorities for the food security policy monitoring and intervention system. In addition to the analysis of the large data sets discussed above, there are public opinion polling organizations which are operating in Bangladesh and several other mechanisms for drawing together government researchers and donors. Examples include, BUP—public opinion polls, CPD— research based discussions with government and other groups, and BFD— consensus building conferences based on public and other input.

8.1.5. Record of Joint Work with Other Organizations This is an organizational approach to food policy research that is less common in Bangladesh, especially nationally. In many ways this is because the research organizations are often rather new to the food security policy research. Some organizations have a long history of doing research on economic development, such as BUP and BIDS. But many are newer and need incentives to join with each other to do work where they each have a comparative advantage, and to work similarly with international research organizations. Recommendation #11: The NFPCSP project should take a lead in making RFPs that encourage joint work. This could encourage domestic and well as international organizations to do joint work. International donor organizations could be asked to make contributions to specific research projects. These contributions could be to support one of their in-country organizations or other research collaborators to join with the Bangladesh organization in an activity. Recommendation #12: Resources used for short term training of government staff could be used to put the officials with accomplished food security research organizations world wide. This would encourage the international cooperation with international research institutions not just donors. Key researchers could as well be sent to international research organizations for training with organizations that have a good record in food security research, rather than to conferences, for example.

45

8.2. Leadership Capacities
Leadership possibilities have been discussed in some detail in Section 7. For this reason we will go directly to the recommendations. These recommendations are provided as a set of bullets, moving from those considered the most important to those that are less important. Recommendation #13: If there is a decision to move to a leadership contract, the NFPCSP should seriously consider a training session on contracts. The three purposes of the seminar would be: 1. To prepare the organizations for the bids on the contract to provide leadership for the NFPCSP in future, 2. To make potential organizations anticipating submissions for the second tranch of funding for the NFPCSP more able to pass the technical part of the review, 3. To upgrade the capacity of food security policy organizations for competing successfully for future research contracts. Recommendation #14: Set the bidding or other arrangements for letting the leadership contract to encourage joint competition. This can be done by making it clear in the itemization of terms that there needs to be expertise in several areas and that the expertise must come from specialists within the joining firms. Examples include: 1. Proposing in the contracts that the organizations must have nutritional and economic or social capacities; most organizations reviewed do not have both. 2. Proposing in the contract that there must be an ability to communicate to the researcher audience and the public about the results of the food security policy research and the monitoring and intervention work. 3. Proposing in the contract that presence in public policy discussions and organization thereof must be a part of the qualifications for winner of the letting. Recommendation #15: Include in the itemization of duties substantive work to be completed by the organization(s) awarded the contract. When discussing the leadership role with the organizations surveyed, we often heard why would we want to bid to lead the NFPCSP, if it would mean that we could not bid for the work on the second tranch of funds? The contract will have to include something substantive for the winning organization(s) to do in food security policy. Possibilities are: 1. Develop and/or manage the development of the monitoring and intervention system for the NFPCSP, including in support of the NFP Plan of Action 2. Manage the updating of the research needs assessment. The exercise will have value if repeated each year, as a way of building consensus in the country about the importance of food security policy and priorities. Recommendation #16: The term of the contract should be for a period of years, possibly three years. This has been discussed in Section 7 above. But the issue is that it will take a period of time, even for well managed organizations, to get the hang of leading and managing the NFPCSP research program.

46

Recommendation #17: The contracting instrument should be for bidding, a conditional bid or the consortium options (1, 2 or 7 from the material in Section 7). Other forms of establishing the leadership in the organizations have serious flaws related to accountability and authority, keys to the success of the leadership contracting approach. Possible approaches to deciding which mechanism to use are: 1. Pre-test the types of contracts with selected groups, within NFPCSP, government and the research organizations. This will make it necessary to fully develop the terms and definitions of the contracting types. 2. Think of different contracting systems, for example the two step process outlined at the end of Section 8. Have a first step be the submission of concept pieces. Then decide which of the pre proposals have merit relative to the needs assessment and ask for second step full proposals. This could lead to less work for all the organizations and the NFPCSP staff, and generate better sets of proposals.

9. Recommendations to NFPCSP
9.1 Possible Guidance for the NFPCSP
As the research needs assessment gets updated and the information from the national data sets, survey and supply, stocks and demand for major foods, becomes more a part of the national monitoring system, this process can become more systematic. The first part of the process is to present to the organizations the results for food security as indicated by the national monitoring system, leading to a review of recent research on interventions. This would then become the background information against the discussions of current needs could be conducted. An advantage of this approach is to get all participants in the discussion or assessment on the same page to begin the process. Food security policy has essentially two components. First is to develop a good monitoring system that can be used for overall assessments of food security, to identify the problem(s) and be used to determine the progress made by policy interventions designed to address these problems. Second is the set of policies designed to address the problems identified by the food security monitoring system. Both of these aspects of the policy need to be well communicated to the organizations involved and to the public interested in food security issues for Bangladesh. Fortunately, FAO has a set of recommendations on the type of monitoring system that is required to support good food security policy. Since the monitoring of the progress towards the World Food Summit goal involves national and international stakeholders, in a 2002 international conference at FAO 1 , consensus emerged that there is no single measure that can capture all aspects of undernourishment while providing policy makers with relevant and timely information in a cost-effective manner. Five methods are included in the system: Measuring undernourishment by combining information from “food balance sheets” and household income and expenditure surveys; Measurement of food insecurity using household income and expenditure survey data. As in the case of Bangladesh, household and individual intake data are collected in consumer expenditure surveys, national surveillance

___________________________________________________________________________
1

FAO (2002) Proceedings on Measurement and Assessment of Food Deprivation and Undernutrition, International Scientific Symposium, 26-28 June, FAO, Rome

47

systems, household food consumption surveys (BBS, NIPORT, and HKI) and analyzed with “food composition tables”; Measurement of child nutritional status based on anthropometric surveys as in those collected by the BBS, NIPORT, HKI that give an indication of the long term consequences of food security problems; and Qualitative methods for measuring people’s perception of food insecurity and hunger. An ability to use results of rapid surveys to detect the consequences of problems of short term duration, cyclones and floods can serve as examples. FAO in collaboration with the Ministry of Planning, GoB had established the Food Insecurity and Vulnerability Information and Mapping Systems (FIVIMS) in Bangladesh. This had linked itself to a large number of government, autonomous, non-government organizations that are providers and users of food security information and products. FIVIMS efforts in Bangladesh made contributions to measuring and monitoring food insecurity status by providing accurate and timely information on the incidence, nature and causes of chronic food insecurity and vulnerability 2 . The FIVIMS outputs and the Food Insecurity Atlas of Bangladesh developed by the Planning Commission, BBS and WFP have provided useful background data sets for preparation of the Poverty Reduction Strategy. Bangladesh has the beginnings of all of these elements of a food security monitoring system. However these systems need to be strengthened and integrated to realize their full impact on the Bangladesh food security monitoring system. As suggested earlier, the NFP (2006) and its ensuing Plan of Action shall provide the core reference for the development of a comprehensive food security and policy monitoring system in Bangladesh. Specifically, the monitoring strategy outline, including set of outcome and output indicators, suggested in the draft NFP Plan of Action prepared in consultation with 12 ministries under FAO-NFPCSP assistance (which awaits approval at the time of writing the present report) could be used as a basis for shaping the system and planning of monitoring activities.

9.1.1 Food Availability These are sets of data about prices and quantities available normally produced on an annual basis, and updated throughout the year on the basis of prices, yields, stocks and various projections as well as actual events. These estimates of availability are summarized in many forms. One is with the use of food balance sheets. The food balance sheets are, for example, potentially available for use in Bangladesh and are well understood and prepared by FAO. In Bangladesh training has been developed with NFPCSP assistance on how to prepare and update them. There are some improvements that can be made in the national data systems to support these food balance sheets or what ever standardized format that is used. One of the areas that is lacking in the preparation of the food balance sheets or whatever system that is used to develop and better understand availability is intelligence on the international markets. There are a number of intelligence systems to get information on

___________________________________________________________________________
2 FIVIMS activities need to be revived to the level the initiative, put under the Planning Commission, was originally envisaged to achieve.

48

international markets and related projections in which FAO has much experience. The future markets provide good short term projections, and can be used as a way of stabilizing prices for countries like Bangladesh that cannot influence international prices or insulate themselves from them. Progress is being made in better understanding and utilizing information on availability, but added work is needed. There is too much reliance on stocks management as a method of stabilizing prices, and not enough emphasis on uses of financial instruments in this activity. Forward contracting is possible in the rice market for example, and could be relied on more heavily for managing the domestic prices. Consulting firms are available to assist in better understanding these contracting processes.

9.1.2 Household Data on Expenditure, Availability and Intake Most nations address this issue with surveys of households and individuals (in Bangladesh these include, e.g. BBS, INFS, HKI as examples). The surveys conducted are of consumer expenditures and of household food consumption. Income and expenditure surveys are normally conducted primarily for developing consumer price indices. They are conducted on an approximate five year cycle by BBS. These surveys are utilized for making estimates of expenditures per household and even used in calculating dietary intakes of households. This is possible because they are household based and national in scope. But the primary focus of the household income and expenditure surveys is the construction of the consumer price index—a measure of cost of living for consumers of different types, and for the nation. The household food consumption surveys were first initiated in 1962-64 3 and have a long and checkered history in Bangladesh. The surveys have been carried out approximately every 5 years (or at less frequent intervals). The problem with the household expenditure surveys is that the food composition tables that are used to develop household and individual intake data are not available or updated to respond the current food supply. One of the tasks with high priority should be to get these data processed and widely available to the research community in Bangladesh. These data could add significantly to those used in the income and expenditure surveys. The cost of conducting and developing updated food composition tables is not high, and efforts should be made to rapidly make these basic population level data available to analysts that can use them to identify food security issues and set forth policies to address them—and of course evaluate their and donor supported policy interventions for success. The survey data can be moved through time as are the income and expenditure survey data, by using available prices, and comprehensively updated by actual surveys on an approximate five year basis. Other surveys can add to this stock of available data to underwrite studies of the diets of the low income population. Examples are the Annual Report on Nutrition Surveillance and various health surveys that collect information about segments of the population and their diets as a part of their effort to understand the health condition of the populations (more common now with the effort on prevention), etc. The effort that is needed is to put these surveys together in some way to get a read on the dietary intake and availability of food at the household level.

___________________________________________________________________________
3

By the Department of Biochemistry, Dhaka University, from which the Institute of Nutrition and Food Science has emerged in 1969.

49

9.1.3. Anthropometric Data The anthropometric measurements on children, women and the poor are available for the population from surveys conducted by the NIPORT, BBS and HKI. The problem is that these surveys have not been carefully linked to the household food consumption surveys, the income and expenditure surveys and the other surveys collecting anthropometric measurements. This is a doable task and could make both types of the surveys (food consumption and anthropometric) more valuable as components of the national food security monitoring system. The issue is more of a technical statistical problem, but can be solved. Decisions need to be made on the anthropometric measurements to be used and the portions of the population on which to make these measurements. Here one should go with more measurements on the poor segment of the population and complete measurements. A problem again with the NIPORT survey is that it has multiple purposes. Getting the surveys coordinated could be helpful in terms of focusing them more narrowly and saving or better allocation resources.

9.1.4. Rapid Assessment Surveys Another component of a national monitoring system is rapid assessment tools. Here there are a number of research organizations already doing these rapid assessment efforts in Bangladesh. They have field enumerators and capabilities to analyze the data. The problem is that they do not have a backdrop against which to measure their results—one of the objectives of the first three elements of the national food security policy monitoring system. In fact, we found numerous research organizations already doing this kind of work—perhaps because the donors are in a way jumping the gun in terms of priorities for supporting a solid national food security policy monitoring system. In food security policy monitoring there needs to be attention to the basic components of the system, and to government commitment in terms of sustaining these systems. The benefits from attention to this block of surveys will be substantial in terms of getting added intelligence from the efforts of the donors to add to the results of the food security policy monitoring system.

9.2 Interventions to Improve Food Security
The second component of a good food security policy is the success of the interventions designed to address problems detected by the monitoring system. There is a protocol that should be developed to decide which of the proposed interventions to support research on. Researchers should use the national food security monitoring system to determine the problems to be addressed and their extent. Monitoring of food security policy and on–going programme such that results of interventions provide feedback to the national food security monitoring system to evaluate the interventions. This is a fertile area for the activities of an annual needs assessment for food security policy, and why the research organizations should be involved in the process. There are for example many researchers attempting to address food security policy issues in other countries. The researchers in Bangladesh are in a good position to be “scanners” of these types of intervention strategies and to bring them to the table for consideration of the needs assessment group.

50

The fact is that the proposed interventions should be viewed in the context of the food security policy monitoring system. This system will at first be sketchy but will develop as the interventions and the different tactics for integrating the various components of the food security policy monitoring system are imposed and understood. But the approach will in the end yield better justified intervention strategies and a basis for evaluating their success.

9.3 A Baseline and the National Nutrition Monitoring and Intervention System
The annual research needs assessment should be made against a coherent set of information from the monitoring system and the recent interventions. It is not the whole national monitoring system and results of recent intervention studies but more of a snap shot of the situation in Bangladesh for a specific year. The baseline could be used as the backdrop for the research needs assessment and as a way to communicate with the public about the nutrition issues for the country. The baseline could be summarized in a publication easily readable and citing the major sources of primary information. For example, the baseline could draw form the surveys of the BBS, HKI, NIPORT, and INFS as well as others to give a read on the situation in the country. Different national surveys could be featured in different years according to when new data is released. Included as well would be information on national supply, stocks and demand for foods, and international markets information. Finally, results of major intervention research projects could be included to update the information on food security in Bangladesh. It is emphasized that this kind of a baseline would be useful to government policy makers, researchers and the general public in assisting to direct resources to major issues of need for addressing food security problems in Bangladesh. The addressing of such issues takers all involved working off of similar and commonly understood national date describing the situation.

10. Conclusions and recommendations
10.1. Conclusions
The substantive conclusions are more future looking, given that the major recommendations have been already reviewed above. The NFPCSP is critical to the development of an improved basis for implementing the National Food Policy (2006) in Bangladesh. The NFPCSP has the vision, resources and leadership to accomplish this task. What is needed is continued work with the government and the research organizations to better define the basics of a more effective food policy. The movement of the leadership for the research activities of NFPCSP to research organizations and their government counterpart organization, the FPMU as well as perhaps the larger set of donors will be necessary to achieve this task. One way to support these improved communications is to use a national food security policy monitoring system and to activate it in terms of the development of a national baseline. This baseline would be presented at an annual conference. It would include the information from the survey data sets that are national in scope as well as national data on availability. The

51

objective would be to present a snap shot of the food security situation in Bangladesh with the best information available. The annual conferences presenting the baseline would get better over time as the research organizations and the government agencies responsible for the data and policy become more acquainted with the information and how it could be merged and integrated to develop a better picture of the food security situation in Bangladesh. As well, from the sequence of conferences, there would be a set of snap shots that could be used to get a feel for the dynamics of the food security situation in Bangladesh. The baseline would provide a basis for proposing adjustments to interventions and choosing among them in terms of what is suggested by the baseline as their relative importance. There are of course, other criterion for determining the importance of the interventions considered. The advantage of using the baseline is that all considering the interventions would have the same or a similar frame of reference. One aspect of this national food security monitoring system, the related annual baseline conference, and the related preparatory work and analysis would be the advantages in terms of realizations that the different national surveys could be more integrated, and develop a better picture of the food security situation in Bangladesh, including national data on food availability and food markets and in particular prices. The conference would bring attention to the food security monitoring system and the planned interventions by the general population. They would better understand the food policy situation, and the actions that are planned to address it. This could be very valuable in terms of generating the public interest in food security and orienting public policy to address the related issues.

10.2 Recommendations
The broad recommendations that emerge form the review of research organizations engaged in food security research in Bangladesh are as follows: o There is capability in the research organizations for undertaking a leadership role in the NFPCSP food security policy research. This will have to be approached carefully with attention to the contracting mechanism and training of the research organizations. The effort should focus on getting a set of organizations to take the leadership role. The research organizations have some deficiencies that need to be better recognized. Mainly, these relate to the size of the budgets for the NGOs that might advance to take the leadership role and the terms of this and other contracts let by FAO for work on food security policy. The contracts should be longer, have more of an organizational commitment, perhaps of smaller size, and require non consultants as principals. A level for the contracts of $50,000 (the highest level for contracts funded in the first phase of NFPCSP) is larger than the total annual budgets of many of the research organizations surveyed. The two step process suggested for letting the leadership of other contracts appears to be a good possibility. It fits with the (low) resource situation of the research organizations, allows the first decision to be on a short proposal on the concept, and if this concept is approved, the development of a complete

o

o

52

proposal. The filter should be tight on the concept proposals, making it essentially a given that the invited full proposal will be funded. This process could replace the practice being considered for the second phase of directing a part of the research budget to research organizations for specific projects. o The research organizations in Bangladesh are very different and must be worked with based on a clear knowledge of their resources and the qualifications of their workforces. A great deal of information was willingly supplied by the research organization’s directors/heads that were surveyed. This type of information could be quite valuable in letting contracts to these organizations. One possibility would be to require as a part of the second submission in the two step contracting process, an updated version of data we collected in the survey for this report. The focus of your questions could as well, give guidance to the organization’s directors in terms of how you would see improvement in the development of their organizations. The research needs assessment and related activities must become more systematic as the NFPCSP advances. The NFPCSP has made remarkable progress in its short history. But, there is more progress to be made by using the available food security approaches from FAO and other organizations. The monitoring system, interventions (determined and evaluated in terms of the monitoring system) and the development of a baseline need to be incorporated in the NFPCSP as it moves to become of greater value in assisting the nation in improving food security.

o

53

Annexes
Annex 1. List of Contacts
An identification of the research organization contacted is provided below. Included are the names of the research organizations, the contact person(s), and type of research organization. With each organization visited, there was an attempt to meet with director level individuals. In most cases we in fact, succeeded in holding the interview with the director/head of the surveyed organizations. The interview was by design general, and in all cases the survey did not exactly correspond to the routine activities of their particular organizations. Where this was the case, we still used the schedule and adapted the questions to the features of the organization being surveyed. The idea was to get as much information on food security policy research from the organizations as possible. Many of the organizations had training and education activities as well as research capabilities. We did not go into these other activities in detail. We just asked about these activities to assure that there we gained a full understanding of the activities and research organizations. Finally, we had a last question that was asked each interviewee. It was open ended and asked if there were aspects of the program of the research organization that they would like to mention in addition those related to the questions from the survey instrument. This produced very interesting responses, mostly about the economic policies of the nation and how they were changing. But, it was designed to give an opportunity to gain added information about the capacities of the research organizations. In general, the individuals interviewed were friendly and informative. They were willing to answer all of the questions, and provided much additional information about their research organizations. Interviews lasted for two hours with some lasting even longer. As well, some of invited their senior staff (up to 10) to join in the interviews. We did not survey all of the possible research organizations in Bangladesh. In fact, due to time available we surveyed only those in Dhaka—and not even all of these. The purpose of the survey wan not to be representative or exhaustive, but to gain information on the research organizations that would be valuable in managing the second tranch of funding for the NFPCSP. A list of the organizations not surveyed is included in Table A.1.2.

54

Table A1.1. List of organizations interviewed
No. Organization Contact person Description Academic and Research Institutions/University Departments Institute of Nutrition and Food Science 1 Nazmul Hassan, Professor and Director Academic, research & education (INFS) 2 3 Bureau of Economic Research (BER) M.A. Taslim, Chairman, Professor Research Education, training & research

Institute of Statistics Research and Dr. Azmeri Khan, Director Training, Dhaka University International Non-Governmental Organizations Alejandro Cravioto, Executive Director Tahmeed Ahmed, 4 ICDDR,B Head, Nutrition Programme S.K.Roy, Senior Scientistt Nasreen Khundker Centre on Integrated Rural 5 Development for Asia and the Pacific Director, Research (CIRDAP) Government Units/Institutions 6 Institute of Food Technology (IFST) Science Choudhury Mahamood Hasan, Chair, and BCSIR A.K.M Formuzul Haque, Director, IFST

Academic, research & education, public health care

Training & project research

Research & technical services

7 8

Bangladesh Agricultural Research Dr. Quazi Mesbahhul Alam Chief and Production research institute Institute (BARI) others Bangladesh Rice Research Institute Dr. Shahe Alam, Chief Scientific Officer Production research institute (BRRI) and others Bangladesh Agricultural Research Research Council (BARC) National Institute of Population Nasimul Ghani, Director General Research and Training (NIPORT) Subroto Bhadra Research Officer Training & research

Non Governmental Organizations 9 Quazi Shahabuddin, Director General Research, training & demand- led Bangladesh Institute of Development Rushidan Islam Rahman, Studies (BIDS) technical services Research Director K.A.S. Murshid, Research Director Imran Matin, Director , Research and BRAC RED Research & evaluation, education Evaluation Human Development Research Centre Abul Barkat, Director and Professor Research & training (HDRC) Monaem Sarker, Director General Bangladesh Foundation for Ambassador M. Faruque Mohammed, Research synthesis & dissemination Development Research Board of Governors Syed Ahmed, Advocate Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD) Uttam Deb, Senior Research Fellow Research, policy communication Research, training & policy Unnayan Shamannay Atiur Rahman, Chairman communication Qazi Kholiquzzamam Ahmad, Research & public opinion, with a small Chairman Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Jadab Chandra Saha, Executive training program Director Power and Participation Research Hossain Zillur Rahman, Chairman Research & policy dialogue Centre (PPRC) Center for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship Zahurul Karim, Chairman Development (CASEED) Research & development, training and entrepreneurship

10 11

12 13 14

15

16

17

Private Institutions Linked to Research 18 DATA Md. Zahidul Hassan, Managing Director Md. Zobair , Director Data collection & analysis

55

Table A1.2. List of organizations not interviewed
No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Organization Description Bangladesh Institute of Research And Rehabilitation In Health Diabetes, Endocrine And Metabolic Disorders (BIRDEM) Bangladesh Breast Feeding Foundation (BFF) Infant and young child feeding International Maternal and Child Health, (IMCH) Health College of Home Economics Dietary and Nutrition Institute of Public Health Nutrition (IPHN) Health/surveys Institute of Public Health (IPH) Health Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council, Dhaka Division, Research

Bangladesh Center for Advanced Studies Research Agricultural Economics Division, Bangladesh Rice Research Academic, research & education Institute, Gazipur Kranti Associates Research Eusuf & Associates Research Bangladesh Center for Communication Program Communications

56

Annex 2. Terms of Reference, Evaluation of Organizations
Background An important part of the research component is the Programme Research (PR) on food security issues to be carried out by reputable research institutions in Bangladesh. Such research will be carried out in order to facilitate the analysis and implementation of policies in the context of the National Food Policy. It is envisaged that a national research institution (or a group of such institutions) might manage the PR in the second phase of the project. The Evaluation of Research Institutions will be carried out with the objective of identifying research institution(s) potentially able to manage the PR in the second phase of the project. Moreover, the study will provide information useful for assessing research proposals under the PR to be awarded by the Research Grants Panel taking into consideration the quality of the research proposal but also the capacity of the research institution to carry out the proposed research, its delivery history including quality and timeliness of the delivered outputs. Activities Under the overall supervision of the FAO Representative for Bangladesh and the direct supervision of the CTA, the consultant will: • • • • Develop a full understanding of the research activities of the NFPCSP especially those associated with programme research, as per the Project Document, the Programme Memorandum, and the work plan. Identify and prepare a list of private and public universities, research centres, think tanks and institutions, which carry, have carried or are capable of carrying out food security relevant research and could be involved in the project. Produce within the first two weeks an annotated outline of the analytical report, including a list of research institutions. On the basis of the reviews of published material, interviews with members of the institution and with recipients of the institution’s work, draft the report, including for each institution an assessment of strength and weaknesses taking into consideration: o o o o o • relevance of research focus to food security quantity, quality, availability and relevance of qualifications of technical staff quality and timeliness of delivery links with other research centres, inside and outside Bangladesh record of joint work with other institutions, inside and outside Bangladesh

Deliver the draft report within six weeks and the final report within 10 weeks, assuming one week for receiving comments on the draft.

Qualifications Advanced degree in a field relevant to food security. At least 10-year working experience in poverty/food security issues. Knowledge of the literature on poverty and food security issues in Bangladesh and ability to assess performance of research institutions. Ability to work independently and effectively in a multi-stakeholder environment including international and government staff.

57

Annex 3. Implementation Plan
Background: The background for the consultancy remains the same as stated on the terms of reference, “An important part of the research component is the Programme Research (PR) on food security issues to be carried out by reputable research institutions in Bangladesh. Such research will be carried out in order to facilitate the analysis and implementation of policies in the context of the National Food Policy. It is envisioned that a national research institution (or group of such institutions) might manage the PR in the second phase of the project. The Evaluation of Research Institutions will be carried out with the objective of identifying research institution(s) potentially able to manage the PR in the second phase of the project. Moreover, the study will provide information useful for accessing research proposals under the PR to be awarded by the Research Grants Panel taking into consideration the quality of the research proposal but also the capacity of the research institution to carry out the proposed research, its delivery history including quality and timeliness of delivered outputs.” To assist in implementing the Evaluation of Research Institutions we have written this document detailing the objectives, procedures and expected outcomes. This will serve as the implementation plan for the consultancy on the Evaluation of Research Institutions. Objectives: The objectives included in the original terms of reference have been interpreted as follows: 1. To identify national research and civil society institutions engaged in food security policy research and evaluate their strengths relative to the PR, and the needs of the nation. 2. To identify a core group of institutions that are involved in food policy research with capacities that stretch beyond specific areas outlined in the survey instrument. 3. To assess the capacity of the research institutions relative to the size of the projects they are prepared to undertake, given constraints on the timeliness for delivery of outputs. 4. To provide an evaluation of the potential of the institutes (together or in collaboration) to take over the management of the PR (project procurement research activities, providing an effective long-run structure for working with the government, donors and the NFPCSP. Procedure: This assessment of institutional capacities and strengths will be accomplished by a series of activities, resulting in reports and seminars for the NFPCSP Administration and invited participants. The process for developing these outputs is provided below: 1. Meetings with National Advisors for the NFPCSP, the Food Planning and Monitoring Committee, the Food Planning Monitoring Unit, and staff in related national agencies. 2. Meetings with individual food security and civil society research institutions. 3. Completion of a survey (if feasible) developed to learn of the capacities and strengths of institutes engaged in food security and civil society research. 4. Interviews with policy makers about their impressions of the capacities of institutes to perform PR research. 5. Follow up visits to food security and civil society research institutes, gaining impressions of capacities and strengths for food security policy research. 6. Visits to international research institutes to obtain their impressions of the strengths of the national institutions. 7. Field visits, if required, to research institutes or projects that institutes are carrying out. 8. Preparation of reports listed above, seminars listed above, and a daily log.

58

Expected outcomes: Outcomes will be varied and are listed in terms of their importance for the NFPCSP. 1. Provide a current list of the main food security and civil society research institutions, and an assessment of their strengths relative to food security in general and the research themes of the PR. Specifically, the consultant will investigate the: o o o o o Relevance of the research focus on food security Quality, quantity, availability and relevance of qualifications of technical staff Quality and timeliness of delivery Links with other research centers, inside and outside of Bangladesh Record of joint work with institutions, inside and outside of Bangladesh

This information will be used as background, along with specific proposals, for placing the grants and contracts with these research institutions. 2. To obtain reactions to the “Research Needs” already developed by the NFPCSP. 3. To provide information for use of the GoB and other donors on the capacities and strengths of food security policy and civil society research institutions. 4. To promote advocacy for national civil society and food policy research. 5. To investigate the possibility of establishing cooperative networks between the institutes involved in civil society and food security policy research. 6. To advocate increase national food security policy and civil society research, and greater involvement between the research institutes and the GoB. 7. To set the ground work for institutes or collections of institutions taking the responsibility for managing the PR. Timeframe for the consultancy: The consultant will be in Bangladesh two times during a six month period. The consultancy started on August 20th with the first visit to Bangladesh. During the first visit, the consultant will finish the draft report and provide seminars and a mission report. When the draft and related activities are completed they will be reviewed. The second visit to Bangladesh will be to conduct further work suggested by the review, to present necessary seminars and finalize the report on the basis of this feed back. A mission report will be prepared for the second visit as well.

Annex 4. Evaluation Survey Instrument and Questionnaire
Context As part of the Research Component of the Government of Bangladesh (GoB) - FAO- ECUSAID collaborative National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme (NFPCSP), support for the development of a wider and deeper capacity within civil society to conduct food security related research and establish stronger links between policy analysts in the GoB and researchers is envisaged. This is intended to facilitate consensus building and enhance the analytical and information base for the elaboration and implementation of the National Food Policy and its Action Plan. An important part of the research component is the Programme Research on food security issues to be carried out by reputable research institutions in Bangladesh. Such research will be carried out in order to facilitate the analysis and implementation of policies in the context of the National Food Policy. It is a possibility that a national research institution (or a group of such institutions) might take a lead role in coordinating the PR in the second phase of the project. An evaluation of Research Institutions is therefore being carried out with the objective of identifying research institution(s) potentially able to take a lead role in coordinating the Programme

59

Research in the second phase of the project. Additionally, the evaluation is expected to provide information useful for assessing research proposals under the Programme Research of NFPCSP. Research Organization Survey Instrument The information provided in this survey will be used to provide basic information on food policy and civil society research organizations. The information will be used to assess your organization’s specialties/capacities of your research organization for conducting food policy research. The form is simple and will be followed up by a personal visit to your organization by a representative of the NFPCSP. 1) 2) Name of the organization: ____________________________________________ Affiliation of the organization (government, university, private, etc): __________________________________________________________________ 3) Brief history of the organization (one paragraph): (Attach if available)

4)

Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: (Tick ) i) Food availability - Accessibility of inputs for food production ------------------- Land use patterns and long term implications for food security -------------- Effectiveness of Extension services in promoting technology adoption ----- Others (please specify) -------------------------ii) Physical and social access to food - Involving communities in local power structures and safety net provision --- Best practices in food distribution programs -------- Storage facilities: options for remote areas and poor communities ------- Others (please specify) ---------iii) Economic access to food - Self-employment, wage employment and income generation ----- Livelihood patterns and coping strategies of the ultra-poor, including disadvantaged group ---------- Price stabilization, market integration and consumer welfare ------ Others (please specify) --------iv) Utilization of food for nutrition - Food contamination and food adulteration --------- Food composition tables with specific reference to indigenous foods ------- Institutionalization and capacity building of street food systems --- Others (please specify) ---------v) Cross cutting and overarching themes - Transparency of policies and accountability of institutions related to food security ---- Issues in measurement of food security, vulnerability and poverty ------- Power, transport, commercialization, irrigation and storage for food security -- Long term environmental degradation and food security ------

60

- Others (please specify) --------5) Staff of the organization and classification (senior researcher, jr. researcher, etc): ----(attach if available) Publications of the organization (last two years): -------------(attach if available) Three important research projects on food security completed during last two years in one or more of the four areas designated above (one paragraph each): -----(attach abstract/summary if available) Annual budget of the organization (approximate) (Taka): ------------Collaborations with other organizations in completing research projects on food security (list two examples): ---------Names of past clients that we can contact about their satisfaction with your organization’s services, if any: -------CVs of major researchers (attach): Any other information on capacities of your organization relative to food security policy that you wish to supply:

6)

7)

8) 9)

10)

11) 12)

61

Annex 5. Results of Interviews by Organization

Annex 5.1. Institute of Nutrition and Food Science (INFS), Dhaka University 1. Name of the organization: Institute of Nutrition and Food Science (INFS), we visited with Dr. Nazmul Hassan, Director and Professor and Professor Nazma Shaheen, and were taken through several laboratories of the Institute 2. Affiliation of the organization: The Institute is a part Dhaka University, and has both educational and research programs. Education program includes 300 undergraduate students and 30 MS students. 3. Brief history of the organization: The Institute of Nutrition and Food Science (INFS) was established in 1969 under the statute of the University of Dhaka. This Institute is an integral part of the University. At the same time it enjoys autonomy with freedom to conduct all activities relevant to its mandate. The affairs of the Institute are governed by a Board of Governors of which the Vice Chancellor is the ex-officio Chair and the Director of the Institute is the Member-Secretary. Mandatory responsibilities include: Study of nutritional problems of the country through regular and periodic surveys and surveillance, conduct research specific to nutritional problems, study nutritional deficiency diseases, study socio-economic and cultural dimensions of nutritional problems, develop and test various intervention methodologies and conduct an inventory of applied nutrition programmes, provide facilities for higher education (M. Sc. M. Phil. And PhD degrees), and provide training and in-service training in nutrition and to popularize knowledge of nutrition. Research activities include responsibility for several (1975-76, 1981-82, 1995-96 and 2001-2003) national surveys and the management, up dating of domestic food composition tables and the study of food toxins. Programs are managed under four divisions; Nutritional Biochemistry, Food Science (including Food Microbiology), Clinical Nutrition, and Community and Applied Nutrition. The Institute as well publishes a journal, Bangladesh Journal of Nutrition. 4. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: (Tick) i) Food availability Accessibility of inputs for food production Land use patterns and long term implications for food security Effectiveness of Extension services in promoting technology adoption Others (please specify) Food availability at the household level YES YES YES

ii) Physical and social access to food Involving communities in local power structures and safety net provision Best practices in food distribution programs Storage facilities: options for remote areas and poor communities Others (please specify)

NO YES NO NO

iii) Economic access to food Self-employment, wage employment and income generation YES Livelihood patterns and coping strategies of the ultra-poor, including disadvantaged group YES

62

Price stabilization, market integration and consumer welfare Others (please specify) iv) Utilization of food for nutrition Food contamination and food adulteration Food composition tables with specific reference to indigenous foods Institutionalization and capacity building of street food systems Others (please specify) Household food consumption surveys v) Cross cutting and overarching themes Transparency of policies and accountability of institutions related security Issues in measurement of food security, vulnerability and poverty Power, transport, commercialization, irrigation and storage for food security Long term environmental degradation and food security Others (please specify) 5. Staff of the organization and classifications: i. Professionals ii.Support staff 6. Publications of the organization:

NO NO YES YES NO

to food YES YES YES NO NO

30 (including 24 professors) 100

Publications have been slow, since the funding of the Institute is meagre (Added information in the follow-up questionnaire that follows) 7. Three important research projects on food security completed during the last two years: ”Consequences of Early Life Malnutrition of Adult Outcomes”, “Approaches to Preventing Diet Related Rickets”, F.A. Abed and G. F. Combs, Jr., editors, Published and partially funded by Cornell University, USA. “The Chakari Food System Study” Nazmul Hassan and Gerald Combs, Jr. Published and partially funded by Cornell University, USA. “Iodine Deficiency Disorders; Surveys and Iodized Salt Intervention, Monitoring and Evaluation” 8. Annual Budget of the organization: 200,000 Taka 9. Collaborations with other organizations in completing research projects on food security: FAO, WFP, UNICEF, MI (Micronutrient Initiative), Cornell University, Harvard University, ICDDR, B, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (National Nutrition Programme), BSCIC (Bangladesh Small Cottage Industries Corporation), and the Ministry of Industry 10. Names of past clients that we can contact about their satisfaction with your organizations services: Cornell University and the above mentioned organizations 11. CVs of major researchers: Have for Dr. Nazul Hassan and Dr. Nazma Shaheen 12. Any other information on capabilities of your organization relative to food security policy that you wish to supply: Need to do the food composition tables and the national food consumption survey-it will require funding from outside.

63

National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme
INFS Follow-Up Questionnaire FAO Survey of Organizations Undertaking Food Security Policy Research

Thank you in advance for making the effort to complete this questionnaire.

1. Publications during the LAST TWO years (2005/6 to 2006/7) by the following classifications. Type of Publication Number Refereed publications (journal articles, 24 books and chapters in books Research reports(summarizing results of 5 particular projects) All other publications 3 2. Current staff of your organization by degree status. Staff of your organization Full-Time Number Ph.D or equivalent Degree holders Masters Degree holders All other staff 27 03 100 0 1 0

Part-Time Number

3. Emphasis in research areas. In the attached document that includes the profile of your organization, we have recorded your responses to the items from the research themes as part of the survey instrument. They are recorded “YES” and “NO” to reflect whether or not you responded that your organization has research capacity and a record of work in the specific areas. First, review the areas and the indications to be sure they are correct. If not, change them to better reflect your organization’s capacity and history of research. Give 10 points to each dimension that you check, and then allocate the total number of points generated by your selections to the areas selected to reflect emphasis. For example if you select two areas, the total points would be 20, and you would allocate them among the two selected, perhaps 14 to one and 6 to the other.

64

Research focus relative to Dimensions NFPCSP Research dimensions selected/generating Total Points Food Availability 10 Physical and social access to food 10 Economic access to food 10 Utilization of food for nutrition 10 Cross cutting and overarching 10 areas Other, please specify TOTAL POINTS 50

Allocation of Total Points based on research emphasis 7 5 10 25 3

50

4. Assume the availability of a new project in each of the areas selected above (in question # 3). Please give the name of another research organization in Bangladesh that you could recommend, if for some reason your organization could not undertake the project. Research focus relative to NFPCSP Name of organization that you would theme areas recommend Food availability BBS, BIDS Physical and social access to food Economic access to food Utilization of food for nutrition Cross cutting and overarching themes Others, please specify BBS, BIDS BIDS, BRAC, BBS IFST,,ICDDRB, IPHN BBS,BIDS, BRAC,HKI,ICDDRB,IPHN

5. Please give the name and address of ONE NATIONAL AND ONE INTERNATIONAL organization that we can contact related to their satisfaction with you organizations services Reference for your organization Name and address of organization National BBS,IFST,BRAC,IPHN International HKI, ICDDR,B

65

Annex 5.2. Bureau of Economic Research (BER), Department of Economics, Dhaka University 1. Name of organization: Bureau of Economic Research, Dr. M. A. Taslim, Chairman of the Bureau and Economics Department 2. Affiliation of Organization: Dhaka University, Economics Department 3. History of Organization: Started during the 1960s with great fanfare, but has not progressed as planned to become a major research institute in Bangladesh. Early research during the 1960s and 1970s focused on Agriculture. The focus shifted during the 1980s to include trade. During the 2000s, Governance was added to the research agenda. The Bureau has revived recently and now has a budget for supporting research that is of modest size to support research of the faculty, and about seven staff members. The staff members are mostly administrative, not much research activity comes from the staff. The two faculty members with appointments with the Bureau are the Director and the Chairman. The chairman is concerned with major policy decisions and the relationships with the Board. The Board is composed of the faculty in the Economics Department, and meets annually to review the projects of the Bureau and make policy. The Director handles the day to day operation of the Bureau. The Bureau has recently started to take in outside projects, the most important of which is one with the IDRC. There are two main difficulties for the operations of the Bureau; University regulations and incentives for the faculty. The University regulations are not supportive of operations of a Bureau. Serious modification in University regulations will be necessary to alter this constraint to the functioning of the Bureau. The Bureau now operates in a “grey” area, often undertaking budgeting and management for research projects that is not explicitly condoned by the University. Faculty incentives are also important to the operation of the Bureau. Salaries are low. Faculty members have outside interests that in fact, generate most of their incomes. Interestingly, the comment was made that the donors in a sense tend to undermine the operations of the Bureau by contracting directly with individual faculty rather than through the Bureau. This incentive system is currently being challenged by the Bureau, but the faculty will come to work with the Bureau only when the Bureau has value to offer. Most of the research to date has been on economic issues, but the Bureau has the capacity to draw in faculty from other departments in the University and does. These externals are mostly from other social science disciplines and from Business Administration. All of technical expertise of the Department of Economics is available within the Bureau. The Economics Department faculty makes proposals to the Bureau which selects and funds them annually. About five to ten small research studies are funded every year. 4. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: (Tick ) i) Food availability Accessibility of inputs for food production NO Land use patterns and long term implications for food security NO Effectiveness of Extension services in promoting technology adoption NO Others (please specify) YES-supply demand and market functioning NO NO

ii) Physical and social access to food Involving communities in local power structures and safety net provision Best practices in food distribution programs

66

Storage facilities: options for remote areas and poor communities Others (please specify)

NO NO

iii) Economic access to food Self-employment, wage employment and income generation YES Livelihood patterns and coping strategies of the ultra-poor, including disadvantaged group NO Price stabilization, market integration and consumer welfare YES Others (please specify) NO iv) Utilization of food for nutrition Food contamination and food adulteration Food composition tables with specific reference to indigenous foods Institutionalization and capacity building of street food systems Others (please specify) NO NO NO NO

v) Cross cutting and overarching themes Transparency of policies and accountability of institutions related to food security NO Issues in measurement of food security, vulnerability and poverty YES Power, transport, commercialization, irrigation and storage for food Security NO Long term environmental degradation and food security YES Others (please specify) NO Note: Most of the research focus is on food availability and the economics of food access. In addition they conduct research on trade and price stabilization, and demographics. In the cross cutting areas, there is some research on commercialization, storage, environment, and food security. The main general areas of research for the Bureau are: i) Macroeconomics, ii) Trade, iii) Poverty, and iv) Agricultural Policy. Most of the research that the Bureau is involved in is funded by small grants from the Bureau to faculty that are made annually—enough for support of a graduate student and related costs for a research project. 5) Staff of the organization and classifications: The Bureau has a full time staff of seven, none of whom are real researchers. The Chairman and Director are on staff but not counted in the Bureau’s budget. All of the Economics Faculty members are candidates for research projects with the Bureau, but most projects come as a result of application for small research grants that are funded by the budget of the Bureau. 6) Publications of the organization: A list will be provided made up mostly of research published but faculty and graduate students who received small grants from the Bureau. 7) Projects of importance during the past two years: IDRC and small grants made to faculty. 8) Annual budget: One million Taka; overhead costs for research projects funded externally are 10 to 25 percent. 9) Collaborations with other organizations:

67

The Bureau has had essentially no collaborative relationships to support food policy or other research projects. They do invite other faculty from other departments in the University to apply for small grants, and to participate in research projects on an individual basis, but no institutional cooperation or networking is in evidence. Some collaborative work with Planning Commission, GoB has also been done in relation to the PRSP. 10) Names of past clients who could be contacted for information about satisfaction with the work of the Bureau: IDRC. 11) CVs: Not given 12) Any other information on capabilities of your organization relative to food security policy that you wish to supply: The Bureau is under new management and trying to become a full fledged policy research organization. Some issues: i) Inadequate coordination of faculty by the Bureau. ii) Lacks sufficient incentives to encourage faculty participation—no value added by the Bureau. Note: no follow-up questionnaire completed.

68

Annex 5.3. Institute of Statistics Research and Training (ISRT), Dhaka University 1. Name of the organization: Institute of Statistics Research and Training, we visited with Dr. Azmeri Khan, Director. 2. Affiliation of the organization: A part of Dhaka University, operates like a department in the University. 3. Brief history of the organization: The Institute was founded in 1964 and had good external projects until 1994, after the war. Since that time the role of the Institute in research has declined. It now does mostly education, with about 350 undergraduate students and 50 graduate students (mostly Masters Candidates). It also does training for government agencies but not regularly. The courses are generally in applied statistics. Research is a small part of the Institutes program. By University rules, it has the responsibility for reviewing proposals of faculty for grants and contracts that are taken through the University. The issue is that most of the faculty members take their projects privately, not through the University. It as well works with other institutes of the University, reviewing projects and giving advice on statistical issues, but not regularly. The Institute has no projects of its own. It bids occasionally on projects but has not been successful in recent years. 4. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: No areas of focus related to the NFPCSP themes. The Institute does not currently have any major projects and thus relates to food security only on the basis of projects that are proposed through the University by faculty members from other departments Participates in all research needs assessment research areas. (Added information provided in the follow-up questionnaire to below). 5. Staff of the organization and classifications: Four full Professors, one Associate Professor, six Lecturers, and nine Support Staff. 6. Publications of the organization: None were supplied related to food security research. 7. Three important research projects on food security completed during the last two years: Again, none related to food security research. 8. Annual budget of the organization: Approximately, eight million Taka. 9. Collaborations with other organizations in completing research on food security policy: Collaborations are occasional, with some through the Institute and some handled by the faculty privately. Most Government consultancies come through the Institute, but these are not regular. 10. Names of past clients that we can contact about their satisfaction with your organization’s services: INFS. 11. CVs of major researchers: Received for director. 12. Any other information on capacities of your organization relative to food security policy that you wish to supply: Institute is mainly devoted to teaching of University students

69

Annex 5.4. ICDDR, B; Knowledge for Global Lifesaving Solutions 1. Name of the organization: ICDDR, B is in fact the current name, which is being used as the trade mark of the Centre. The Centre outgrew the old name which suggests much more restricted activity. They decided to keep the letters used to identify the Centre and to go under the letters as an acronym. The original name was International Centre for Diarrhoeal Disease Research, Bangladesh. We visited with Dr. Alejandro Craviot, Executive Director; Dr. S. K. Roy, Senior Scientist; and Dr. Tahmeed Ahmed, Head, Nutrition Programme. 2. Affiliation of the organization: NGO a “National/International Centre”. 3. Brief history of the organization: Over the last decades, the Centre has successfully transformed from s research laboratory, highly focused on cholera, to a full fledged comprehensive health Centre for research, service, and training. Furthermore, the Centre has shown how an institution with vision, purpose and principles can thrive through changes in governments, donor priorities, and senior staff. Clearly, the Centre is not in the business of acquiring knowledge just to publish papers, but rather to develop knowledge that will be useful and practical. The Centre is based in Dhaka due to the simple fact that this is where the problems are. This is where the health problems can be understood in all of their complexities. The concept of “humanitarian science” led to our new tagline; Knowledge for Global Lifesaving Solutions. The Centre has six divisions and a set of programs that cross cut the divisions. The divisions are: Clinical Sciences, Health Systems, Laboratory Sciences, Public Heath Sciences, Information Sciences, and an Executive Director’s Division. The programmes of the Centre, which are cross cutting in terms of divisions, are: Child Health, Reproductive Health, Nutrition, Infectious Diseases and Vaccines, Health and Family Planning, Population Sciences, Poverty and Health, and HIV/AIDS. The nutrition programme is primarily under the clinical sciences division. This programme is evolving from a clinical orientation to a population or public health policy focus. 4. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: i) Food security Accessibility of inputs for food production NO Land use patterns and long term implications for food security NO Effectiveness of Extension services in promoting technology adoption YES Others (please specify) YES Some activity on food availability and its relation to health status of individuals and population groups.

ii) Physical ad social access to food Involving communities in local power structures and safety net Provision NO Best Practices in food distribution programmes NO Storage facilities—options for remote areas and poor communities NO Others (please specify) YES--emphasis on community food security iii) Economic access to food Self-employment, wage employment and income generation YES

70

Livelihood patterns and coping strategies of the ultra-poor, including disadvantaged groups NO Price stabilization, market integration and consumer welfare NO Others (please specify) YES iv) Utilization of food for nutrition Food contamination and adulteration YES Food composition tables with specific reference to indigenous foods YES Institutionalization and capacity building of street food systems NO Others (please specify) YES see below: Breast feeding: complementary feeding vitamin A, anaemia inn home fortification, all for children under two years of age Preschool children topics include: nutrition education, micro nutrient deficiency, overweight and obesity School age children include: micronutrient deficiency, overweight and obesity, energy, school feeding and others Nutrition for women and nutrition for pregnant women were two other areas with similar sub categories. v) Crosscutting and overarching themes Transparency of policies and accountability of institutions related to food policy Issues of measurement of food security, vulnerability and poverty Power, transport, commercialization, irrigation, and storage for food Security Long term environmental degradation and food security Others (please specify) 5. Staff of the organization and classifications: Forty-two international staff, 11 scientists, 47 associate scientists, and 470 support staff. The total staff in the nutrition area is about 120. 6. Publications of the organization : One hundred forty-four journal articles, 11 book chapters, and 14 letters, editorials and abstracts in journals. The ICDDR B also publishes a journal, “Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition”. 7. Three important research projects on food security completed during the last two years in one of the four areas designated above: “Effects of 2004 Floods on Nutritional Status of Children; Distribution of Severe and Malnutrition Before and After Floods” “Need to Integrate Nutrition; Mainstreaming Nutrition Initiative”, funded by the World Bank “National Guidelines on Management of Severe Malnutrition in Bangladesh”, cooperative with the Directorate of General Health Services, Bangladesh. 8. Annual budget of the organization: Twenty million USD. 9. Collaborations with other organizations in completing research projects on food security: International collaborators, approximately 75 including universities. NGOs and international donors and domestic collaborators, approximately 100 again including national government ministries, local government, universities, NGOs, and medical centres.

NO YES NO NO NO

71

10. Names of past clients that we could contact about their satisfaction with your organization’s services; Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, BRAC, MNI (Mainstreaming Nutrition Initiative), World Bank, Cornell University, Aga Khan University, Partnership for Maternal, New Born Child Health (PMNCH), and the UN Sub Committee on Nutrition. 11. CVs of major researchers: Three are here. 12. Any other information on capacities of your organization relative to food security policy that you wish to supply: One aspect of the nutrition program that was reiterated was the broadening of focus—moving from clinical studies to include nutrition at a population level and policy. Another mentioned by the Executive Director was the increasing success in working with government ministries and the importance of initiating contact with younger up-and-coming governmental officials.

72

National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme
ICDDR,B Follow-Up Questionnaire FAO Survey of Organizations Undertaking Food Security Policy Research

Thank you in advance for making the effort to complete this questionnaire. 1. Publications during the LAST TWO years (2005/6 to 2006/7) by the following classifications. Type of Publication Number Refereed publications (journal articles, 318 books and chapters in books) Research reports (summarizing results 4 of particular projects) All other publications 20 2. Current staff of your organization by degree status. Staff of your organization Full-Time Number Ph.D or equivalent Degree holders Masters Degree holders All other staff 59 767 3245

Part-Time Number

3. Emphasis in research areas. Give 10 points to each dimension that you check, and then allocate the total number of points generated by your selections to the areas selected to reflect emphasis. For example if you select two areas, the total points would be 20, and you would allocate them among the two selected, perhaps 14 to one and 6 to the other. Research focus relative to Dimensions NFPCSP Research dimensions selected/generating Total Points Food Availability Physical and social access to food 10 Economic access to food Utilization of food for nutrition 10 Cross cutting and overarching areas 10 Other, please specify TOTAL POINTS 30 Allocation of Total Points based on research emphasis 8 10 10 28

73

4. Assume the availability of a new project in each of the areas selected above (in question #3). Please give the name of another research organization in Bangladesh that you could recommend, if for some reason your organization could not undertake the project. Research focus relative to NFPCSP Name of organization that you would theme areas recommend Food availability Physical and social access to food Economic access to food Utilization of food for nutrition Cross cutting and overarching themes Others, please specify BRAC and Mitra and Associates INFS, DU and IPHN

5. Please give the name and address of ONE NATIONAL AND ONE INTERNATIONAL organization that we can contact related to their satisfaction with your organization’s services. Reference for your organization Name and address of organization National Executive Director, National Nutrition Programme International The World Bank Office, Dhaka (Dr Dinesh Nair)

74

Annex 5.5 Centre on Integrated Rural Development for Asia and the Pacific 1. Name of the Organization: Centre on Integrated Rural Development for Asia and the Pacific. We visited with Dr. Nasreen Khundker, Research Director. 2. Affiliation of the Organization: The Centre on Integrated Rural Development for Asia and the Pacific is a regional inter-governmental and autonomous Institution, established in July 1979 at the initiative of the countries in the Asia-Pacific region and the FAO with support from several other UN bodies and donors. Countries that are members include Afghanistan, Bangladesh, (host state), India, Indonesia, Iran, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam. 3. Brief history of the organization: The main objectives of CIRDAP are to: 1) Assist in national action, 2.) Promote regional cooperation, 3) Act as a servicing institution for its member countries for promotion of integrated rural development (IRD) through research, action research, pilot projects, training and information discrimination. Amelioration of rural poverty in the Asia-Pacific region has been the prime concern of CIRDAP. The programme priorities of CIRDAP are set under four areas of concern and include: a) Agrarian development, b) Institutions/Infrastructure development, c) Resource development including human resources, and d) Employment. Within these areas of concern, the thematic areas identified for the Third Six-year plan (2002-2007) are: Poverty alleviation through participatory approaches with emphasis on social sector development,; GO-NGO collaboration, Gender issues, and Governance issues and Environmental concerns for sustainable development. Operating through designated Contact Ministries and Link Institutions in member countries, CIRDAP promotes technical cooperation among nations of the region. CIRDAP plays a supplementary and reinforcing role in supporting and furthering the effectiveness of integrated rural development programmes in the Asian-Pacific region. 4. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: Under the priority areas the emphasis is on the following areas: i) Food availability Accessibility to inputs for food production NO Land use patterns and long term implications for food security YES In particular, clear titles and transferability were major issues for the CIRDAP Effectiveness of Extension services in promoting technology adoption NO Others (please specify) NO

ii) Physical and social access to food No work in any of these areas NO iii) Economic access to food Self–employment, wage employment and income generation YES In particular non farm employment which occupies about 50 percent of the rural Bangladesh labor force currently. Livelihood patterns and coping strategies of the ultra poor, including disadvantaged groups NO Price stabilization, market integration and consumer welfare NO Others (please specify) NO iv) Utilization of food for nutrition

75

Nothing in any of these areas v) Cross cutting and overriding themes received attention. Transparency of policies and accountability of institutions related to food security Issues in measurement of food insecurity, vulnerability and Poverty Power, transport, commercialization, irrigation, and storage for food security Long term environmental degradation and food security Others (please specify)

NO NO NO YES NO

The main avenue through which food security is addressed involves development, poverty and causes and mechanisms for mitigating it. There is attention to non farm employment in rural communities 5. Staff of the organization and classifications: The staff of the CIRDAP is only three, the Director and two assistants. 6. Publications of the organization: We received a list, which is rather small in recent years, mostly reports on the activities of CIRDAP. In addition, the CIRDAP produces a journal, “Asia-Pacific Journal of Rural Development”. 7. Three important research projects on food security completed during the last two years: “Access to Land”, (Bangladesh, Indonesia, Philippines and Nepal), IFAD Funded, on going. “Institutional Mechanisms in Rural Development”, Bangladesh, CIRDAP, 2005. “Appropriate Technologies for Rural Development”, (Myanmar and Pakistan) 2001. 8. Annual budget of the organization: 390,000 Taka 9. Collaborations with other organizations in completing research on food policy: Most of the collaborations are with international donors and with other country branches of the CIRDAP 10. Names of past clients that we can contact about the satisfaction with your organizations services: IFAD and other CIRDAP centres 11. CVs of major researchers: Given Any other information on capacities of your organization relative to food security policy that you wish to supply: Note: No follow up questionnaire completed.

76

Annex 5.6. Institute of Food Science and Technology (IFST) 1. Name of the Organization: Institute for Food Science and Technology (IFST) of the Bangladesh Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (BCSIR). The IFST is one of the institutes of the BCSIR. We met with the Chairman of BCSIR, Prof. Dr. Choudhury Mahamood Hasan, and the Director of the IFST, Dr. K. M. Formuzul Haque, along with Senior Scientists Dr. Momtaz Doulatana and Dr. Fahima Rokhsana. The meeting with the Chairman was after we met with the three representatives of the IFST. 2. Affiliation of the organization: The BCSIR is a government organization, under which the IFST operates. The IFST receives support form the government and fees form testing food, leasing of processes developed in the Institute, and the development of food testing kits. 3. Brief history of the organization: The Institute of Food Science and Technology (IFST) started functioning as an Institute of the Bangladesh Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (BCSIR) during July of 1983. Prior to its establishment, the Institute had been functioning as a division of the East Regional Laboratories, Dhaka, since 1955. The Institute has seven Research Divisions (Technology of Plant Food Products, Technology of Animal Food Products, Technology of Food Grains, Legumes and Oilseeds, Microbiology, Biochemistry and Applied Nutrition, Food Science and Quality Control, and Industrial Development and Rural Technology) and sixteen Research Stations. Each Research Division is headed by a Scientist-in-Charge, and the Section-in-Charge to assist the Director in research administration and policy matters to assure the smooth functioning of the Institute. At present, the Institute employs 116 staff members of whom 78 are scientists. The Institute is engaged in Research and Development activities in different branches of Food Science and Technology. Presently (during 2005 to 2006), there are 56 on-going in the Institute. During the period under report (again, 2005 to 2006), the Institute has developed 14 industrial processes, 11 of which have been leased out to different entrepreneurs. A major focus of IFST is on food safety under the dimension of utilization of food for nutrition and food security. Particular emphasis is given to lab identification of food adulterants (colourants, ripeners, preservatives, and other toxic chemicals used in the food trade and handling sectors). IFST does not have regulatory authority; its mandate is to analyze samples of food for purity (impurity) sent to the Institute by different ministries and the private sector and to give certificates of their findings. The Ministry with primary authority for assuring food quality is under enforcing given its authority. Recently, the Institute has been entrusted by the Government of Bangladesh with the responsibility to examine the quality of food products imported by different entrepreneurs. This Institute also provides assistance for the analysis of crude palm oil/olein and stearin samples. 4. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: The main activity of the Institute is related to the theme “Utilization of food for nutrition”, and the sub category of food contamination and adulteration. IFST does both demand-lead and self mandated research and development. Some of their research impinges on storage facilities for food (shelf life, etc.) under the Physical

77

and social access to food” and self employment and income generation under the “Economic access to food” themes. Participates in research in all research needs assessment areas 5. Staff of the organization and classification: Currently there are 60 scientists employed by the Institute: four Chief Science Officers, 10 Principal Scientific Officers, 20 Senior Scientists, and 26 Scientific Officers. The first two groups fall in the category of senior researchers. 6. Publications of the organization: During the past year, 13 papers have been published in scientific journals, and four are accepted for publication. In addition, three patents have been accepted. 7. Three important research projects on food security completed during the past two years: “Development of Processes for Dehydrated Fruits, Vegetables, Spices and Their Products”, “Studies on the Processing of Instant Food Products Having Required Nutrition from Plant Sources” “Examination of Formalin in Fish” 8. Annual budget of the organization: 2 million Taka. 9. Collaborations with other organizations in completing research projects on food security: BARC (Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council, Ministry of Agriculture) on identification of hazardous chemicals in food. CFTRI (Central Food Technology Research Institute, India) on pathogenic bacteria listeria monocytogenus. Foreign collaborations through the ERD (External Relations Division), Ministry of Science and Information Communication Technology, BSTI (Bangladesh Standards and Testing Institution), and the CAB (Consumers Association of Bangladesh) on food standards and consumer’s rights and protection. 10. Names of past clients that we can contact about their satisfaction with your organizations services: See above 11. CVs of major researchers: received. 12. Any other information on capacities of your organization relative to food security policy that you wish to supply: i) The laboratories of the IFST are being prepared for ISO accreditation in 2008. We visited several labs and found that the equipment and present and ordered was first rate and that the labs were being prepared with a layout that would support ISO certification. ii) There is little collaboration with the food testing labs of the IPH (Institute of Public Health, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare), the Directorate of Food (Ministry of Food and Disaster Management), and Dhaka City Corporation (Ministry of Local Government, Rural Development and Cooperatives) iii) There is as well a lack of enforcement of food standards by the BSTI (Bangladesh Standards and Testing Institution).

78

National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme
IFST Follow-Up Questionnaire FAO Survey of Organizations Undertaking Food Security Policy Research Thank you in advance for making the effort to complete this questionnaire. 1. Publications during the LAST TWO years (2005/6 to 2006/7) by the following classifications. Type of Publication Number Refereed publications (journal articles, 2005-2006= 13 2006-2007= 10 books and chapters in books) Research reports (summarizing results 8 of particular projects) All other publications 3 2. Current staff of your organization by degree status. Staff of your organization Full-Time Number 9 56 46 Part-Time Number

Ph.D or equivalent Degree holders Masters Degree holders All other staff

15

3. Emphasis in research areas Give 10 points to each dimension that you check, and then allocate the total number of points generated by your selections to the areas selected to reflect emphasis. For example if you select two areas, the total points would be 20, and you would allocate them among the two selected, perhaps 14 to one and 6 to the other. Research focus relative to Dimensions NFPCSP Research dimensions selected/generating Total Points Food Availability 10 Physical and social access to food 10 Economic access to food 10 Utilization of food for nutrition 10 Cross cutting and overarching 10 areas Other, please specify TOTAL POINTS 50 Allocation of Total Points based on research emphasis 12.5 9.5 6 6 16

50

79

4. Assume the availability of a new project in each of the areas selected above (in question # 3). Please give the name of another research organization in Bangladesh that you could recommend, if for some reason your organization could not undertake the project. Research focus relative to NFPCSP Name of organization that you would theme areas recommend Food availability INFS Physical and social access to food Economic access to food Utilization of food for nutrition Cross cutting and overarching themes Others, please specify INFS INFS INFS INFS

5. Please give the name and address of ONE NATIONAL AND ONE INTERNATIONAL organization that we can contact related to their satisfaction with your organization’s services. Reference for your organization National International Name and address of organization INFS CFTRI (Central Food Technology Research Institute, India)

80

Annex 5.7.Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute 1. Name of the organization: Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI), we met with Dr. Quazi Mesbahul Alam, Chief Scientific Officer, Mr. Subodh Chandra Barman, Principal Scientific Officer and Dr. M. Abdul Baset, Principal Scientific Officer, Agricultural Economics Division 2. Affiliation of the organization: Government research Institute 3. Brief history of the organization: Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI) is the largest multi-crop research institute conducting research on a variety of crops other than rice, jute, sugarcane and tea. The BARI crops include cereals (wheat, maize, millets, barley and sorghum), tubers, pulses, oilseeds, vegetables, fruits, spices, and flowers. Established in 1973, the Institute is mainly mandated to undertake research to ensure a stable and productive agriculture through scientific management of land, water, evaluation of new varieties of various agricultural products and development of appropriate technology and pest management methods. The Institute does all its functions through three major wings – Research wing, Support services wing and the Training and communication wing. The Research wing executes and monitors all research programmes through seven special crop research centres, 14 research divisions, 6 regional research stations and 28 sub-stations. 4. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: i) Food availability Access of inputs for food production YES Land use patterns and long term implications for food security YES Effectiveness of Extension services in promoting adoption YES Others, please specify: Rice and rice production related technology --development ii) Physical and social access to food Involving communities in local power structures and safety NO net provision Best practices in food distribution YES Storage facilities; options for remote areas and poor communities YES Others, please specify --iii) Economic access--all areas here Self-employment, wage employment and income generation YES Livelihood patterns and coping strategies of the ultra poor NO Price stabilization, market integration and consumer welfare YES Others, please specify --iv) Utilization of food for nutrition Food contamination and food adulteration YES Food composition tables with specific reference to indigenous foods YES Institutionalization and capacity building of street food systems YES Others, please specify --v) Cross cutting and overarching themes Transparency of policies and accountability of institutions related to food security YES Issues in measurement of food security, vulnerability and poverty YES Power, transport, commercialization Irrigation and storage for food security NO Long term environmental degradation and food security YES Others, please specify ---

81

5. Staff of the organization and classifications: Director-General … 1 Directors ….. 6 CSO ….. 16 PSO …... 58 SSO ….. 189 SO ….. 229 Class 1 officers …. 33 Class 2 officers …. 40 Class 3 and 4 employees 1922

6. Publications of the organization: 146 in 2006-2007. 7. Three important research projects completed during the last two years in one of the five areas designated above: A) Dynamics of Income Generation of the Resource-poor Farm Households in Bangladesh B) Access to Quality Rice Seed by the Resource-poor Farm Households in Bangladesh C) Rice Production Situation in Different Production Environments of Bangladesh 8. Annual budget: 959.3 million Taka 9. Collaborations with other organizations in completing research projects on food security (list 2 examples): BARC, SANDEE, Institute of Biosaline Agriculture (Agr. Economics division only) 10. Names of past clients that we can contact about their satisfaction with your organization’s services, if any: -11. CVs of major researchers: CVs of Dr. Quazi Mesbahul Alam, Chief Scientific Officer, Dr. M. Abdul Baset and Mr. Subodh Chandra Barman, Principal Scientific Officers, and 10 other senior officials the Agricultural Economics Division were given. 12. Any other information on capacities of your organization that you wish to supply: ---

82

National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme
BARI Follow-Up Questionnaire FAO Survey of Organizations Undertaking Food Security Policy Research

Thank you in advance for making the effort to complete this questionnaire. Name of organization: Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute (BARI) 1. Publications during the LAST TWO years (2005/6 to 2006/7) by the following classifications Number (from the Agricultural Economics Division only) Refereed publications (journal articles, 28 books and chapters in books Research reports(summarizing results of 21 particular projects) All other publications 49 Type of Publication

2. Current staff of your organization by degree status. Staff of your organization Economics Division only) (Agricultural Full-Time Number Part-Time Number

Ph.D or equivalent Degree holders 11 Masters Degree holders 7 All other staff 26 *Masters degree holders, **B.Sc. (Ag) degree holders

3. Emphasis in research areas In the attached document that includes the profile of your organization, we have recorded your responses to the items from the research themes as part of the survey instrument. They are recorded “YES” and “NO” to reflect whether or not you responded that your organization has research capacity and a record of work in the specific areas. First, review the areas and the indications to be sure they are correct. If not, change them to better reflect your organization’s capacity and history of research.

83

Give 10 points to each dimension that you check, and then allocate the total number of points generated by your selections to the areas selected to reflect emphasis. For example if you select two areas, the total points would be 20, and you would allocate them among the two selected, perhaps 14 to one and 6 to the other. Research focus relative to NFPCSP Research dimensions Food Availability Physical and social access to food Economic access to food Utilization of food for nutrition Cross cutting and overarching areas Other, please specify TOTAL POINTS Dimensions selected/generating Total Points 10 10 10 30 Allocation of Total Points based on research emphasis 15 4.5 10.5 30

4. Assume the availability of a new project in each of the areas selected above (in question # 3). Please give the name of another research organization in Bangladesh that you could recommend, if for some reason your organization could not undertake the project. Research focus relative to NFPCSP theme areas Food availability Physical and social access to food Economic access to food Utilization of food for nutrition Cross cutting and overarching themes Others, please specify Name of organization that you would recommend BRRI BAU BAU BIDS, BAU

5. Please give the name and address of ONE NATIONAL AND ONE INTERNATIONAL organization that we can contact related to their satisfaction with you organizations services Reference for your organization Name and address of organization National BARC International CIMMYT

84

Annex 5.8. Bangladesh Rice Research Institute 1. Name of the organization: Bangladesh Rice Research Institute (BRRI), we met with Dr. Shahe Alam, Chief Scientific Officer and Head, Agricultural Economics Division and Dr. M. Rafiqul Islam, Principal Scientific Officer, Agricultural Economics Division. 2. Affiliation of the organization: Government research Institute 3. Brief history of the organization: The Bangladesh Rice Research institute (BRRI) was established in 1970 with the long-term vision of developing new rice technology to take the challenges of food security of the fast growing population of the country. The major objectives are: • • • Conducting research on all aspects of rice Establishing project areas to demonstrate appropriate agricultural technology; and Training extension personnel and farmers in improved techniques of rice production.

It has 17 divisions, brought under 7 programme areas, namely: • • • • • • • Varietal development Crop-soil-water management Pest management Rice farming systems Socioeconomics and policy Farm mechanization and post harvest technology Technology transfer.

Achievements so far: • 47 modern rice varieties including one hybrid rice variety developed • Rice acreage increased from 0.25 million ha (2.6% of total) in 1969-70 to 11.15 million • ha (65% of total) in 2007 • Rice production increased from 9mMT in 1970 to 29 million MT in 2007 • More than 7000 different genotypes are being conserved in the BRRI Rice Germplasm Bank. 4. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: i) Food availability Access of inputs for food production Land use patterns and long term implications for food security Effectiveness of Extension services in promoting adoption Others, please specify: Rice and rice production related technology Development vi) Physical and social access to food Involving communities in local power structures and safety net provision Best practices in food distribution Storage facilities; options for remote areas and poor communities Others, please specify Economic access--all areas here Self-employment, wage employment and income generation Livelihood patterns and coping strategies of the ultra poor Price stabilization, market integration and consumer welfare

YES YES

NO NO YES --NO YES YES

vii)

85

viii)

ix)

Others, please specify --Utilization of food for nutrition Food contamination and food adulteration YES Food composition tables with specific reference to indigenous foods YES Institutionalization and capacity building of street food systems NO Others, please specify --Cross cutting and overarching themes Transparency of policies and accountability of institutions related to food security NO Issues in measurement of food security, vulnerability and poverty YES Power, transport, commercialization Irrigation and storage for food security NO Long term environmental degradation and food security YES Others, please specify ---

5. Staff of the organization and classifications: Director-General …. 1 Directors ….. 2 Class 1 officers …. 260 Class 2 officers …. 42 Class 3 employees …. 216 Class 4 employees …. 141 6. Publications of the organization: 9 7. Three important research projects completed during the last two years in one of the five areas designated above: a) Dynamics of Income Generation of the Resource-poor Farm Households in Bangladesh b) Access to Quality Rice Seed by the Resource-poor Farm Households in Bangladesh c) Rice Production Situation in Different Production Environments of Bangladesh 8. Annual budget: 285 million Taka 9. Collaborations with other organizations in completing research projects on food security (list 2 examples): IRRI, DAE 10. Names of past clients that we can contact about their satisfaction with your organization’s services, if any: DFID, IRRI, DAE, BARC, BRAC, CIMMYT, NRI, WFC 11. CVs of major researchers: CVs of Dr. Shahe Alam (Chief Scientific Officer and Head, Agricultural Economics Division, BRRI) and Dr. M. Rafiqul Islam (Principal Scientific Officer, Agricultural Economics Division, BRRI) given. 12. Any other information on capacities of your organization that you wish to supply: ---

86

National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme
BRRI Follow-Up Questionnaire FAO Survey of Organizations Undertaking Food Security Policy Research

Thank you in advance for making the effort to complete this questionnaire. Name of organization: Bangladesh Rice Research Institute 1. Publications during the LAST TWO years (2005/6 to 2006/7) by the following classifications Type of Publication Number Refereed publications (journal articles, 32 from the Agricultural Economics Division books and chapters in books Research reports(summarizing results of 4 particular projects) All other publications 3

2. Current staff of your organization by degree status. Staff of your organization Full-Time Number Ph.D or equivalent Degree holders 58 Masters Degree holders 106* + 17** All other staff 468 *Masters degree holders, **B.Sc. (Ag) degree holders 3. Emphasis in research areas. -

Part-Time Number

In the attached document that includes the profile of your organization, we have recorded your responses to the items from the research themes as part of the survey instrument. They are recorded “YES” and “NO” to reflect whether or not you responded that your organization has research capacity and a record of work in the specific areas. First, review the areas and the indications to be sure they are correct. If not, change them to better reflect your organization’s capacity and history of research.

87

Give 10 points to each dimension that you check, and then allocate the total number of points generated by your selections to the areas selected to reflect emphasis. For example if you select two areas, the total points would be 20, and you would allocate them among the two selected, perhaps 14 to one and 6 to the other. Research focus relative to NFPCSP Dimensions Research dimensions selected/generating Total Points Food Availability 10 Physical and social access to food 10 Economic access to food 10 Utilization of food for nutrition 10 Cross cutting and overarching areas 10 Other, please specify TOTAL POINTS 50 Allocation of Total Points based on research emphasis 15 10 12 8 5 50

4. Assume the availability of a new project in each of the areas selected above (in question # 3). Please give the name of another research organization in Bangladesh that you could recommend, if for some reason your organization could not undertake the project. Research focus relative to NFPCSP Name of organization that you would theme areas recommend Food availability BARI, BFRI, BLRI, BAU Physical and social access to food Economic access to food Utilization of food for nutrition Cross cutting and overarching themes Others, please specify BIDS, BAU BIDS, BAU DU, BAU, BSMRAU, BFRI BIDS, CPD

5. Please give the name and address of ONE NATIONAL AND ONE INTERNATIONAL organization that we can contact related to their satisfaction with you organizations services. Reference for your organization National International Name and address of organization DAE IRRI

88

Annex 5.9. Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC) 1. Name of the organization: Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC). We visited with Dr. Md. Nurul Atam, Executive Chairman 2. Affiliation of the organization: Government under the Ministry of Agriculture, an appendage of the National Agricultural Research System (NARS). 3. Brief history of the organization: The BARC is an umbrella organization under which the entire Bangladesh agricultural research effort is coordinated. This involves cooperative activities with several ministries of the government: Agriculture, Forest and Environment, Fisheries and Livestock, Rural Development, Education, Industries, Commerce, Science, and Technology, etc. Policies to guide BARC are made by a governing body which is headed by the Honorable Minister for Agriculture as its Chairman with the Honorable Minister of Fisheries and Livestock and the Honorable Minister for Environment and Forest as co-chairmen including Honorable Members of Parliament, top officials of government ministries and research institutes, outstanding scientists, and farmers representatives as members. The implementation of policies adopted by the governing body is the responsibility of the Executive Chairmen of BARC and the Member Directors and Directors of specific disciplines. BARC is entrusted with the task of preparing the vision document and the national agricultural research plan. These are the guided for planning and conducting activities according to national priorities. Based on these guidelines the research institutes draw their master plan. BARC has the responsibility to coordinate research and foster inter-institute collaboration, monitor, and review the research program of NARS institutes, assist institutes to strengthen research capacities, establish systemwide operational policies and standard management procedures and assure that each institute is optimally governed. 4. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: The BARC is mainly concerned with technology development. It in fact does not figure well relative to the food security needs assessment themes. They do research on production methods and new technologies but little related to actual implementation of the technologies and management methods. In our conversations with Dr. Atum, he indicated that this complete focus on technology may change in the future, with the BARC paying much more attention to the implementation of the technologies developed. This is partly in response to a condition on the new loan from the World Bank which is to provide research funds to the BARC. The funds from the Bank loan will be not for salaries but for research costs, an area where, because of regulations, the BARC is very poorly funded. Another problem with the BARC is that it has lost many of the scientists that it formerly had to international positions due to higher salaries and the availability of funds to support the costs of research programs that are not salaries. The BARC still has a ratio of about 90% salaries to 10% for research costs—very low by national research institution standards. 5. Staff of the organization and classifications: The proportion of staff is given in percentages. These are: PhDs approximately 25%, Masters approximately 60%, BSc approximately 15%. 6. Publications of the organization (last two years):

89

7. Three important research projects completed during the last tow years in one or more of the five areas designated above: 8. Annual Budget of the organization; 9. Collaborations with other organizations in completing research projects: 10. 1Names of past clients that we can contact about their satisfaction with your services: 11. CVs of major researchers: given 12. Any other information on capacities of your organization that you wish to supply: Note: No follow up questionnaire requested, due to the large nature of the organization. We have annual reports from the research institutes that are coordinated by the BARC

90

Annex 5.10. National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPORT); Ministry of Health and Family Welfare 1. Name of the organization: National Institute of Population Research and Training, we visited with three people from the research branch. We visited with Nasimal Ghani, General Director, and Subrata Bhadra, senior researcher NIPORT. 2. Affiliation of the organization: Government, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. 3. Brief history of the organization: The National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPOT) was established in July of 1977 for imparting management training to the mid-level program managers of the national family planning program. With the growing needs felt for demographic, social, bio-medical, and evaluative research on training and operational problems of the program, a Research Unit was added to NIPOT in 1978 and the Institute renamed as the National Institute of Population Research and Training (NIPORT). The responsibility of operational management of 12 Welfare Visitors Training Institutes (FWVTI) and 20 Regional Centers (RTC) was transferred to NIPORT from the Directorate of Family Planning in 1982. Management training of mid-level program managers of the Health Directorate involved in MCH-Family Planning Programme was also added as a responsibility of NIPORT. In April 1985 a Management Advisory Committee headed by the Secretary of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare was formed to streamline and guide the overall training and administrative activities of NIPORT. The Committee was also responsible to formulate an overall plan for manpower development, to set research and training priorities and to devise training policies. Another important committee headed by the Secretary of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare called the “National Steering Committee for Population Research” was formed to strengthen the research activities in the population sector. The Committee was responsible for providing policy guidelines, to identify priority research areas, to review research needs, to avoid duplication of research, and to coordinate research activities. Functions in training include: manage development of training, development of a core curriculum for various special groups, and deliver the training. The research tasks include: develop research to improve training, conduct surveys, rapid appraisal situation analysis; assessments for support of health, nutrition and family planning; coordinate other government agencies conducting research on these same topics; and disseminate research findings. 4. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: i) Food availability - Accessibility of inputs for food production NO - Land use patterns and long term implications for food security NO - Effectiveness of Extension services in promoting technology adoption NO - Others (please specify) YES, food availability as it relates to health outcomes ii) Physical and social access to food - Involving communities in local power structures and safety net provision NO - Best practices in food distribution programs Yes as related to Health - Storage facilities: options for remote areas and poor communities NO - Others (please specify) NO iii) Economic access to food

91

- Self-employment, wage employment and income generation NO - Livelihood patterns and coping strategies of the ultra-poor, including disadvantaged group YES - Price stabilization, market integration and consumer welfare NO - Others (please specify) NO iv) Utilization of food for nutrition Food contamination and food adulteration NO Food composition tables with specific reference to indigenous foods NO Institutionalization and capacity building of street food systems NO Others (please specify) YES, Health areas as they relate to food for nutrition

v) Cross cutting and overarching themes - Transparency of policies and accountability of institutions related to food security - Issues in measurement of food security, vulnerability and poverty - Power, transport, commercialization, irrigation and storage for food security - Long term environmental degradation and food security - Others (please specify)

NO NO NO NO NO

The research is related to the surveys and primarily health issues which of course relate to food security. In terms of the five theme areas, there was work on livelihood patterns of the ultra poor and best practices related to health policies that involve to food security. But the overall research program was more or less tangential to food security policy. 5. Staff of the organization and classifications: Research Director Senior Research Associates Evaluation Specialists Research Associates Statisticians 1 2 1 2 2

6. Publications of the organization (last two years): “Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey” (BDHS) is completed every three years. The last survey and publication was in 2007. A large number of health indicators are collected and presented in the documents based on these surveys. “Essential Services Delivery Survey” is conducted on an occasional basis. The last survey was conducted in 2006. It contains date on consumption of health services and related problems of access. “Urban Health Survey” is an occasional survey and was conducted last in 2006. This survey was supported by the National Institute of Population Research and Training (NPORT) in collaboration with the Centre for Health and Population Research, the MEASURE Evaluation, at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill and USAID. 7. Three important research projects on food security completed during the last two years: The survey reports above are the major outputs from NIPORT. 8. Annual budget: Not sent. 9. Collaborations with other organizations in competing research of food security policy: The collaborations are not exactly related to food security but include; USAID, Population Council, UVFAP, Mitra and Associates, and North Carolina University. It

92

is noted that these collaborations are for the development and implementation and analysis of the three surveys listed above. 10. Names of past clients that we can contact about their satisfaction with your organizations services: Any of the above. 11. CVs of major researchers: Not sent 12. Any other information on capacities of your organization relative to food security policy that you wish to supply: The Director indicated that he was investigating ways to open his training and research capacities to other agencies and to the NGO and private sector. He believes that the capacities are substantial for adding to survey and data quality. The problem is that all revenues go to the government and do not come to the Institute— a clear incentive problem. Get more use of survey data. Note: No follow-up questionnaire provided.

93

Annex 5.11. Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) 1. Name of Organization: Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies, we visited with Dr. Rushidan Islam Rushidan, Research Director : Dr Quazi Shahabuddin. 2. Affiliation of organization: Independent not for profit research organization with a “Parliamentary Charter”. 3. Brief History of the organization: Largest and oldest social science research organization in Bangladesh, it has completed 50 years since organization in 2007. It is one of the premier multi disciplinary research organizations engaged in policy oriented research on critical development issues in Bangladesh. The Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies (BIDS) or Bangladesh “Unnayan Gabeshona Protishthan” is a multidisciplinary organization which conducts policy oriented research on development issues. It is mandated to function as an agency for undertaking and promoting study, research and dissemination of knowledge in the field of development economics, demography, and other social sciences related to planning for national development and social welfare—to collect information and generate data; conduct investigations, and undertake research projects for purposes of planning and formulation of policies, and of implementation of plans and policies; and to provide information and offer advice on modern research techniques and methodologies in economics, demography, and other social sciences. With changing economic and social conditions the focus of the research program gradually moved to areas relating to: globalization, macro economic issues, agriculture and rural development, water resources management, poverty and inequality, food security, micro credit, health and nutrition, education, energy, environment, gender, empowerment, migration, and urbanization. 4. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: (Tick ) i) Food availability - Accessibility of inputs for food production YES - Land use patterns and long term implications for food security YES - Effectiveness of Extension services in promoting technology adoption NO - Others (please specify) YES Many types of studies of household food availability, global and regional food security. ii) Physical and social access to food - Involving communities in local power structures and safety net provision YES - Best practices in food distribution programs YES - Storage facilities: options for remote areas and poor communities YES Others (please specify) YES In addition, communities in local power structures and safety net provisions, food distribution programs, storage facilities and food security options for remote areas and poor communities, and promoting maize crops and crop diversification. iii) Economic access to food - Self-employment, wage employment and income generation YES

94

- Livelihood patterns and coping strategies of the ultra-poor, including disadvantaged group YES - Price stabilization, market integration and consumer welfare YES Others (please specify) YES Market integration, chronic poverty conditions and links to development. iv) Utilization of food for nutrition Food contamination and food adulteration Food composition tables with specific reference to indigenous foods Institutionalization and capacity building of street food systems Others (please specify NO NO NO NO

v) Cross cutting and overarching themes - Transparency of policies and accountability of institutions related to food security - Issues in measurement of food security, vulnerability and poverty - Power, transport, commercialization, irrigation and storage for food security - Long term environmental degradation and food security

YES YES YES YES

vi) Others (please specify) YES Additional issues covered by BIDS related to gender, indigenous populations and elderly groups. Issues related to climate change and long term environmental degradation and food security are as well in the research portfolio of BIDS. In short, BIDS is focused on the themes and even broader characterizations of the themes for food availability, physical and social access to food, and economic access to food. They do not focus on utilization and food nutrition. They are as well doing research on most of the areas identified as cross cutting. 5. Staff of the organization: The Director General officiates as Secretary to the Board of Trustees. The Board of Trustees is composed of a Chairman who is the Minister for Planning, ex-officio and trustees that include: A member of the Planning Commission to be nominated by the Chairman, Director General of the Institute, ex-officio, Chairman or a Member of the University Grants Commission to be nominated by it, the Governor, Bangladesh Bank, ex-officio, the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, ex-officio; the Secretary, Ministry of Education, ex-officio; two Senior Fellows of the Institute; three Senior Staff Members of the Institute; the Director General, Bangladesh Rural Development Board, ex-officio. There are three statutory committees for dedicated to decentralizing administration and sharing responsibilities within BIDS. These committees are: the Policy Coordination Committee (PCC), the Administrative Affairs Committee (AAC); and the Finance Committee (FC). The BIDS statute provides for an Advisory Committee of 12 Senior Fellows, nominated by the Policy Coordination Committee and selected from among eminent professionals in the country. The Senior Fellows are appointed by the Board of Trustees for three years. The Senior Fellows serve in their individual capacities without honorarium, and provide guidance in designing and implementing the Institute’s professional programs. The regular staff if BIDS includes; - Director General 1 - Research Director 5 - Senior Research Fellow 11

95

- Research Fellow 19 - Research Associate 11 - Research Assistant 1 - Statistical Assistant 1 Total authorized staff by the Board of Trustees is 81. Total current staff is approximately 50. 6. Publications of the organization (last two years): Publications of BIDS are summarized in two documents provided during the interview to discuss the survey and elicit responses: The Biennial Report 2004-2006, prepared for the 50th year celebration of BIDS, and the list of publications supplied with the 50th year celebration documents. We will summarize the later, the “List of Publications of BIDS”. This is a summary of major publications from 1976 to 2006 and is organized by publication type. Reviewing the document we find: o Quarterly Journal: the Bangladesh Development Studies, 12 special issues have been published, the latest in 2003. o Research Monographs are 21 in number with the latest in 2007. o Research Reports number 180 with the latest publications in 2005. o Project Report Series includes three publications two in 2007 and one in 2003. o Books and Special Publications include thirty four latest English publication is in 2004. These are publications of the BIDS summarized in short form, excluding project reports and papers and other material published by collaborating institutions. Most of the recent publications are on the three theme areas and the cross cutting areas identified above. 7. Three Important Research Projects on food security completed during the past two years: “Operationalizing Pro-poor Growth in Bangladesh”, Shahabuddin, Q. DFID funded project, 2004. “Programme for Research on Chronic Poverty in Bangladesh”, Sen, B. DFIDD, CPRC and University of Manchester, UK funded project, 2006. “Study on environmental Policy Analysis”, Assaduzamman, M. UNDP funded project. 2005. “Trade Cooperation and Economic Reform Policy”, Chowdhury, O. H. EC funded project, 2005. “Researching well being in Developing Countries – Bangladesh”, Ali, Z. ESRC Research Group on Wellbeing in Developing Countries and University of Bath, UK, 2007. “Policy Research on the Socially Disadvantaged Women (Commercial Sex Workers) and their Children in Bangladesh”, Bakht, Z. World Bank and GoB funded project, 2006. (PRSDWB) “Sustainable Networking Programme”. Assaduzamman, M. UNDP funded project, 2006. A full description of the policy research program of BIDS is contained in the Biannual Report 2004-2006 8. Annual budget of the organization: 350-375 million Taka. 9. Collaborations with other organizations in completing projects on food security: IFPRI and CMI were given as research organizations that had been collaborated with. Most of the collaboration is with the international organizations that fund BIDS research projects. BIDS does not normally collaborate with in-country research

96

organizations. In-country collaborations are mainly with particular researchers who fill in with expertise that the BIDS staff does not have. 10. Names of past clients that we can contact about their satisfaction with your organizations services, if any: They indicated that we could contact any of the research and donor institutions that had worked with BIDS. 11. CVs of major researchers: Given 12. Any other information on capacities of your organization relative to food security policy that you wish to supply: Broad research Institute focused almost entirely on food security, taken in its widest sense since food insecurity is at the heart of many of Bangladesh’s development problems as a critical factor or as an indicator of development problems study, research and dissemination of knowledge in the field of development economic, demography, and other social sciences related to planning for national development and social welfare to collect information and generate data; conduct investigations, and undertake follow-up.

97

National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme
BIDS Follow-Up Questionnaire FAO Survey of Organizations Undertaking Food Security Policy Research Thank you in advance for making the effort to complete this questionnaire. 1. Publications during the LAST TWO years (2005/6 to 2006/7) by the following classifications. Type of Publication Number Refereed publications (journal articles, books and chapters in books) Research reports (summarizing results of particular projects) All other publications 2. Current staff of your organization by degree status. Staff of your organization Full-Time Number Ph.D or equivalent Degree holders Masters Degree holders All other staff 3. Emphasis in research areas. Give 10 points to each dimension that you check, and then allocate the total number of points generated by your selections to the areas selected to reflect emphasis. For example if you select two areas, the total points would be 20, and you would allocate them among the two selected, perhaps 14 to one and 6 to the other. Research focus relative to Dimensions Allocation of Total Points NFPCSP Research dimensions selected/generating based on research Total Points emphasis

Part-Time Number

Food Availability Physical and social access to food Economic access to food Utilization of food for nutrition Cross cutting and overarching areas Other, please specify TOTAL POINTS

10 10

12 8

98

4. Assume the availability of a new project in each of the areas selected above (in question # 3). Please give the name of another research organization in Bangladesh that you could recommend, if for some reason your organization could not undertake the project. Research focus relative to NFPCSP Name of organization that you would theme areas recommend Food availability Physical and social access to food Economic access to food Utilization of food for nutrition Cross cutting and overarching themes Others, please specify 5. Please give the name and address of ONE NATIONAL AND ONE INTERNATIONAL organization that we can contact related to their satisfaction with your organization’s services. Reference for your organization Name and address of organization National International

99

Annex 5.12. BRAC Research and Evaluation Division 1. Name of the organization: BRAC (Research and Evaluation Division). The Research and Evaluation Division is a part of BRAC, one of the largest private development organizations in the world, virtually self-financed and employing approximately 100,000 people. 2. Affiliation of the organization: NGO 3. Brief history of the organization: The Research and Evaluation Division (RED) was established in 1975 as an independent unit within the framework of BRAC to provide necessary research support to BRAC programmes. Although RED concentrates its activities on BRAC programmes, it also undertakes multi-disciplinary studies on various development issues and subjects of national and global importance. These include poverty alleviation, socioeconomic development, agriculture, nutrition, health, population, education, environment, gender, and related fields. It also maintains strong linkages with government organizations, UN bodies, and a number of local and international academic and research institutions. The Research and Evaluation Division is funded about 70 percent from within to do research ad evaluation of BRAC programmes and 30 percent from external grants and contracts. 4. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: i) Food availability Accessibility of inputs for food production YES Land use patterns and long term implications for food security YES Effectiveness of Extension services in promoting technology adoption YES Others (please specify) NO

ii) Physical and social access to food - Involving communities in local power structures and safety net provision YES - Best practices in food distribution programs NO - Storage facilities: options for remote areas and poor communities - Others (please specify) YES Income generation for vulnerable groups iii) Economic access to food - Self-employment, wage employment and income generation YES - Livelihood patterns and coping strategies of the ultra-poor, including disadvantaged group YES - Price stabilization, market integration and consumer welfare YES - Others (please specify) NO iv) Utilization of food for nutrition Food contamination and food adulteration Food composition tables with specific reference to indigenous foods Institutionalization and capacity building of street food systems Others (please specify) Evaluation of supplementary feeding programme NO NO NO YES

v) Cross cutting and overarching themes - Transparency of policies and accountability of institutions related to food security YES - Issues in measurement of food security, vulnerability and poverty YES - Power, transport, commercialization, irrigation and storage for food Security NO - Long term environmental degradation and food security YES

100

- Others (please specify)

YES role of food security for neonatal health

i)

Food availability Accessibility of inputs for food production (e.g. Assessment of seed delivery system with IRRI, 2001; Impact evaluation of maize production system, 2001) Effectiveness of Extension services in promoting technology adoption (e.g. Refinement of System of Rice Intensification with PETRRA, 2004; Knowledge, perception and attitude of civil society on rice biotechnology research, 2004; Poultry against poverty, 2005.)

ii) Physical and social access to food Involving communities in local power structures and safety net provision (e.g. Palli samaj in safety net allocations, 2006) Best practices in food distribution programs (e.g. studies on Income Generation for Vulnerable Group Development (IGVGD) iii) Economic access to food Self-employment, wage employment and income generation (e.g. process and impact evaluations of programmes for the ultra poor with LSE) Livelihood patterns and coping strategies of the ultra-poor, including disadvantaged group (e.g. risk and vulnerability of the ultra poor) iv) Utilization of food for nutrition Others (e.g. Evaluation of supplementary feeding) National Nutrition Programme (NNP),

v) Cross cutting and overarching themes Transparency of policies and accountability of institutions related to food security (management of supplement distribution system in NNP, 2005, Wheat Soya Blend distribution, 1998) Issues in measurement of food security, vulnerability and poverty (e.g. conceptual work on agro-economics and vulnerability analysis, 2003) Others (e.g. Role of food security in maternal and neonatal health careongoing study) 5. Staff of the organization and classification: (approximately 70 staff) Director 01 Research Coordinator 02 Senior Research Fellow 04 Research Fellow 02 Senior Research Associate 09 Research Associate 14 Staff Researcher 12 Research Assistant 09 Support staff 15 6. Publications of the organization (last two years): RED Annual Reports for the list. 2006; Sixteen journal articles, 4r books, 10 chapters in books, 5 research monographs, and other publications. In 2005: 12 journal articles, 7 books, 7 chapters in books, It was mentioned that the research publications are cyclical depending on the work the RED is responsible for in terms of internal evaluations of BRAC. 7. Three important research projects on food security completed during last two years in one or more of the four areas designated above: abstracts in attachment)

101

“Asset transfer as a means to food security: A case of BRAC’s Challenging the Frontiers of Poverty—Targeting the Ultra Poor” (CFPR/TUP) programme “Social security benefits: Who gets and how?” “A Multiple-Micronutrient-Fortified Beverage Affects Haemoglobin, Iron, and Vitamin A Status and Growth in Adolescent Girls in Rural Bangladesh” 8. Annual budget of the organization: (approximate) (Taka):30.71 million 9. Collaborations with other organizations in completing research projects on food security: Aga Khan Foundation Canada for CFPR/TUP research project in first phase LSE for CFPR/TUP research project in second phase. The Hospital for the Sick Children, University of Toronto, for the formative study on supplementary feeding. The BRAC Research and Evaluation Division has a well functioning ability to collaborate with other research organizations, subcontracting, jointly making applications with other organizations, collaborative arrangements that are less formal. 10. Names of past clients that we can contact about their satisfaction with your organization’s services, if any: London School of Economics (LSE), Aga Khan Foundation Canada, Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS), IRRI, Micronutrient Initiative, Canada; 11. CVs of major researchers (attached): 12. Any other information on capacities of your organization relative to food security policy that you wish to supply: There is interest in cooperating with FAO in developing a training/research institute to parallel the Masters in Development Studies Programme at BRAC University.

102

National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme
BRAC Follow-Up Questionnaire FAO Survey of Organizations Undertaking Food Security Policy Research

Thank you in advance for making the effort to complete this questionnaire.

2. Publications during the LAST TWO years (2005/6 to 2006/7) by the following classifications. Type of Publication Number Refereed publications (journal articles, 49 (2006 & 2007) books and chapters in books Research reports(summarizing results of 59 (2006), 4 (2007) particular projects) All other publications 30 (2006 & 2007) 2. Current staff of your organization by degree status. Staff of your organization Full-Time Number Ph.D or equivalent Degree holders Masters Degree holders All other staff 10 16 47 2 -

Part-Time Number

3. Emphasis in research areas. In the attached document that includes the profile of your organization, we have recorded your responses to the items from the research themes as part of the survey instrument. They are recorded “YES” and “NO” to reflect whether or not you responded that your organization has research capacity and a record of work in the specific areas. First, review the areas and the indications to be sure they are correct. If not, change them to better reflect your organization’s capacity and history of research. Give 10 points to each dimension that you check, and then allocate the total number of points generated by your selections to the areas selected to reflect emphasis. For example if you select two areas, the total points would be 20, and you would allocate them among the two selected, perhaps 14 to one and 6 to the other.

103

Research focus relative to NFPCSP Research dimensions Food Availability Physical and social access to food Economic access to food Utilization of food for nutrition Cross cutting and overarching areas Other, please specify TOTAL POINTS

Dimensions selected/generating Total Points 10 10 10 10 10

Allocation of Total Points based on research emphasis 6 6 16 16 6

50

50

4. Assume the availability of a new project in each of the areas selected above (in question # 3). Please give the name of another research organization in Bangladesh that you could recommend, if for some reason your organization could not undertake the project. Research focus relative to NFPCSP Name of organization that you would theme areas recommend Food availability Bangladesh Agricultural University Bangladesh Rice Research Institute Bangladesh Agricultural Research Institute Bangladesh Rice Foundation Physical and social access to food Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies ICDDR,B: Centre for Health and Population Research Economic access to food Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies Economic Research Group Utilization of food for nutrition Institute of Nutrition and Food Science, DU ICDDR,B: Centre for Health and Population Research Helen Keller International Cross cutting and overarching themes Bangladesh Institute of Development Studies ICDDR,B: Centre for Health and Population Research Others, please specify 5. Please give the name and address of ONE NATIONAL AND ONE INTERNATIONAL organization that we can contact related to their satisfaction with you organizations services. Reference for your organization Name and address of organization National ICDDR,B: Centre for Health and Population Research, Mohakhali, Dhaka 1212 International Aga Khan Foundation 360 Albert Street, Suite 1220 Ottawa, ON K1R 7X7, Canada

104

Annex 5.13. Human Development Research Center (HDRC); Human Development through Research and Action 1. Name of the organization: Human Development Research Center; Human Development trough Research and Action. We visited with the Prof. Dr. Abul Barkat. 2. Affiliation of the organization: It is a private not for profit organization chartered in Bangladesh. 3. Brief history of the organization: The Human Development Research Center (HDRC) s a multidisciplinary research-action organization, registered with the Registrar of Firms and having the Registration Number PF30084/99. It also has a branch in the USA namely HDRC USA Inc. having the Registration Number 040031914, date 06/08/203. The HDRC in Bangladesh was registered in 1999. HDRC’s vision is to accelerate the process of humane development through research and actions. It is a multifaceted structure with a large pool of specialists drawn from diverse disciplines. Most of the specialists have long-standing experiences in relevant fields of human development. Operationally, the activities of HDRC can be best viewed in four blocks; Mainstream Research Studies and Technical Assistance (MRSTM), Development and Research about Indigenous People (DRIP), Human Potential Development Centre (HPDC), and HDRC media-Advisory-Publications (HDRC-MAP). HDRC has already made visible contributions to national policymaking areas, particularly in the fields of health, population, education, gender development, land rights, infrastructure, and in the development of the poor, marginalized, disadvantaged and indigenous people. The major domain of HDRC’s interest covers policy and strategy research, operations research, survey, evaluation, assessment, technical assistance, training, communication and actions in the fields of population, health, reproductive health, primary healthcare, education, gender, human resources development, human rights, the development of indigenous people, land, agriculture, rural development, microcredit, environment, management and training. 4. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: Food availability Access of inputs for food production YES Land use patterns and long term implications for food security YES (particularly for the landless nearly landless farmers) Effective use of Extension services in promoting technology adoption YES (Extension and other community organizations) Others (please specify) YES Food availability in a much broader contest than suggested here, dealing with food but as well humane livelihoods ii) Physical and social access to food Involving communities in local power structures and safety net provision YES Best Practices in food distribution NO Storage facilities-options for remote areas and poor communities YES Others (please specify) YES Community food security and importance of middlemen. iii) Economic access to food Self employment, wage employment and income generation (evidence of structural problems) YES i)

105

Livelihood patterns and coping strategies for communities as well as for individuals and families YES Price stabilization, market integration and consumer welfare YES (investigation the role of middlemen and large farm to consumer caps in prices, and syndicates and cartels) Others (please specify) NO iv) Utilization of food for nutrition Food contamination and adulteration NO Food composition tables with specific reference to indigenous Foods NO Institutionalization and capacity building of street food systems NO Others (please specify) YES Food security, different than suggested by official statistics (figure is double the official number) need proper surveys for measuring food consumption v) Cross cutting ad overarching themes Transparency and accountability of institutions related to food security YES Issues of measurement of food security, vulnerability and Poverty YES (Not well done, especially within household consumption and food security) Power, transport, commercialization, irrigation and storage for food security NO Long term environmental degradation and food security YES Others (please specify) YES Structure of food markets and corruption, ways to address this problem. 5. Staff of the organization and classifications: The total full time employment of the firm is approximately 35. Composition includes: Director 4 Full time consultants 7 Part-time consultants 38 Senior researchers 11 Technical staff 6 Administrative 8 6. Publications of the organization (last two years): 2005 and 2006 Twenty major research publications. Many training and special reports that appear to be knock-offs from major published work. The 20 research reports during the last two years are in fact research reports from projects. 7. Three important research projects on food security completed during the last two years: “Study of the people (particularly poor, landless and vulnerable) having livelihoods based on agriculture and marketing in the eastern cast region”, funded by CARE Bangladesh “Contract farming; political economy of tobacco cultivation and processing”, Funded by Nijera Kori “Baseline survey of prevalence of child labour in harmful work”, Funded by Save the Children Foundation “An assessment of the health and nutrition of women in the RMP nutrition pilot”, Funded by CARE Bangladesh.

106

8. Annual budget: 4 million USD 9. Collaborations with other organizations: Collaborations with approximately 45 international and domestic organizations, collaborators include to the World Bank to the Ministry of Education and Ministry of Health and Family Welfare in Bangladesh to CARE and other Bangladesh NGOs that are active in funding and developing joint projects with HDRC. 10. Names of past clients that we can contact about their satisfaction with your organization’s services, if any: Any of the collaborators, more related to the type of service you are going to be investigation. 11. CVs of major researchers: Not sent 12. Any other information on capacities of your organization relative to food security policy research that you wish to supply: We had a long discussion about this area, issues discussed include; food consumption surveys and accuracy—thinks that measures of food insecurity are grossly under reported, cartels and syndicates control imports and direct methods should be designed to address this—not the government policies to arrest “criminals”. One of the aspects of this approach should be to encourage smaller importers to generate competition. As well, he discussed middlemen and the delivery of food to the city and excessive margins. He feels that there are major supply side impacts on food security. Finally he feels that food security research should deal with a much broader approach to the problem emphasizing the total set of conditions on food insecure families. Note: No follow-up questionnaire completed.

107

Annex 5.14. Bangladesh Foundation for Development Research 1. Name of the organization: Bangladesh Foundation for Development Research. We visited with Dr. Monaem Sarker, Director General, Ambassador M Faruquue Mohammed, Board Member, Advocate, Bangladesh Supreme Court, Syed Ahmod, Board Member, and several of the staff of the Foundation. 2. Affiliation of the organization: This is a private foundation with a reasonable (see below) endowment that does work to bring major cultural, governance and social issues to the forefront in Bangladesh. The name “think tank” was used several times to describe the organization. 3. Brief history of the organization: The Bangladesh Foundation for Development Research was founded to help fill an acknowledged gap, in country, the dearth of basic research relating to various aspects of society and life. It is only knowledge based on fundamental research which can open the doors of development for the nation besides giving a sense of direction. Based on this realization, in the Silver Jubilee year of independence (1996) and the war of liberation, an initiative was taken for establishing the Bangladesh Foundation for Development Research (BFDR). BFDR is the research organization built on individual initiatives, and is run by independent voluntary participation. BFDR is a leading non-profit public policy research “think tank”, founded by intellectuals, academics, public figures, social activists, human rights activists, institutions of higher learning, business leaders, representatives of women’s’ NGOs and minority community members of Bangladesh. The objective of the Foundation is to aid and encourage the formulation of policies for the creation of a strong, prosperous, and secular Bangladesh. Policies that result from rigorous, debate and a synthesis of divergent but informed opinions. Areas of focus will be development issues, a safer world and global concerns. 4. Research areas relative to the NFPCSP thematic areas: Cross cutting and Overarching Themes The Foundation does not focus on food security policy, but with little funding could develop an effort in the general area of along the lines of one of the themes. Will not repeat the questions and answers. The Program of the Foundation has several features i) The development of thematic maps related to refugee camps, resistance camps ad the Mujibnagar Government. These are now a part of the history of the Foundation. A possible idea would be to work with the Foundation to do a map or set of maps on food security.

ii) Publication of policy consensus on major issues. These begin with a grant form a donor to address a critical policy issue. Papers are prepared and presented to a conference on the issue. The conference is high level and attracts attention by virtue of the members of the Foundation and their presence. Out of the conference comes a consensus piece prepared in many cases by the director. iii) Videos on major policy issues that developed and are presented on national television, and available as distributed by the Foundation. The areas are again developed by a donor coming to the foundation and making a deal on

108

the subject and conditions of inquiry related to the governance structure of the Foundation. iv) The Foundation also publishes a magazine on a weekly basis that has a circulation of about 2000. This is down from earlier levels of circulation near 10,000. It is a literary magazine with in depth pieces about current policy issues. They as well have a web page, www.bfdr-bd.com, which is used for disseminating findings of their research activities. 5. Staff of the organization and classifications: The organization has a small core staff, the Director, an assistant director, and up to five support staff. Specifically, Director 1 Assistant Director 1 Support staff 4 Administrative 1 When projects come they increase the staff by hiring professionals and support staff to engage in the related work. These professionals come from universities and other walks of life. 6. Publications of the organization; Weekly magazine, Consensus reports (abut two per year), Videos (about one per year). 7. Three important pieces on food security completed within the last two years: None. 8. Annual budget of the organization: This is a foundation with an endowment which is approximately, 6 million Taka. This is augmented by contributions from the Trustees (contributing 100,000 Taka or more), and donors who give up to 10,000 Taka. The core operations of the foundation run on proceeds from contributions and interest from the endowment. 9. Collaborations with other organizations: Really no systematic coordination, only when groups come to support a policy analysis and dialogue. 10. Names of clients that we could contact about their satisfaction with your services: Any of the organizations that have supported the activities of the Foundation. 11. CVs of major researchers: Dr. Monaem Sarker, Director General. Any other information on capacities of your organization relative to food security that you wish to supply: Interested in being a part of the food security project even though the Foundation does not do basic research.

109

National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme
Bangladesh Foundation for Development Research Follow-Up Questionnaire FAO Survey of Organizations Undertaking Food Security Policy Research Thank you in advance for making the effort to complete this questionnaire.

1. Publications during the LAST TWO years (2005/6 to 2006/7) by the following classifications. Type of Publication Number Refereed publications (Journal articles, Thirty three books and chapters in books) Research reports (summarizing results Seven of particular projects) All other publications Five monograms

2. Current staff of your organization by degree status. Staff of your organization Full-Time Number One Six Six Part-Time Number Three Eight Six

Ph.D or equivalent Degree holders Masters Degree holders All other staff

3.Emphasis in research areas. Give 10 points to each dimension that you check, and then allocate the total number of points generated by your selections to the areas selected to reflect emphasis. For example if you select two areas, the total points would be 20, and you would allocate them among the two selected, perhaps 14 to one and 6 to the other. Research focus relative to NFPCSP Dimensions Allocation of Total Research dimensions selected/generating Points based on Total Points research emphasis Food Availability Physical and social access to food Economic access to food Utilization of food for nutrition Cross cutting and overarching areas 20 Other, please specify 20 TOTAL POINTS

110

4. Assume the availability of a new project in each of the areas selected above (in question # 3). Please give the name of another research organization in Bangladesh that you could recommend, if for some reason your organization could not undertake the project. Research focus relative to Name of organization that you would NFPCSP theme areas recommend Food availability Physical and social access to food Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) Economic access to food Bangladesh Enterprise Institute(BEI) Utilization of food for nutrition BNPS, Name Mrs. Rokeya Kabir’s Organization Cross cutting and overarching PRIP-Trust, Name Aroma Dytta’s Organization themes Others, please specify Unnayan Samannay, Dr. Atiur Rahman’s Organization)

5. Please give the name and address of ONE NATIONAL AND ONE INTERNATIONAL organization that we can contact related to their satisfaction with your organization’s services. Reference organization for your Name and address of organization

111

Annex 5.14. Centre for Policy Dialogue 1. Name: of organization: Centre for Policy Dialogue, We visited with Uttam Kumar Deb, Senior Research Fellow. 2. Affiliation of the organization: Private Institute, funded by foundations, endowments, research contracts and overhead. 3. Brief history of the organization: The Centre for Policy Dialogue (CPD), established in 1993 with support from leading civil society institutions in Bangladesh, is mandated by its Deed of Trust to service the growing demand that originates from the emerging civil society of Bangladesh for a more participatory and accountable development processes. CPD seeks to address this felt need by way of organizing multi stakeholder consultations, by conducting research on issues of critical national and regional interests, dissemination of knowledge and information on key developmental issues, and by influencing the policy making process in the country. CPD strives to bridge the gap between empirical research and policy advocacy through a sustained effort in public policy analysis. CPD endeavors to create a national environment conducive to open public discussion on important policy issues with a view to ensuring domestic ownership over the policy agenda and also building a broad-based support for such policies. Over the past 12 years CPD has emerged as Bangladesh's premier think-tank and has established its credibility as one of the very few places in Bangladesh where the government and opposition political parties agree to sit around the dialogue table and conduct an informed discussion with the civil society. CPD’s civil activism in policy related areas is operationalized through various means which are implemented through concrete activities. These include knowledge generation through research and analysis, policy awareness raising, policy influencing and capacity building. Specifically, the CPD has 8 programme areas which include: Independent Review of Bangladesh development, trade development and capacity development, agriculture and rural development, ecosystems and environment, social sectors, regional cooperation and governance. The Centre is a broad based policy dialogue and organization with research and other more active forms of involvement in policy debate. The focus in terms of economics is the total economy, and food security is important to the Centre programs because food is a major national issue in Bangladesh. It produces a volume called “State of the Bangladesh Economy in FY 2005-06 and Outlook for FY 2006-07” which details the issues on which it is focused and relates them to food security as well as other major issues. 4. Research Focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: The organization focuses on three of the themes set out in the NFPCSP needs paper. These are food availability, physical and social access to food and economic access to food. There is little work on utilization of food. Work is underway on several of the cross cut areas. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: (Tick) i) Food availability Accessibility of inputs for food production Land use patterns and long term implications for food security YES YES

112

Effectiveness of Extension services in promoting technology adoption NO Others (please specify) YES Research on imports and exports of food and on domestic versus international pricing. ii) Physical and social access to food Involving communities in local power structures and safety net provision Best practices in food distribution programs Storage facilities: options for remote areas and poor communities Others (please specify)

NO YES NO NO

iii) Economic access to food Self-employment, wage employment and income generation NO Livelihood patterns and coping strategies of the ultra-poor, including disadvantaged group NO Price stabilization, market integration and consumer welfare NO Others (please specify) Yes, imports and market integration iv) Utilization of food for nutrition Food contamination and food adulteration Food composition tables with specific reference to indigenous foods Institutionalization and capacity building of street food systems Others (please specify) YES NO NO YES

v) Cross cutting and overarching themes Transparency of policies and accountability of institutions related to food security YES Issues in measurement of food security, vulnerability and poverty YES Power, transport, commercialization, irrigation and storage for food security YES Long term environmental degradation and food security YES Others (please specify) NO 5. Staff organization and classification: The Centre has about 50 staff members of which about 28-30 are involved in research. The remaining employees are support staff involved for example, in setting up dialogue meetings, web page management and clerical work. 4. Publications of the organization: We received copies of publications lists for JulyDecember 2006 and January-August 2007. These lists include; Five journal articles, 7 books, 15 book chapters, 16 research reports, 7 dialogue reports. Other papers including conference proceedings, occasional papers, policy briefs and newspaper articles added to approximately 46. 7. Three or more important research projects on food security completed during the past three years: Technical Report “Dynamics of Livelihood Systems in Rural Bangladesh; Generation of Information Facilitating Dialogue on Strategies and Policies Pertaining to Elimination of Poverty”, Mahabub Hossain, presented to the Poverty Elimination Through Rice Research Assistance (PETRRA), IRRI, Dhaka, Bangladesh. “Dhaka Declaration 2005 for Advancing LDC Interests in the Sixth WTO Ministerial”, Organized by the Centre for Policy Dialogue--various publications. “The Poverty Reduction Strategy for Bangladesh: Review of the Finalization Process and Interim Measures”, Deb, Uttam Kumar et al,; in Revisiting Foreign Aid: a Review of Bangladesh’s Development. Dhaka: University Press Ltd., 2003.

113

“Sorghum Genetic Enhancement; Research Processes, Dissemination and Impacts”, Bantilan, M.C.S. (eds.), ICRISAT, 2004 “Impacts of the Hong Kong Declaration on Bangladesh Agriculture: Impacts: an ExAnte Analysis” Deb, U.K., and Das N. C. The Cost and Management, 34(4) 2006. 8. Annual Budget: Not supplied 9. Collaborations and networking with other organizations: CPD has undertaken collaborative research with Ministries of (less developed countries within the region) LDCs, IRRI, ICRISAT, BARI, DFID, FAO, CGIAR and the UNDP, Network of Economic Research Institutes. This is an organization that knows how to collaborate and used this mechanism in its regular research and other programs. 10. Names of past clients: LDCs, IRRI, ICRISAT, BARI, DFID, FAO, CGIAR and the UNDP, Network of Economic Research Institutes. 11. CVs of major researchers: Not supplied. 12. Any other information we did not ask for that is of importance: Interviewers comment, this is an organization with active researchers who publish but as well are involved in policy dialogue. They understand the major issues involving food security and have a research program that addresses them regularly. The researcher that we met was highly involved in research and dialogue on major food policy issues. CPD also publishes a “Quarterly” that contains write ups of activities of the Center, meetings policy dialogue events, press briefings, activities of personnel overseas, research division reports, key publications and other matters of interest.

114

National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme
CPD Follow-Up Questionnaire FAO Survey of Organizations Undertaking Food Security Policy Research

Thank you in advance for making the effort to complete this questionnaire. 1. Publications during the LAST TWO years (July 2006 to August 2007) by the following classifications. Type of Publication Number Refereed publications (journal articles, 27 books and chapters in books) Research reports (summarizing results 23 of particular projects) All other publications 46 2. Current staff of your organization by degree status. Staff of your organization Full-Time Number Ph.D or equivalent Degree holders Masters Degree holders All other staff 5 35 10

Part-Time Number

3. Emphasis in research areas. Give 10 points to each dimension that you check, and then allocate the total number of points generated by your selections to the areas selected to reflect emphasis. For example if you select two areas, the total points would be 20, and you would allocate them among the two selected, perhaps 14 to one and 6 to the other. Research focus relative to Dimensions NFPCSP Research dimensions selected/generating Total Points Food Availability 10 Physical and social access to food Economic access to food 10 Utilization of food for nutrition Cross cutting and overarching areas 10 Other, please specify TOTAL POINTS 30 Allocation of Total Points based on research emphasis 7 8 15 30

115

4. Assume the availability of a new project in each of the areas selected above (in question # 3). Please give the name of another research organization in Bangladesh that you could recommend, if for some reason your organization could not undertake the project. Research focus relative to NFPCSP Name of organization that you would theme areas recommend Food availability Physical and social access to food Economic access to food Utilization of food for nutrition Cross cutting and overarching themes Others, please specify

5. Please give the name and address of ONE NATIONAL AND ONE INTERNATIONAL organization that we can contact related to their satisfaction with your organization’s services. Reference for your organization National International Name and address of organization Not Applicable Social Sciences Division, International Rice Research Institute (IRRI)

116

Annex 5.15. Unnayan Shamanny: An Organization for Research, Development and Culture 1. Name of the organization: Unnayan Shamannay. We visited with the Director, Dr. Atiur Rahman, a very well known economist. 2. Affiliation of the organization: It is an NGO but with but organized differently than other NGOs as a not-for-profit private firm. 3. Brief History of the organization: Unnayan Shamannay denotes coordination of development activities, not in the narrow sense, but in the wider context of all aspects of a living society and human race—reckoning with all the quantifiable and qualitative actions a society carries out. The members of Unnayan Shamannay have been striving to invigorate and further strengthen private sector initiatives for socioeconomic and cultural development of Bangladesh through a concentrated grass roots approach. The Institute is an innovative non-profit research organization of resourceful professionals working in the area of research and development. It is engaged in quantitative and qualitative research work, training, communication and advocacy cultural learning, and development activities. The organization was incorporated in July 1994 under the Companies Act, 1913 (section 26) with the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies under the Ministry of Commerce, Government of Bangladesh. Unnayan Shamannay was conceived in the light of a felt need for an alternative socio-economic trend, a trend that encompasses the struggle for survival thriving on the creative talent of the people. This trend does not seek to depict the country as poverty ridden. Rather is seeks to uphold the country as a free and resilient entity, demonstrating creativity and innovation that is inherent in its cultural legacy. It attempts to delve into this ingenious force, establish a linkage of the well-endowed heritage to the present and understanding the future trend of development in a finer context. 4. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: i) Food availability - Accessibility of inputs for food production YES - Land use patterns and long term implications for food security YES - Effectiveness of Extension services in promoting technology adoption NO - Others (please specify) YES-supply and demand for food ii) Physical and social access to food - Involving communities in local power structures and safety net provision NO - Best practices in food distribution programs YES - Storage facilities: options for remote areas and poor communities NO - Others (please specify) NO iii) Economic access to food - Self-employment, wage employment and income generation NO - Livelihood patterns and coping strategies of the ultra-poor, including disadvantaged group NO - Price stabilization, market integration and consumer welfare NO - Others (please specify) YES-food quality and consumer welfare iv) Utilization of food for nutrition

117

-

Food contamination and food adulteration YES Food composition tables with specific reference to indigenous foods NO Institutionalization and capacity building of street food systems NO Others (please specify) YES, Nutrition and consumer welfare

v) Cross cutting and overarching themes - Transparency of policies and accountability of institutions related to food security YES - Issues in measurement of food security, vulnerability and poverty YES - Power, transport, commercialization, irrigation and storage for food security YES - Long term environmental degradation and food security YES - Others (please specify) YES, Poverty alleviation 5. Staff of the organization and classifications: One senior staff person with (approximately 25) consultants as part time senior staff, 24 research assistants with MS degrees (from within and outside the country). 6. Publications of the organization: Research reports from 2005 forward till 2007, approximately 21. Chapters in books, 2 since 2004. Books in Bangla, 8 since 2004. Journal Articles English, 4 since 2004. Journal Articles Bangla 2 since 2004. Many public presentations mostly by Dr. Atiur Rahmam. 7. Three important research projects on food security completed during the last two years: “Peoples Report 204-2005, Bangladesh Environment”, Atiur Rahman and Mahoob Hassan, Funded by the Ministry of Environment, UNDP and Unnayan Shamannay, A comprehensive baseline on environment and its relation to the economy and poverty, urbanization, and demographics with a focus on particular troublesome issues, funded by . River and Life; Char lands Food Security Project, funded by CARE Review of the WFP Programmes, funded by WFP 8. Annual budget: Approximately two million Taka 9. Collaborations with other organizations in completing research projects on food security: Approximately 30 international and domestic organizations. Includes donors, private sector and organizations representing advocacy groups (e.g. Grameen Trust, International Labor Organization) 10. Names of past clients that we can contact about their satisfaction with your organizations services: Any of the representatives of the of organizations that the Institute works with or has worked with, e.g. UNDP, World Bank, WHO, United Nations Children’s Fund, Plan Bangladesh, Rural Electrification Board, Research Initiative Bangladesh. 11. CVs of major researchers: The CV of Dr. Atiur Rahman is available in the summary of details on the organization. He is the major full time researcher in the organization. 12. Any other information on capacities of your organization relative to food security that you wish to supply:

118

The role of the organization in advocacy was stressed. Access to public media was stressed the organization has a strong record here. Environmental report should not be lost in the assessment of this organization’s capacities; it is the only biennial baseline in the country on environmental conditions and focuses to a large extent on poverty and impacts of environmental degradation on the poor.

119

National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme
Unnayan Shamanay Follow-Up Questionnaire FAO Survey of Organizations Undertaking Food Security Policy Research

Thank you in advance for making the effort to complete this questionnaire.

1. Publications during the LAST TWO years (2005/6 to 2006/7) by the following classifications. Type of Publication Number Refereed publications (journal articles, 16 books and chapters in books Research reports(summarizing results of 21 particular projects) All other publications 30

2. Current staff of your organization by degree status. Staff of your organization Full-Time Number Ph.D or equivalent Degree holders Masters Degree holders All other staff 24 15

Part-Time Number 4 40 -

3. Emphasis in research areas. In the attached document that includes the profile of your organization, we have recorded your responses to the items from the research themes as part of the survey instrument. They are recorded “YES” and “NO” to reflect whether or not you responded that your organization has research capacity and a record of work in the specific areas. First, review the areas and the indications to be sure they are correct. If not, change them to better reflect your organization’s capacity and history of research. Give 10 points to each dimension that you check, and then allocate the total number of points generated by your selections to the areas selected to reflect emphasis. For example if you select two areas, the total points would be 20, and you would allocate them among the two selected, perhaps 14 to one and 6 to the other.

120

Research focus relative to NFPCSP Research dimensions Food Availability Physical and social access to food Economic access to food Utilization of food for nutrition Cross cutting and overarching areas Other, please specify TOTAL POINTS

Dimensions selected/generating Total Points 10 10 10 -10 -40

Allocation of Total Points based on research emphasis 05 12 15 -08 -40

4. Assume the availability of a new project in each of the areas selected above (in question # 3). Please give the name of another research organization in Bangladesh that you could recommend, if for some reason your organization could not undertake the project. Research focus relative to NFPCSP Name of organization that you would theme areas recommend Food availability BIDS Physical and social access to food Economic access to food Utilization of food for nutrition Cross cutting and overarching themes Others, please specify PPRC BIDS CPD

5.Please give the name and address of ONE NATIONAL AND ONE INTERNATIONAL organization that we can contact related to their satisfaction with you organizations services. Reference for your organization National Name and address of organization Concern Worldwide Bangladesh House: 58, 1st lane, Kalabagan Dhaka- 1205, Bangladesh. Tel:88-02-8112795, 88-02-8115972 Fx880-2-8113693 CUTS- India D-217,Bhaskar Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur 302016, India.Fx91.141.2282485 Website: www.cuts-international.org

International

121

Annex 5.16. Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) 1. Name of the organization: Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP). We met with Dr. Qazi Kholiquzzaman Ahmad, Chairman ( and President of the Bangladesh Economic Association) and Dr. Jadab Chandra Saha, Executive Director. 2. Affiliation of the organization: Private Not-for-Profit. 3. Brief History of the Organization: The Bangladesh Unnayan Parishad (BUP) is a non-profit organization devoted to the promotion of basic as well as action research on socioeconomic development and environment. It was established in 1980 and is registered with the Government of Bangladesh under the Societies Act 1860. In the field of development research and dialogue activities, the BUP has played the pioneering role in this country. When it was established in 1980, it was virtually the first of its kind in the country and represented a new vision, it has conducted many seminal research works on key national development issues and played a key role in popularizing roundtable discussions and dialogues on important issues of policy relevance. It has also pioneered public opinion research in Bangladesh, initiating this activity in 1994. Nationally and internationally, the organization is usually known as BUP, which is the abbreviation of its full name. It is now well-established as a leading think-tank of Bangladesh. The BUP’s research areas include a wide range of issues relating to sustainable development, covering social, economic, environmental and cultural aspects of development efforts. It has also earned wide recognition for its planning forum which organizes policy debates on not only national issues but also regional and international issues. The BUP is governed by its own constitution and managed by an executive Board with the Chairman as its Chief Executive. Dr. Q. A. Ahmad an economist and development thinker of international repute is the current Chairman of the BUP. He vision that inspirits BUP’s work is the vision of Bangladesh as a democratic, economically self reliant, just, and vibrant society in which every citizen will have access to opportunities for achieving their full human potential in an environment of individual and collective security. Internationally, it envisages a sustainable and equitable goal as the collective broad goal of humanity. Core research and related activities are organized within the framework of three thrusts: Economic and Social policy Research, Water and Environment, and Social Opinion Analysis. The organization publishes two journals, “Unnayan Bitarka” (Development Dialogue) since 1981 and “Asia Pacific Journal on Environment and Development” since 1994. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: i) Food availability, Accessibility of inputs for food production YES Land use patterns and long term implications for food security YES Especially for the poor is a special area of attention Effectiveness of Extension service in promoting technology adoption NO Others (please specify) YES National and regional issues related to inputs for example irrigation and power.

ii) Physical and social access to food Involving communities in local power structures and safety net provision

NO

122

Best practices for food distribution programmes YES Storage facilities-options for remote and poor communities NO Others (please specify) YES, micro credit and food security iii) Economic access to food Self employment, wage employment and income generation livelihood patterns and coping strategies of the ultra poor Price stabilization, market integration and consumer welfare The non functioning of domestic markets. Others (please specify) iv) Utilization of food for nutrition YES NO YES NO

No work in these areas

v) Cross cutting and overarching themes Transparency of policies and accountability of institutions relates to food policy YES Issues of measurement of food insecurity and poverty YES Power, transport, commercialization, irrigation and storage for food security YES Long term environmental degradation and food security YES Others (please specify) Indian Rivers project and implications for Bangladesh and food production (forthcoming book). 5. Staff of the organization and classifications: One director or chairman, 20 senior researchers, 17 support staff. 6. Publications of the organization (last two years): The BUP has many publications as an institute ranging from dialogue reports to press releases to research reports to journal articles. From the Chairman’s vita for example there are approximately 20 since 2004. Three important research projects completed during the last two years in one of the five theme areas designated above: “Socio-Economic and Indebtedness-Related Impact of Micro-Credit in Bangladesh”, University Press ltd.(UPL), Dhaka, January, 2007. “Climate Change, Flood and Flood Management 7. Annual budget: Approximately 25 million Taka. 8. Collaborations with other organizations in completing food security policy research projects: Approximately 35 national and international organizations, including donors, NGOs, government and foundations. 9. Names of past clients that we can contact about their satisfaction with your organizations services: Any of the list of institutions supplied can be contacted. 10. CVs of major researchers: Received CV of the Chairman 11. Any other information on capacities of your organization that you wish to supply: The importance and significance of the public opinion survey unit (the Gallop poll of Bangladesh). These surveys take place regularly every year and include approximately 15,00 sample respondents. Special surveys are also conducted. Note: Follow-up questionnaire not provided

123

Annex 5.17. Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC) 1. Name of the organization: Power and Participation Research Centre (PPRC). We visited with Hossain Zillur Rahman, Executive Chairman of the PPRC. 2. Affiliation of the organization: Private NGO. 3. Brief history of the organization: The PPRC, established in 1996, is an independent, not-for-profit Centre for research and social action. The Centre strives to develop a holistic approach towards issues of development, knowledge management, and citizen empowerment. PPRC places particular emphasis on evidence-based policy formulation and values a pro-active approach towards building Southern voices in the global discourse. The major focus of the Centre’s activities and programs pertain to the intellectual and cultural heritage of Bangladesh and its people, as well as their capability to cope with the problems and issues of the past, present and future. A key goal of the Centre is to assist in the development of a research culture which values excellence and relevance. PPRC has a specific focus on young researchers. PPRC sees its own growth as an exercise in institution-building and adopts the motto of “relevant research for relevant action”. Food security research and policy is seen particularly, in a broad sense by the research efforts of PPRC. 4. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: ii) Food availability Access of inputs for food production Land use patterns and long term implications for food security Effectiveness of Extension services in promoting adoption Others, please specify: Physical and social access to food Involving communities in local power structures and safety net provision Best practices in food distribution Storage facilities; options for remote areas and poor communities Others, please specify YES YES NO

x)

YES NO NO NO

xi)

Economic access--all areas here Self-employment, wage employment and income generation YES Livelihood patterns and coping strategies of the ultra poor YES Price stabilization, market integration and consumer welfare YES Others, please specify YES, micro credit and development iv) Utilization of food for nutrition Food contamination and food adulteration Food composition tables with specific reference to indigenous foods Institutionalization and capacity building of street food systems Others, please specify NO NO NO NO

xii)

xiii)

Cross cutting and overarching themes Transparency of policies and accountability of institutions related to food security YES Issues in measurement of food security, vulnerability and poverty YES Power, transport, commercialization Irrigation and storage for food security NO

124

Long term environmental degradation and food security YES Others, please specify YES Governance on local communities and its importance to food security and other forms of economic and social security 5. Staff of the organization and classifications: 6. Publications of the organization: 7. Three important research projects completed during the last two years in one of the five areas designated above: “Local Business Dynamics; Ground Realities and Policy Changes”, PPRC and KATALYST, 2006 “Unbundling Governance; Indices, Institutions, Processes and Solutions”, PPRC 2007 “Bangladesh 2015; Crossing Miles”, Outcome of a Consultation Exercise for the Conference, Asia 2015: Promoting Growth, Ending Poverty. London, England, 2007 8. Annual budget: US$ 250,000 9. Collaborations with other organizations in completing research projects: 10. Names of past clients that we can contact about their satisfaction with your organization’s services: 11. CVs of major researchers: 12. Any other information on capacities of your organization that you wish to supply: Research methods for doing community research. Action reach and public opinion efforts—advocacy. Governance from the bottom up not top down. Business and government interface and community strengthening. Methods for including the poor in economic activities within communities. Importance of leading the research agenda and developing value added within the institute

125

National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme
PPRC Follow-Up Questionnaire FAO Survey of Organizations Undertaking Food Security Policy Research

Thank you in advance for making the effort to complete this questionnaire.

1. Publications during the LAST TWO years (2005/6 to 2006/7) by the following classifications. Type of Publication Number Refereed publications (journal articles, books and chapters in books Research reports(summarizing results of particular projects) All other publications

2. Current staff of your organization by degree status. Staff of your organization Full-Time Number Ph.D or equivalent Degree holders Masters Degree holders All other staff (Below graduate) 3. Emphasis in research areas. 2 18 5

Part-Time Number

In the attached document that includes the profile of your organization, we have recorded your responses to the items from the research themes as part of the survey instrument. They are recorded “YES” and “NO” to reflect whether or not you responded that your organization has research capacity and a record of work in the specific areas. First, review the areas and the indications to be sure they are correct. If not, change them to better reflect your organization’s capacity and history of research. Give 10 points to each dimension that you check, and then allocate the total number of points generated by your selections to the areas selected to reflect emphasis. For example if you select two areas, the total points would be 20, and you would allocate them among the two selected, perhaps 14 to one and 6 to the other.

126

Research focus relative to Dimensions NFPCSP Research dimensions selected/generating Total Points Food Availability 10 Physical and social access to 2.5 food Economic access to food 10 Utilization of food for nutrition 0 Cross cutting and overarching 8 areas Other, please specify 0 TOTAL POINTS 30.5

Allocation of Total Points based on research emphasis 20 4 20 16 60

4. Assume the availability of a new project in each of the areas selected above (in question # 3). Please give the name of another research organization in Bangladesh that you could recommend, if for some reason your organization could not undertake the project. Research focus relative to NFPCSP theme Name of organization that you would areas recommend Food availability CPD, PPRC, BIDS, BRAC, Physical and social access to food PPRC, BIDS, CARE, BRAC, Economic access to food PPRC, CPD, BIDS, Economic Research Group Unnuyon Sumonoy Utilization of food for nutrition ICCDRB, Helen-killer International Cross cutting and overarching themes PPRC, BIDS, CPD, Unnuyon Sumonoy Economic Research Group, BRAC Others, please specify 5. Please give the name and address of ONE NATIONAL AND ONE INTERNATIONAL organization that we can contact related to their satisfaction with you organizations services. Reference for your organization Name and address of organization National PKSF, Bangladesh, Grameen Bank International DFID, World Bank, ADB (Bangladesh)

127

Annex 5.18. Centre for Agriresearch Entrepreneurship Development (CASEED) 1. Name of the organization:

and

Sustainable

Environment

and

Centre for Agriresearch and Sustainable Environment and Entrepreneurship. We visited with Chairman Prof. Dr. Zahurul Karin, Chairman, Md. Abu Bakar, Executive, Director, Dr. Mohanned Kamal Hossain, Researcher, and nine other people from the Centre. 2. Affiliation of the Organization: NGO. 3. Brief history of the Organization: CASEED was established as a private sector, not for profit, institution under the Companies Act of 1994 and is managed by an impendent Board of Directors. Bangladesh derided as a basket case only three decades ago is now near self sufficiency in food grains. Fish and animal production is increasing but it far below the nation’s requirements. Public sector research institutes have been in the process of technology generation. Many of the technologies generated by such organizations are not demand led and not rightly sustainable to endemic and socio-economic situations. There remains a gap between user’s demand and public sector technology development. Many private enterprises, NGOs and other individuals are now in agribusiness. Packages of technology on production, handling, processing, grading, improved measures for sanitary and phyto-sanitary standards etc. are essentially required to boost agribusiness development in the country. The country is already experiencing various environmental vulnerabilities like floods, droughts, cyclones sea level rise and other climatic change related threats to food security. Bangladesh has, in fact, become a severe environmentally vulnerable nation posing threats to livelihood, food security, housing and public health. Little support is provided by few public sector research and development institutions in Bangladesh on poverty alleviation. Private organizations play an important role in between the users and the researchers by screening, improving and packaging of promising technologies through participatory action research. However, no private sector institution is yet to come up to support the entrepreneurs with marketable and hands-on technologies. CASEED bridges this gap. Its objective is to help improve peoples living and working conditions, sustain the natural resource base, increase productivity, generate income and improve access to food with more care and promotion of the environment. It has applied research programs, training, demonstration projects, entrepreneurial development, and sustainable environmental technology introduction programs. 4. Research focus relative to NFPCSP theme areas: i) Food availability Access to inputs for food production YES An area of concentration, inputs in “packages” with appropriate technology. Land use patterns and long term implications for food security YES Environmental implications. Effectiveness of Extension services in promoting technology adoption YES Community groups working with Extension in fostering adoption of improved and sustainable technologies. Others (please specify) YES Working with landless farmers to make their lives improved and linking them to larger enterprises. Physical and social access to food Improving community’s local power structures and safety nets provision YES

ii)

128

Much of the work of the CASEED is with local communities. Best practices for food distribution programs YES Linkages to production systems. Storage facilities-options for remote areas and poor communities NO Others (please specify) YES Processing of foods to make the distribution throughout the year more appropriate and to generate income, and growing fish in complete systems that handle distribution and processing. iv) Economic access to food Self-employment, wage employment and income generation YES Major emphasis on income generation in production systems developed and integrated into agriculture, cooperatives and other structures to link farmers together. Livelihood patters and coping strategies for ultra poor YES Especially low income and landless farmers. Price stabilization, market integration and consumer welfare NO Others (please specify) YES Special projects on food distribution systems, reducing the gap between farm prices and retail prices by developing processing and distribution systems. Utilization of food for nutrition Food contamination and adulteration YES By introducing processing and larger facilities (slaughter house for example that is ISO certified) as ways to improve food safety. Food composition tables with specific reference to indigenous foods YES Institutionalization and capacity building of street food systems YES Capacity building with attention to street foods and their production and delivery, Others (please specify) NO Cross cutting and overarching themes Transparency of policies and accountability of institutions related to food security YES Issues of measurement of food security, vulnerability and poverty YES Power, transport, commercialization, irrigation, and storage for food Security NO Long term environmental degradation and food security YES Including development of data bases that provide indications of soil and other conditions.

v)

vi)

5. Staff of the organization and classifications; Three hundred professionals to call on all with expertise in agriculture broadly defined and including environment. One Director, six fulltime senior professionals, five support staff 6. Publications of the organization: 7. Three important research projects on food security completed during the last two years: 8. Annual budget: Approximately 2 million Taka. 9. Collaborations with other organizations completing research projects on food security: 10. Names of past clients that we can contact about their satisfaction with your organizations services:

129

11. CVs of major researchers: not given 12. Any other information on capacities of your organization relative to food security policy that you wish to supply: This is an organization that works closely with NGOs providing technical and related advice to them in field operations. The niche is an interesting avenue for support of the development of a sustainable agriculture in Bangladesh, and has important leverage on the capacities of the NGOs. They have the energy and commitment and the CASEED has the handle on proper technologies to consider and related sustainability considerations.

130

National Food Policy Capacity Strengthening Programme
CASEED Follow-Up Questionnaire FAO Survey of Organizations Undertaking Food Security Policy Research

Thank you in advance for making the effort to complete this questionnaire.

1. Publications during the LAST TWO years (2005/6 to 2006/7) by the following classifications. Type of Publication Refereed publications (journal articles, books and chapters in books Research reports(summarizing results of particular projects) All other publications Number CASEED was established in 2006 and got Government Registration in 2007. CASEED’s researchers of national and international reputations have publications preceding to 2007. A list of 10 (ten) publications of prominent researchers are annexed in attachment “A”.

2. Current staff of your organization by degree status. Staff of your organization Full-Time Number Ph.D or equivalent Degree holders Masters Degree holders All other staff 10 10 05

Part-Time Number 100 170 05

3. Emphasis in research areas. In the attached document that includes the profile of your organization, we have recorded your responses to the items from the research themes as part of the survey instrument. They are recorded “YES” and “NO” to reflect whether or not you responded that your organization has research capacity and a record of work in the specific areas. First, review the areas and the indications to be sure they are correct. If not, change them to better reflect your organization’s capacity and history of research. Give 10 points to each dimension that you check, and then allocate the total number of points generated by your selections to the areas selected to reflect emphasis. For

131

example if you select two areas, the total points would be 20, and you would allocate them among the two selected, perhaps 14 to one and 6 to the other. Research focus relative to Dimensions NFPCSP Research dimensions selected/generating Total Points Food Availability 10 Physical and social access to food 10 Economic access to food 10 Utilization of food for nutrition 10 Cross cutting and overarching areas 10 Other, please specify Included with each dimension TOTAL POINTS 50 Allocation of Total Points based on research emphasis 9 7 7 7 8 Included with each dimension 38

4. Assume the availability of a new project in each of the areas selected above (in question # 3). Please give the name of another research organization in Bangladesh that you could recommend, if for some reason your organization could not undertake the project. Research focus relative to Name of organization that you would NFPCSP theme areas recommend Food availability BAU-Res, BAU Mymensingh Physical and social access to food Economic access to food Utilization of food for nutrition Cross cutting and overarching themes Others, please specify BAU-Res, BAU Mymensingh BAU-Res, BAU Mymensingh BAU-Res, BAU Mymensingh BAU-Res, BAU Mymensingh BAU-Res, BAU Mymensingh

5. Please give the name and address of ONE NATIONAL AND ONE INTERNATIONAL organization that we can contact related to their satisfaction with you organizations services. Reference for your Name and address of organization organization National Micro Industries Development Assistance & Services (MIDAS), House-43, Road-16 (Old 27), Dhanmondi, Dhaka-1209, Bangladesh International Training and Technology Transfer (TTT) 111The Terrace, DB Tower, Level 9, P. O. Box 10-488, Wellington, New Zealand

132

Annex 5.19. DATA (Data Analysis and Technical Assistants) Ltd. 1. Name of the organization: DATA: Data Analysis and Technical Assistance Limited. Visit was tithe Md. Zahidul Hassan, Managing Director, and Md Zobair, Director. 2. Affiliation of the organization: It is a fully private institute that grew out of a relationship with IFPRI. It became a private company in 1994. 3. Brief history of the organization: DATA was founded in 1994 as a research consulting firm to apply its technical expertise in support of finding solutions to pressing social and economic challenges in Bangladesh. Its uniqueness as an organization stems from the honest devotion, efficiency and high quality work of its staff and the prioritization of client satisfaction over profit. DATA was founded by a select group of talents formerly employed by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI). These three senior directors have now accumulated over 48 years of collective experience and have contributed successfully, to much of the critical food security, agriculture, nutrition and poverty alleviation policy research conducted in Bangladesh over the past 16 years. With close ties to IFPRI and other internationally renowned research institutions, DATA’s excellent reputation has earned them contracts from various international organizations including The World Bank Programme (WBP), International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Tufts University Friedman School of Nutrition, MISEREOR, The Population Council, Save the Children (USA), and IRIS a center at the University of Maryland. Very few organizations in Bangladesh have devoted themselves to the collection and management of quality data for understanding the underlying socioeconomic issues in the country. People at DATA are committed to such an effort using state of the art survey methodologies and employing highly technical data management systems. This has been the key for DATA’s success over the past sixteen years, helping to produce many excellent research outputs that dealt with critical issues to foodsecurity and agricultural policies, poverty alleviation programs, nutrition, health and educational achievements of the people in the country. 4. Research focus relative to the NFPCSP theme areas: The record of DATA related more to the research mix than to complete research tasks. DATA combines with international and domestic research firms, NGOs and government to be a part of research projects that require primary data—data collected from surveys. The tasks of designing the survey instruments, data collection, clean-up, preparing files that are used by researchers and preliminary statistical analysis are the focus of their work. They have sets of trained enumerators, analysts that can take the survey schedules and convert them to data files, analysts that can handle the clean-up processes, data management experts and statistical analysts that can work with the research firms to do some of the analysis of the survey data. All of the areas identified by the themes are within the preview of DATA. The issue that DATA addresses is the need for primary data. It is of note that the firm does nutrition surveys and understands the subtleties of related surveying methods. 5. Staff of organization and classifications: There are 18 professionals working at DATA. Three are directors; the remaining core staff members are analysts. In addition they have a cadre of enumerators who work part time and receive necessary training for particular survey tasks. Finally they have

133

a string of food security consultants form universities and other organizations that they employ to assist with various analytical and specialized tasks. 6. Publications of the organization: The core staff members do not normally publish with the researchers who contract with them. The vitas which we assembled show occasional publications, but this is not seen as a part of their work. Eventually, they will likely have to develop a publication program related to the survey methods, experimental design and other data issues, but the firm is now not at this point in its existence. 7. Three important research projects on food security completed during the past two years: The DATA firm has an impressive set of current clients. We will list some of the research projects in which they are involved to indicate their scope and the research firms they serve: ° “Relative Efficiency of Food and Cash Transfers in Improving Food Security and Livelihoods of the Ultra-Poor in Bangladesh”, Funded by the WFP and the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Initiated May 2006, on going. ° “The long-term Impact of Anti-Poverty Interventions in Bangladesh”, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Initiated October 2006, on going. ° “Long-term Impact of Anti-Poverty Interventions in Bangladesh”, Funded by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), Sussex University and University of Bath, Initiated March 2007, on going ° “Developing Poverty Measurement Tools,” Funded by the IRIS at the University of Maryland and USAID, February through August 2004. ° “Baseline Study of Reaching Out-of –School Children in Bangladesh” Funded by the World Bank, January 20006 through August 2006. 8. Annual Budget: Approximately $200,000 USD 9. Collaborations with other organizations in completing research projects on food security: The DATA firm collaborates mostly with international research institutions, but is beginning to work with national institutions. Generally, they are subcontractors to the prim contractor doing the survey data and analysis work. The DATA firm contracts with local individuals not organizations to augment its staff at this point in time. 10. Names of past clients that we can contact about their satisfaction with your organization’s services: DATA provided us with a list of their past and current projects that includes names of the primary investigators and indicated that we could contact any of these people. The most complete list of any organization visited in this consultancy. 11. CVs of major researchers: The CVs of the two people we visited with are available. 12. Any other information on capacities of your organization relative to food security policy that you wish to supply. In projects funded by the NFPCSP that are going to require collection of data, it might be well to put the researchers in contact with the DATA firm, at least. More interventionist recommendation would be for the NFPCSP to insist that the researchers use the DATA firm unless they could demonstrate that they have alternative survey capacity that is as good or better. Note: No follow-up questionnaire provided.

134