Report of the Thirty-seventh Regular Meeting of the Executive Committee

(1)

San Jose, Costa Rica – 18-19 July 2017

98 ENG

INTER-AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR COOPERATION ON AGRICULTURE Headquarters / P.O. Box: 55-2200 San Jose,

Vazquez de Coronado, San Isidro 11101, Costa Rica Phone: (+506) 2216-0222 / Fax: (+506) 2216-0233

E-mail: iicahq@iica.int / Web site: www.iica.int

REPORT OF THE THIRTY-SEVENTH

REGULAR MEETING OF THE

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS SERIES No. 98

(2)

What is IICA?

More than 70 years ago, a group of visionaries recognized the need to create an agency specializing in agriculture for the American continent, with a purpose that still remains valid today: to promote agricultural development and rural well-being in this region.

As a result, the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA) was born. Throughout this time, the Institute has succeeded in identifying challenges and opportunities and, most importantly, evolving into an international technical cooperation organization that permanently responds to the new demands of the agricultural sector.

Our mission is to encourage, promote and support our Member States in their efforts to achieve agricultural development and rural well-being through international technical cooperation of excellence.

In partnership with our Member States, our vision is to create a competitive, inclusive and sustainable inter-American agriculture that feeds the hemisphere and the world, while at the same time generating opportunities to reduce hunger and poverty among farmers and rural dwellers.

We provide cooperation by working closely and continuously with our 34 Member States, addressing their needs in a timely manner. Our most valuable asset is undoubtedly the close relationship we nurture with the beneficiaries of our work.

We have a wealth of experience in areas such as technology and innovation for agriculture, agricultural health and food safety, agribusiness, agricultural trade, rural development, natural resource management and training.

We are also committed to achieving results. Our 2014-2018 Medium Term Plan contributes to the evolution of our technical cooperation model with the aim of consolidating IICA as an organization geared toward accomplishing concrete and visible results. We work to facilitate the positive changes that our Member States wish to achieve in their agricultural and rural sectors.

(3)

REPORT OF THE THIRTY-SEVENTH

REGULAR MEETING OF THE

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

(4)

Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA), 2017

Report of the Thirty-seventh Regular Meeting of the Executive Committee by IICA is published under license Creative Commons

Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO (CC-BY-SA 3.0 IGO) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/igo/)

Based on a work at www.iica.int

IICA encourages the fair use of this document. Proper citation is requested.

This publication is also available in electronic (PDF) format from the Institute’s Web site: http://www.iica.int

Editorial coordination: Patricia Ross and Katia Núñez. Translator: Laura Moya y Elizabeth Lewis.

Layout: Karla Cruz. Cover design: Karla Cruz. Printed: IICA Print Shop.

San Jose, Costa Rica 2017

Report of the Thirty-seventh Regular Meeting of the Executive Committee / Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture – San Jose, C.R. : IICA, 2017.

103 p. ; 21x16 cm. – (Official Documents Series / IICA, ISSN 1018-5704; no. 98)

ISBN: 978-92-9248-711-9

Published also in Spanish, French and Portuguese

1. International Cooperation 2. International Organizations 3. Technical Assistance I. IICA II. Title III. Series

AGRIS DEWEY

(5)

(6)

(7)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

MINUTES OF THE MEETING ...7

Preparatory Session …………...9

First Plenary Session…………...15

Second Plenary Session………… ...29

Third Plenary Session …………...37

Fourth Plenary Session …………...43

Closing Session………...51

RESOLUTIONS ...53

SIGNING OF THE REPORT...79

ANNEXES ...83

Annex 1. Agenda………...85

Annex 2. List of participants ...89

(8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

IICA/CE/ACTA-37 (XXXVII-O/17) 18-19 July 2017 Original: Spanish

MINUTES OF THE THIRTY-SEVENTH REGULAR MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE INTER-AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR

COOPERATION ON AGRICULTURE (IICA)

The Thirty-seventh Regular Meeting of the Executive Committee of the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA) was held in accordance with the provisions of the Rules of Procedure of the Executive Committee and Resolution No. 614 of said governing body of the Institute.

The 2017 Executive Committee comprised the following Member States: Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominica, Ecuador, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Saint Lucia and the United States of America.

PREPARATORY SESSION

0.1 Opening of the session

0.1.1 The Preparatory Session of the Thirty-seventh Regular Meeting of the

Executive Committee of the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA) was called to order at 08:45 hours on July 18, 2017, in the Sala Magna (United States and Canada Rooms) at IICA Headquarters. It was chaired by Mr. Santiago Bertoni, President of the Paraguayan Institute of Agricultural Technology (IPTA), given that Paraguay was the country chairing the Executive Committee.

0.1.2 In attendance were representatives of the Member States sitting on the 2017 Executive Committee.

(12)

10 Thirty-seventh Regular Meeting of the Executive Committee

0.2 Agreements

0.2.1 Election of the Chair and Rapporteur of the meeting

0.2.1.1 The representatives of the Member States of the Executive Committee unanimously elected Mr. Bryce Quick, Associate Administrator and Chief Operating Officer of the Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), to serve as Chair of the Meeting, as proposed by the Representative of Costa Rica. Mrs. Ana Isabel Gómez, Executive Director of the Executive Secretariat for Agricultural Sector Planning (SEPSA) of Costa Rica, was proposed as Rapporteur. The motion was approved unanimously.

0.2.1.2 The Officers of the Meeting were elected as follows:

Chair: Bryce Quick

Rapporteur: Ana Isabel Gómez

Ex officio Secretary: Víctor M. Villalobos

0.2.2 Agenda for the meeting

0.2.2.1 The Chair submitted the provisional work agenda of the Thirty-seventh Regular Meeting of the Executive Committee, contained in document No. 660 (17), for consideration by the representatives. The provisional work agenda was approved without changes.

0.2.2.2 The Chair informed the representatives of the Member States on the Executive Committee that their folders contained the working and background documents for the meeting, digital versions of which had been made available online on June 19, 2017, in Spanish and English.

0.2.3 Working committees

0.2.3.1 It was agreed that no working committees would be established and that all topics would be discussed in the plenary sessions.

(13)

11

Preparatory Session

0.2.4 Duration of the meeting

0.2.4.1 The Plenary agreed that the Closing Session of the Meeting would take place on Wednesday, July 19, 2017, at 17:00 hours.

0.2.5 Deadline for submitting proposals

0.2.5.1 Tuesday, July 18, at 15:00 hours was set as the deadline for submitting new draft resolutions.

0.2.6 Countries’ right to vote

0.2.6.1 The Director General of IICA asked the Legal Adviser for an opinion regarding the scope and application of the rules governing the right to vote in meetings of the Executive Committee, in accordance with its Rules of Procedure and other relevant provisions.

0.2.6.2 The Legal Adviser explained the provisions of Chapter IX of the Rules of Procedure of the Executive Committee regarding the right to vote in meetings. He then informed the Plenary that four of the twelve Member States sitting on the Executive Committee had been in arrears in the payment of their quotas for more than two fiscal years, exceeding the limit established for the right to vote. Therefore, Colombia, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Paraguay were asked to explain the reasons for which they had fallen into arrears. 0.2.6.3 The Representative of Paraguay indicated that the Ministry of Agriculture

and Livestock had already authorized payment of the quotas corresponding to 2016 and 2017, which were expected to be finalized by the end of July. 0.2.6.4 The Representative of Colombia underscored the importance of IICA to his

country. He explained that one of the main reasons for delayed payment was that his country was undergoing a difficult fiscal situation as a result of the fall in prices for oil and other raw materials. He pointed out that these difficulties had prevented his country from paying quotas owed to all of the organizations of which it formed part, not only IICA. He reported that Congress had already approved a budgetary management plan to pay quotas owed to the Institute for 2015 and 2016 as soon as possible; however, he was unable to commit to an exact date.

(14)

0.2.6.5 The Representative of Nicaragua reported that it was highly likely that his country would pay the quotas for 2017 within 30 days; after that date, his Government would analyze whether it would be possible to pay all other quotas owed.

0.2.6.6 The Representative of Ecuador highlighted the relevance of agriculture to his country and his government’s intention to settle the debt owed to the Institute. He explained that Ecuador had fallen into arrears due to the earthquake that struck the country in 2016, the recent change of government and the postponement of budgets for the second half of 2017. He mentioned that the Minister of Agriculture and Livestock of his country had reached a decision to fulfill the country’s financial commitments with international organizations; therefore, payment of the quota for the current year was expected to be completed within 60 days, and all other quotas were expected to be paid by the end of the year.

0.2.6.7 The Representative of Antigua and Barbuda commented that his country appreciated IICA’s contributions and was struggling to cover the cost of salaries and other commitments. He added that his government was undertaking efforts to settle pending quota payments by the end of 2017. 0.2.6.8 It was agreed that all the delegations of the Member States sitting on the

Executive Committee could participate in the Thirty-seventh Regular Meeting with full rights.

0.2.7 Credentials

0.2.7.1 The Technical Secretary announced that all Member States’ delegations to the Executive Committee had been duly accredited through appropriate letters of accreditation issued by the competent authorities of each country. He stated that the credentials of the delegations of Brazil and Canada, the member countries of IICA that would be participating as observers on this occasion, had been received. He added that Germany and Turkey, two observer countries of the Institute, would also be participating in this meeting of the Executive Committee.

(15)

13

Preparatory Session

0.3 Close of the session

0.3.1 The Preparatory Session of the Thirty-seventh Regular Meeting of the

(16)

(17)

FIRST PLENARY SESSION

1.1.1 The First Plenary Session of the Thirty-seventh Regular Meeting of the

Executive Committee of the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA) was called to order at 09:47 hours on July 18, 2017 and was chaired by the Representative of the United States of America.

1.2 Welcome address by the Director General of IICA

1.2.1 The Director General welcomed the Chair of the Executive Committee as

well as the representatives of the Member States, observer countries and international organizations attending the meeting. He declared that 2017 was a special year for IICA, since it would be celebrating 75 years of contributing to the efforts undertaken by the Member States for the benefit of agricultural development and rural well-being.

1.2.2 He expressed his gratitude for the support he had received during his terms in office. He then described the evolution of agriculture over the past ten years, both at the global and hemispheric levels, listing some of its main characteristics and highlighting the fact that this sector generally performed better than others.

1.2.3 He mentioned that 28% of global agrifood exports in 2015 were carried out by countries in the Americas, which demonstrated that the region was a relevant stakeholder in the global agrifood market. He added that in 2015, Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) accounted for 13.9% of global agrifood exports, most of which were destined to the Asian market. On the other hand, he stated that although the population living in poverty in LAC had diminished, the percentage of rural dwellers in this situation continued to be very high.

1.2.4 He then recalled that when he applied for the position of Director General of the Institute, his proposal focused on a specific objective: “strengthening the technical expertise of IICA to support countries in achieving a productive, competitive, inclusive, and sustainable agriculture.” He added that this objective became a clear mandate for the Institute’s actions, as stated in the

(18)

2010-2020 Strategic Plan as well as the two medium-term plans developed during his term in office, which outlined four strategic objectives: a) to improve the productivity and competitiveness of the agricultural sector, b) to strengthen agriculture’s contribution to the development of rural areas and the well-being of the rural population, c) to improve agriculture’s capacity to mitigate and adapt to climate change and make better use of natural resources, and d) to improve agriculture’s contribution to food security. 1.2.5 He listed the main achievements of the Institute’s cooperation, including the

following: a) urgent or short-term needs of IICA member countries were effectively addressed through 47 rapid response actions in areas related to health services, competitiveness of agro-productive chains and institutional strengthening; b) an average of 200 technical cooperation projects were managed every year since 2010, for an amount close to USD 150 million; c) since 2014, 26 multinational projects were financed via the Technical Cooperation Fund (FonTC) through an investment of over USD 1.8 million, to benefit 25 countries in the Americas; d) the Institute provided training to more than 6,200 stakeholders involved in markets, innovation, business management and public institutional frameworks, which allowed for improving the competitiveness of 32 agricultural chains in 23 countries; and e) more than 300 technical results, most of which were related to the strengthening of institutional capabilities as well as the promotion of innovation, agricultural health and agricultural businesses, were achieved each year through the flagship projects.

1.2.6 The Director General then highlighted the results of the scholarship program offered by IICA and the National Council on Science and Technology (CONACYT) of Mexico, which began in January of 2012. By the end of the first half of 2017, the program had awarded scholarships to a total of 1,108 young professionals from Latin America and the Caribbean, 243 of whom had already completed their postgraduate studies. He indicated that the total value of scholarships awarded exceeded USD 30 million, and that scholarships had been granted to students in 25 countries of the region; Colombia, Ecuador, Venezuela, Honduras and Peru were the countries with the highest number of scholarship recipients.

1.2.7 He explained that the Institute had undertaken efforts to secure external resources, one of the most noteworthy of which was the process to become accredited by the Green Fund, which was well underway.

(19)

17

First Plenary Session

1.2.8 He encouraged the members of the Executive Committee to reflect on the

financial future of the Institute, to comprehensively analyze the operation of the organizations of which they formed part, and to find ways to join efforts with IICA.

1.2.9 The Director General concluded his remarks by stating that the future of American peoples was closely tied to agriculture, and, as a result, it was of the utmost importance to support this sector in order to eliminate poverty and hunger.

1.3 Analysis and comments

1.3.1 The Chair, speaking as the Representative of the United States of America, congratulated the Director General of IICA for his leadership in managing the Institute during his two terms, and for giving continuity to the visionary spirit of Henry Wallace and the other founders of the Institute. He also recognized his success in fostering joint work among the Member States in order to strengthen IICA.

1.3.2 The Representative of Mexico expressed his satisfaction with the report

presented by the Director General. He added that the Institute’s contributions to agriculture, research and technical cooperation were noteworthy. He agreed that achieving agricultural development was the best way to combat hunger and poverty, which were areas of focus for IICA. Lastly, he congratulated the Director General on his excellent management during his two terms in office.

1.3.3 The Observer Representative of Canada congratulated IICA on the

celebration of its 75th_{anniversary. He expressed his gratitude for the report} presented and highlighted the efforts that the Institute had undertaken to drive technical training and its impact on food security, trade and prosperity in the hemisphere. He emphasized the fact that his country valued the work geared toward promoting the adoption of food safety standards and benefiting countries through biotechnology.

1.3.4 The Representative of Argentina stated that the relationship between his country and IICA had been very productive during the Director General’s terms in office. He expressed his interest in addressing resolutions No. 501, No. 502 and No. 615. With respect to the latter resolution, he highlighted the

(20)

topics of climate change, coordination of different types of agriculture, improvement of trade flows, food security and the strengthening of health controls. He added that he looked forward to listening to the presentations of the two candidates for Director General for the 2018-2022 period, and expressed his support for the candidate from Argentina, Dr. Manuel Otero, highlighting his long history with the Institute.

1.3.5 The Observer Representative of Brazil congratulated the Institute on its 75 years of work for the benefit of agriculture, combating poverty and driving rural development in the Americas. He highlighted the Director General’s leadership in working with his country on agricultural health, food safety, rural development and food security projects. He mentioned that the resources that Brazil had contributed to IICA represented an investment in agricultural development. Lastly, he extended his best wishes to the Director General and encouraged him to continue sharing his knowledge for the benefit of agricultural development.

1.3.6 The Representative of Paraguay thanked the Director General for his support in topics related to sectoral policies on trade and biotechnology, which had enabled his country of 6 million inhabitants to produce enough food to feed 100 million people. He congratulated the Director General on his report and wished him great success in his future endeavors.

1.3.7 The Representative of Antigua and Barbuda congratulated IICA on its 75th anniversary as well as the Director General for the report presented. He recognized IICA’s leadership in matters related to training, technical cooperation and facilitation of cooperation among countries.

1.4 Presentation of the Report on Resolution No. 615 of the Executive Committee “Progress Made in Drafting Proposals for the Financial Strengthening and Strategic Restructuring of the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA)”

1.4.1 The Director General explained that the internal adjustments made by the Institute and its efforts geared toward securing additional external resources had not prevented the continuous deterioration of its financial situation, which could impact the quality of cooperation services provided by IICA and could even lead to its disappearance. For this reason, at its Eighteenth Regular Meeting, the Inter-American Board of Agriculture (IABA) approved

(21)

19

Resolution No. 501, “Institutional Process for the Formulation and Presentation of Proposals for the Financial Strengthening and Strategic Restructuring of the Institute.”

1.4.2 He added that, in compliance with this mandate, the Executive Committee

adopted Resolution No. 615 at its Thirty-sixth Regular Meeting, in which it requested that the Director General of IICA conduct a comprehensive study of the model established between the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO). This report could serve as the basis for a proposed partnership between IICA and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), describing potential benefits, opportunities, advantages and disadvantages. He announced that, in compliance with this resolution, a study was prepared and presented to the Special Advisory Commission on Management Issues (SACMI), which included the following main conclusions:

- It is feasible to align the cooperation agendas of IICA and FAO, given their similarities and complementarities, such as the following: a) both institutions address topics related to agriculture and food, b) their mandates are similar, and c) both organizations have a need to reduce their operational costs.

- It is viable to establish a partnership model between IICA and FAO that is similar to the successful WHO-PAHO model, without affecting the IABA’s relevance or IICA’s inter-American nature or autonomy in managing the hemispheric cooperation agenda.

- This partnership would be useful for both organizations and especially for the countries that they serve, by facilitating the development and implementation of a hemispheric cooperation agenda aligned with the global agenda.

- It is relatively simple to develop a single structure that includes all countries in the Americas and generates savings with respect to operating costs.

- The regular meetings of the IABA and the FAO Regional Conference

take place every two years, a few months apart, and are generally held at the ministerial level. Consequently, an agreement establishing the IABA as the FAO Regional Conference would not only provide a larger space and greater consistency for strategic multilateral discussions in the region, but would also save resources that could be used for technical cooperation.

(22)

- It is viable to integrate Canada, the United States and Cuba into a single hemispheric structure by means of the resolutions of the IABA and the FAO Regional Conference, following the same reasoning that has enabled these countries to participate in PAHO.

- There is a crucial difference in the leadership of these cooperation efforts: whereas the Director General of IICA is elected by affirmative vote of the Member States for a maximum period of eight years, the Representative of the FAO Regional Office is appointed, and can be removed by the Director General of FAO. This difference could be resolved by including a provision in the Basic Agreement between IICA and FAO requiring that the Director General of FAO appoint the Director General of IICA as Director of the Regional Office.

- It is feasible to gradually adopt the WHO/PAHO model, trying to apply lessons learned in order to ensure a gradual transition toward joint and coordinated technical cooperation activities, as a first step in this partnership.

- Regarding the formal steps required to establish this partnership, the Director General mentioned the need for a negotiation process geared toward drafting a basic agreement, approved by both the FAO Conference and the IABA, so that no amendment of the constituent instruments of either organization would be required.

- It is recommended that the next regular meeting of the IABA be used to advance the political process toward the possible establishment of the WHO/PAHO model for the IICA/FAO partnership, by means of a resolution declaring the implementation of said model as an “objective” and calling on Member States to adopt a similar resolution at the next meeting of the FAO Regional Conference.

1.4.3 The Director General pointed out that strong political will on the part of the countries would be necessary in order to establish this partnership. He recommended exploring the possibility of countries instructing both Directors General to further strengthen the relationship between IICA and FAO through this new agreement, in order to begin this process. He reported that a new draft resolution on this topic had been prepared, and instructed the Technical Secretary to present it.

1.4.4 The Technical Secretary provided a detailed explanation of the draft

(23)

21

1.5.1 The Observer Representative of Canada commented that, at one point, at least six options for IICA’s financial strengthening and strategic restructuring were presented, one of which was the possibility of applying the WHO/PAHO cooperation model to the relationship between IICA and FAO. He asked whether any of the other options were being considered. He stated that he agreed in principle with fostering a strengthened alliance between IICA and FAO that could lead to greater effectiveness and efficiency; however, he wished to know to what extent both organizations would change as a result of this partnership. He anticipated that Canada would not be in a position to endorse an initiative that could imply an increase in contributions to these organizations. He requested further information on the potential risks and benefits of this partnership, mentioning, as an example, possible savings through a merger of national offices. He ended his remarks by stating that his country would be willing to consider a draft resolution that took into account these concerns.

1.5.2 The Representative of the United States of America agreed with the Observer Representative of Canada on the need for more information regarding all of the other options that were considered for the financial strengthening and strategic restructuring of the Institute, including the partnership with FAO. She requested that the Director General provide more information on the agreement signed between FAO and IICA in order to better understand the opportunities afforded by the proposed partnership.

1.5.3 The Representative of Mexico commented that the possibility of establishing a partnership between IICA and FAO had been under review since 2009, with a view to eliminating duplication and bolstering the technical cooperation that countries received. She considered that current conditions were highly favorable to establishing the proposed partnership, given that a good core document had been prepared. She recommended continuing to work on this document and delving deeper into the topic of governance.

1.5.4 She felt that the proposal should be presented by the countries themselves to the FAO Conference or be channeled through the Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries in the United Nations (GRULAC), to give it greater force. She believed that the greatest degree of political will on the part of both organizations was necessary and that, contrary to what was stated during

(24)

the presentation, she deemed it necessary to modify the constituent documents of both institutions. Lastly, she acknowledged the efforts undertaken by the Director General to comply with the mandate to improve the relationship between IICA and FAO, including the processes it had conducted with FAO authorities.

1.5.5 The Representative of Antigua and Barbuda expressed his interest in learning more about the other options for IICA’s institutional strengthening, as well as his concern regarding the repercussions that a possible partnership between IICA and FAO could have on technical cooperation. He also expressed his interest in learning about the savings that this partnership could generate, and requested information on the meetings that had been held with FAO regarding this topic as well as their results.

1.5.6 The Director General commented that the Executive Committee and the

Inter-American Board of Agriculture (IABA) had proposed, for several years, that IICA and FAO coordinate their actions and conduct joint activities. He mentioned that current conditions were highly favorable to identifying areas of joint work between both institutions. He added that it was still necessary to define certain details with greater precision in order to implement the proposal; as a result, both institutions would need to take part in a coordinated process geared toward developing a shared agenda. He pointed out that the WHO/PAHO model was an important benchmark that was worth considering, given that it had functioned successfully for over 70 years.

1.5.7 He commented that additional options for strengthening IICA had been

analyzed, but that the proposal presented was considered to be the most viable option. He then summarized the other options: a) increasing quota contributions by the Member States, which would be difficult for countries to adopt, since it would imply a substantial increase in this type of contribution; b) driving the search for externally funded projects, which would generate a high level of dependency on these resources, which could not be used with a great deal of flexibility to, among other things, cover operational costs or staff salaries in the IICA Delegations; c) increasing indirect cost recovery (ICR), but this would not increase financial resources, given that ICR funds are used exclusively to cover indirect costs generated from the administration of externally funded projects, which allows for absorbing the implementation costs of projects themselves; d) fostering

(25)

23

greater participation of the private sector through the sale of services, which went beyond the Institute’s current mandate, and would need to be discussed within the IABA; and e) reducing the IICA Delegations in Member States, but this would affect staff presence in each of those countries, which was one of the Institute’s greatest strengths.

1.5.8 He added that the proposed IICA/FAO cooperation model was a “win-win”

alternative that included mechanisms for complementing capacities and resources. He also stated that this option would not imply a reduction of institutional capabilities, but rather an increase in financial and human resources; as a result, the Institute would avoid reducing its presence in the countries. He stated that complementarities between IICA and FAO were a lot stronger at present, and outlined the areas of expertise of both institutions. 1.5.9 He explained that the long-term objective was for the Institute to carry out

the duties of FAO’s Regional Office; the medium and short-term objectives, on the other hand, were for IICA to maintain its current conditions and to gradually begin assuming the execution of FAO’s agenda in the continent through a synergetic approach. He added that any other options for institutional strengthening proposed by the Member States could also be considered. He stated that the main benefit of the proposed partnership would be achieving an improved and more efficient presence of both institutions in the hemisphere; the main risk, on the other hand, would be the inability to maintain the status quo, which could be exacerbated by the Institute’s deteriorating budgetary situation.

1.5.10 The Director General reported that the signing of a new agreement between IICA and FAO was currently underway, and that the agreement incorporated conditions that would benefit collaborative and coordinated work. He deemed it unnecessary to adjust the constituent documents of both organizations. He also highlighted the fact that strong political will on the part of IICA Member States and FAO authorities would be necessary in order to achieve progress in linking both institutions.

1.5.11 The Legal Adviser indicated that an analysis of the constituent documents of the WHO/PAHO model had been carried out and allowed for concluding that neither institution would need to adjust its convention. He added that neither institution would need to review its constituent documents in order to implement the IICA/FAO partnership, although it was possible that the FAO

(26)

Conference would need to change its rules and that FAO would need to modify the members of its regional conferences by means of resolutions, given that Canada and the United States of America formed part of its European conference. On the other hand, he commented that IICA would retain its own governance, quota system and procedures for electing its Director General, similar to PAHO. He added that certain specific conditions could be negotiated when implementing the model. Lastly, he agreed that in order to establish the IICA/FAO partnership, political will and support from the member countries of the IABA and the FAO Regional Conference would be necessary.

1.5.12 The Representative of Panama expressed his concern that IICA could be

absorbed by FAO with respect to its governance; therefore, he recommended guaranteeing operational equity between both institutions should the partnership be established. Furthermore, he requested that the new partnership strive to maintain the pragmatism that characterized IICA’s concrete actions for the benefit of its Member States.

1.5.13 The Observer Representative of Brazil agreed with the comments made by

the Representative of Panama. He highlighted the importance of IICA preserving its institutional identity and avoiding becoming absorbed by FAO, to which end the effectiveness of its actions would be more important than its size.

1.5.14 The Representative of Colombia considered that a partnership with FAO

must not weaken but rather strengthen the Institute. He stated that he would take advantage of the opportunity to share a message from the Minister of Agriculture of his country with respect to the outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in Colombia, which required international cooperation. He acknowledged the fact that controlling the outbreak would be a major undertaking, but that IICA specialists and the Ministry of Agriculture were preparing a joint intervention in order to stop further spread of the disease and eliminate it. He reiterated his country’s commitment to IICA, which it viewed as a valued partner, especially due to the support it had provided throughout the post-conflict period in driving rural development. He announced that a meeting would be held the following Friday at the Pan-American Foot-and-Mouth Disease Center (PANAFTOSA) to discuss the spread of this disease.

(27)

25

1.5.15 The Chair proposed creating a work group responsible for reviewing, in

greater detail, the proposal on the IICA/FAO partnership, in order to improve its presentation as well as options for its implementation.

1.6 Report on Resolution No. 502 of the IABA, “Working group to improve the capabilities of the countries of the Americas for sanitary and phytosanitary risk assessment”

1.6.1 The leader of Agricultural Health and Food Safety (AHFS) of IICA reported that, in compliance with Resolution No. 502 of the IABA, a virtual forum was held with the participation of representatives of the Caribbean Agricultural Health and Food Safety Agency (CAHFSA), the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), the Plant Health Committee of the Southern Cone (COSAVE), the Standing Veterinary Committee of the Southern Cone (CVP), the International Regional Organization for Plant Protection and Animal Health (OIRSA), the North American Plant Protection Organization (NAPPO), IICA, the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC), the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) and the Secretariat of the Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures of the World Trade Organization (SPS/WTO). Participants from Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Mexico, the United States of America and Uruguay were also in attendance.

1.6.2 He explained that the forum had been carried out in two sessions. During the first session, held on December 12, 2016, participants established a baseline for the status of risk assessments in the Americas. During the second session, held on May 31, 2017, participating international organizations shared various resources for improving risk assessment capabilities, which were developed for the benefit of countries in the region and had proven very useful in fostering coordination and avoiding the duplication of work.

1.6.3 He then stated that risk assessment based on science and international

standards was critical to decision making on plant and animal health, as well as to facilitating safe trade in agricultural products. He added that the support of regional and international organizations was very important in order to improve the performance of risk assessments conducted by national authorities.

(28)

1.6.4 Lastly, he enumerated the actions that IICA had been conducting in order to strengthen risk assessment capabilities across the American continent through externally funded projects as well as the flagship projects “Competitiveness and sustainability of agricultural chains for food security and economic development” and “Resilience and integrated risk management in agriculture.”

1.7.1 The Representative of Panama expressed his country’s concern regarding the recent outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in Colombia, referencing the fact that, in 1972, his country signed a cooperation agreement with the United States of America to prevent the spread of this disease in Panama. He urged countries to provide his country with financial support in order to strengthen its prevention efforts, which would in turn allow for protecting the animal biodiversity of many other countries to the north of Panama and in the Caribbean. He requested that a draft resolution on this topic be prepared, and offered to assist in preparing the document.

1.7.2 The Technical Secretary offered his support in preparing the draft resolution. He recommended that the Representative of Panama meet with Institute specialists to define the scope of the proposal and that other representatives of the Executive Committee also take part in this task. He explained that the draft resolution would be shared with the Representative of Panama once it was ready, and would subsequently be presented to the Plenary.

1.7.3 The Observer Representative of Canada acknowledged the value of capacity-building in the AHFS area. He reported that this year, the Ministry of Agriculture and Food of his country had provided financial resources to combat animal diseases.

1.7.4 The Representative of Argentina mentioned that the Minister of Agriculture of his country met recently with the Deputy Minister of Colombia to exchange information on foot-and-mouth disease. He considered that Colombia should participate in preparing the draft resolution.

1.7.5 The Representative of Ecuador supported the proposal made by the

Representative of Panama, which was also of interest to his country. He added that Ecuador had implemented a vaccination initiative in order to

(29)

27

control foot-and-mouth disease, and highlighted the country’s considerable investments aimed at remaining free from the disease. He also offered to form part of the group responsible for preparing the draft resolution.

1.7.6 The Representative of Colombia clarified that the outbreaks had occurred in only a few areas of his country and that prevention protocols had been activated. He reported that, with support from the OIE and other institutions, the Ministry of Agriculture had been implementing control measures such as the slaughter of infected animals. He added that his country was open to clarifying any questions and offering technical cooperation.

1.7.7 The Representative of Dominica expressed his interest in what was stated by the Representative of Panama, and underscored the importance of addressing this situation. As a veterinarian and the person responsible for this topic in CARICOM, he offered his support in preparing the draft resolution.

1.7.8 The Chair proposed creating a work group responsible for preparing the

requested draft resolution, under the guidance of the AHFS leader at IICA. The members of the group would be Argentina, Colombia, Dominica, Ecuador, Panama and the United States of America.

1.8.1 The First Plenary Session of the Thirty-seventh Regular Meeting of the

(30)

(31)

SECOND PLENARY SESSION

2.1.1 The second plenary session of the Thirty-seventh Regular Meeting of the

Executive Committee of the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA) was called to order at 14:15 hours on July 18, 2017. It was chaired by the Representative of the United States of America.

2.2 Relations between IICA and the Tropical Agriculture Research and Higher Education Center (CATIE)

2.2.1 CATIE Report for the 2015-2016 biennium

2.2.1.1 Mr. Muhammad Ibrahim, Director General of the Tropical Agriculture Research and Higher Education Center (CATIE), gave the CATIE report for the 2015-2016 biennium. He explained that his administration had been focusing on four areas: education, research and development, outreach and finances.

2.2.1.2 He first discussed the main achievements in higher education, including the accreditation granted by Costa Rica’s System for Higher Education (SINAES) for a doctoral degree and four international academic master’s degrees, curriculum improvement for master’s degrees in the Graduate School (with support from IICA) and capacity building through the Field Schools (ECA). He added that CATIE had become consolidated as a platform for scientific research. He commented on the development of rust-resistant coffee hybrids, along with highly productive and resistant cacao clones which had been transferred to countries and producers. CATIE also promoted the application of sustainable livestock production models that emitted low levels of greenhouse gases.

2.2.1.3 Outreach work included the building of new partnerships for CATIE, especially with the Korea-Latin America Food and Agriculture Cooperation Initiative (KoLFACI) for a new cacao breeding project, and with the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to implement the Regional Climate Change Program. He stressed that CATIE had made major

(32)

achievements in its finances, including a net surplus of nearly USD 39,000 and reduction of administrative costs.

2.2.1.4 The Director General of CATIE then thanked IICA for its support and assistance and noted that the two institutions shared a joint cooperation agenda on a number of issues such as research (projects and new proposals), graduate-level training and strengthening their offices in the member countries. He commented that the two organizations were working together to implement the Regional Program for Integrated Coffee Rust Management (PROCAGICA) and to coordinate management of a new joint project with the Mexican Secretariat of Agriculture, Livestock, Rural Development, Fisheries and Food (SAGARPA) and the Mexican National Commission for Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity (CONABIO), funded with grant money from Germany. He noted that IICA had also cooperated with CATIE in such areas as academic reorganization, training courses, joint events and support for the drafting of proposals.

2.2.1.5 The Director General of CATIE completed his presentation with a discussion of areas targeted for future action by the center, emphasizing institutional modernization, consolidation of the Office of Strategic Alliances, development of a resource management plan and shaping a new working agenda with the Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute (CARDI) and, with IICA support, strengthening the business model of the graduate school and the role of the offices in the countries.

2.2.2 Presentation of the Report on Resolution No. 500 of the IABA, “Extension of the contract signed between the Government of Costa Rica and the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA) on the Tropical Agriculture Research and Higher Education Center (CATIE)”

2.2.2.1 The IICA Secretary of Corporate Services introduced the report on the results of the IICA-CATIE Program of Joint Action for 2016-2018 (second semester of 2016 and first semester of 2017), pursuant to the terms of the IICA-CATIE Bilateral Agreement and Resolution No. 500 of the Inter-American Board of Agriculture (IABA). He discussed the program's main achievements in the area of technical cooperation through projects and actions involving coffee, livestock production, research, agricultural development, food security and adapting to climate change and mitigating its effects. He pointed out that most of the progress in the field of capacity building had been accomplished

(33)

31

Second Plenary Session

through face-to-face academic education, distance education, continuing education, and upgrading the Orton Memorial Library and the Henry Wallace Legacy Scholars (HWLS) program.

2.2.2.2 The next area, corporate management, had included the signing of a tripartite agreement by IICA, CATIE and the Costa Rican Social Security Administration (CCSS) and the signing of letters of understanding to modernize the Orton Memorial Library, and set up joint cooperation on corporate and technical issues in the IICA Delegation in Bolivia. He noted that IICA had contributed USD 6.8 million to CATIE since 2010, a clear reflection of the Institute's continued commitment to the work CATIE was doing. He explained that a process was currently underway to formalize a letter of understanding for IICA-CATIE joint activities in Mexico and El Salvador, that work was about to begin on a joint analysis of the CATIE Financial Rules, and that suggestions had been made for establishing a working group to develop a strategic proposal to update and improve the regulatory framework of Law 8028 “Comprehensive Reform of the Government of Costa Rica / IICA Contract on the Creation of CATIE,” of the Republic of Costa Rica.

2.3 Report by the Representative of the IABA to the CATIE Council for the 2015-2017 period

2.3.1 The Technical Secretary informed the Committee that Chile had been serving as the IABA representative on the CATIE governing bodies for the 2015-2017 term, and that one of the responsibilities of this position was to deliver a report on their actions. He noted that the report had been included in the documentation sent in advance to all the Member States sitting on the Executive Committee. He added that the representative for the 2018-2020 term would be Ecuador.

2.3.2 The Chair commended the Director General of CATIE for his report and for the progress made, and extended his recognition to both institutions for having reinvigorated their relations.

2.4.1 The Observer Representative of Canada expressed appreciation to the two

(34)

clarified that while Canada was not a member of CATIE, it understood how important CATIE’s relationship with IICA was, as well as the efforts made by the new administration of CATIE to improve conditions and the transparency of financial management. With respect to the extension of the contract between IICA and CATIE, she felt that it would be advisable to perform an in-depth analysis of its financial implications for the Institute and the benefits that could be drawn from such a contract.

2.4.2 The Director General of IICA acknowledged the work that both institutions had carried out since the current Director General of CATIE had taken office. He underscored the coordinated work that the two organizations had been doing and CATIE’s standing as a good partner of IICA and of other institutions. He also praised the Director General of CATIE for his excellent work, and most particularly for his transparency in financial management and his achievements in redirecting CATIE's activities.

2.4.3 The Representative of Dominica asked CATIE to continue supporting coffee production, cacao production and the husbandry of small ruminants, as all three areas were of great interest to his country.

2.4.4 The Representative of the United States of America asked for further

explanation about the membership and tasks of the IICA/CATIE ad hoc working group.

2.4.5 The Deputy Director General of the Institute explained that the

inter-institutional ad hoc working group set up by CATIE and IICA was following up on strategies intended to improve technical cooperation; it was made up of an equal number of representatives from each organization. The group reported to the CATIE governing bodies with respect to its work plans. He added that the group's performance had improved significantly over the past few years.

2.5 Relations between IICA and the Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute (CARDI)

2.5.1 CARDI Report for the 2015-2016 biennium

2.5.1.1 The Representative of CARDI explained that IICA and CARDI had signed an agreement that would help them consolidate their relationship and joint

(35)

33

work to promote agricultural research and development in the Caribbean. He underscored some of the challenges facing both institutions in this region: improving productivity and competitiveness, enhancing food and nutrition security, improving the management of natural resources and production capacity, understanding the implications of climate change, managing the increase in natural disasters, lessening dependence on imported food and building up the capacity of small farmers to supply and compete in domestic and external markets.

2.5.1.2 He discussed the cooperation agreement for 2015-2017, emphasizing three areas of action: (a) direct technical cooperation to facilitate the use of innovative technologies and systems, (b) building CARDI’s internal institutional capacity and (c) mobilization of resources through joint projects intended to secure additional funding.

2.5.1.3 He pointed out that the current plan of action called for institutional improvement and for coordinating activities between IICA and CARDI. He added that eight projects on a variety of topics had been conducted in selected countries, including production of first generation seed of yellow hot pepper, development of elite seed lines of Trinidad pimento, implementing a community training program on climate change, training in the use of information and communication technologies for members of the small ruminant industry and institutional strengthening in the form of project management training.

2.5.1.4 The Representative of CARDI recognized that the center had received excellent support from IICA to promote the use of climate change technologies (such as hydroponics), the use of communication technologies and developing a regional learning platform. He reported that IICA, CARDI and the International Potato Center (CIP) had signed a letter of intent to pursue more extensive technical and scientific cooperation among the three organizations and to develop future initiatives on germplasm management, genetic improvement, production technologies and strengthening value chains for roots and tubers.

2.5.2 Report of joint collaboration activities between IICA and CARDI

2.5.2.1 The Director General of IICA informed the Committee that he had visited the CIP together with Dr. Barton Clarke. They had met with Barbara Wells,

(36)

Director General of the CIP, to sign an agreement granting Caribbean countries access to bio-fortified germplasm of sweet potato and other roots and tubers, which they could then offer to producers to be propagated; this was considered highly beneficial, as these crops are very important in the Caribbean.

2.5.2.2 The Representative of CARDI submitted the report on activities and cooperation between CARDI and IICA, and the Director of Technical Cooperation added to the report by highlighting the importance of CARDI’s work to promote innovation in agriculture within the Caribbean region. He felt that CARDI could play a more decisive role in the process of promoting agricultural innovation, and therefore the joint working plan called for an external evaluation of CARDI that would identify opportunities to build up its capacity.

2.6.1 The Representative of Saint Lucia thanked the Director General of CATIE

and the Representative of CARDI for their two reports. He recalled a proposal made nine years earlier to eliminate the subsidy that IICA paid to CARDI, and expressed his appreciation that this had not happened; he also voiced his hope that the next IICA administration would continue to support CARDI.

2.6.2 The Representative of Antigua and Barbuda also thanked CATIE and

CARDI for their reports and agreed with the Representative of Saint Lucia that it was important to continue fostering research and development in the Caribbean. He drew attention to the excellent work CARDI had been doing to promote sweet potato production.

2.6.3 The Representative of Mexico thanked CATIE and CARDI for all the

contributions they had made to research. She highlighted the support that CATIE had given to agriculture in Mexico, particularly under the new administration. She then reiterated her country’s support for the Directors General of the two institutions.

2.6.4 The Deputy Director General of IICA responded to two important points

raised by the Representative of Dominica: cacao production and Codex Alimentarius. He emphasized CATIE's experience with cacao germplasm,

(37)

35

the joint work the countries had been doing in the framework of the Codex Coordinating Committee for Latin America and the Caribbean and the achievements made in developing science-based standards.

2.7 Activities of the General Directorate and the governing bodies of IICA

2.7.1 2016 Annual Report of IICA

2.7.1.1 The Technical Secretary explained that the report had been made available to the members of the Executive Committee via the on-line information system. He commented that the Director General of IICA had presented it to the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States (OAS) on April 19, 2017.

2.7.1.2 He invited the representatives to share their comments or questions on the content of the report.

2.7.2 Report of the 2017 Regular Meeting of the Special Advisory Commission on Management Issues (SACMI)

2.7.2.1 The Technical Secretary indicated that the report had been sent to the Member States of the SACMI on June 8, 2017, and had been made available to the members of the Executive Committee via the on-line information system. He invited the representatives to share their comments or questions on the content of the report.

2.7.3 Rotation of the Member States on the Executive Committee for the

2019-2033 period

2.7.3.1 The Technical Secretary noted that the table on revolving membership of Member States on the Executive Committee for 2019 to 2033 had been made available to the members of the Executive Committee via the on-line information system. He invited the representatives to share their comments or questions on the content of the table, which would be submitted for review and approval at the upcoming meeting of the IABA.

(38)

2.7.4 Status of the resolutions of the Eighteenth Regular Meeting of the IABA and the Thirty-sixth Regular Meeting of the Executive Committee

2.7.4.1 The Technical Secretary invited the representatives to share their questions or comments on the reports on the status of resolutions from the Eighteenth Regular Meeting of the IABA and the Thirty-sixth Regular Meeting of the Executive Committee, which had been sent in advance via the Committee’s on-line information system.

2.7.4.2 He then spoke specifically about Executive Committee Resolution No. 506 on the bylaws of the Inter-American Commission for Organic Agriculture (ICOA); Executive Committee Resolution No. 572 on IICA cooperation with the Market Information Organization of the Americas (MIOA), and Executive Committee Resolution No. 606 concerning the CATIE report. He explained that the first two resolutions charged both organizations with submitting annual reports, while the third required CATIE to submit annual financial reports to the Executive Committee and the IABA. In all three cases, the relevant information had been posted in advance to the Executive Committee’s on-line information system.

2.8.1 The second plenary session of the Thirty-seventh Regular Meeting of the

(39)

THIRD PLENARY SESSION

3.1.1 The third plenary session of the Thirty-seventh Regular Meeting of the

Executive Committee of the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA) was called to order at 08:56 hours on July 19, 2017. It was chaired by the Representative of the United States of America.

3.2 Reading and approval of draft resolutions

3.2.1 The Rapporteur read out the following draft resolutions: “2014-2017

Management Report;” “Biennial Report of the Caribbean Agricultural Research and Development Institute (CARDI) for 2015-2016;” “2016 Annual Report of the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA);” “Report of the 2017 Regular Meeting of the Special Advisory Commission on Management Issues (SACMI);” “Rotation of Member States on the Executive Committee for the period 2019-2033” and “Status of the Resolutions of the Eighteenth Regular Meeting of the Inter-American Board of Agriculture (IABA) and the Thirty-sixth Regular Meeting of the Executive Committee.” The Chair submitted each of these draft resolutions to a vote, and they were approved as read.

3.2.2 The Rapporteur read out draft resolution “Biennial Report of the Tropical Agriculture Research and Higher Education Center (CATIE) for 2015-2016.” 3.2.3 The Representative of Argentina proposed an additional phrase at the close

of the first operative paragraph, to read as follows: “...and outstanding management.” The Chair declared the draft resolution “Biennial Report of the Tropical Agriculture Research and Higher Education Center (CATIE) for 2015-2016” approved as amended with the modification proposed by the Representative of Argentina.

3.2.4 The Director General offered a modification to draft resolution “IICA/FAO Strategic Partnership based on the WHO/PAHO Model, for the Structural and Financial Strengthening of the Multinational Cooperation provided by the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA),” taking into account the concerns raised and the need to perform a more in-depth

(40)

analysis of the draft resolution and the supporting document. He suggested that the members of the Executive Committee be given one month to submit their comments, thoughts and suggested wording for the draft resolution, to be used by the Technical Secretariat in developing a new version and sending it back to them; the Executive Committee could then hold an extraordinary meeting to discuss this new version of the draft resolution the day before the upcoming meeting of the IABA.

3.2.5 The Representatives of the United States of America, Antigua and Barbuda, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Ecuador and Costa Rica and the Observer Representative of Canada expressed their support for the Director General's suggestion.

3.2.6 The Representative of Saint Lucia agreed with the Director General’s

proposal, noting that this issue had been under consideration for quite some time. He reminded participants that a new Director General would be elected during the upcoming meeting of the IABA, and therefore it would be advisable to consider the opinions of the candidates on this subject.

3.2.7 The Representative of Nicaragua proposed that IICA send the draft resolution to all the Member States so they could express their views in writing over the following 30 days.

3.2.8 The Director General explained that, if the discussion on the draft resolution were expanded to include the other member countries as well, many uncertainties would arise because the other countries had not been involved in the discussion at this meeting, and this would further delay the process. He asked that the suggestion be reconsidered and the draft resolution sent only to the member countries on the Executive Committee. He clarified that this would not limit other Member States from being able to express opinions on the draft resolution during the proposed time period.

3.2.9 The Representative of Argentina said that because this draft resolution was the responsibility of the Executive Committee, it should be discussed by that body, as planned, during the extraordinary meeting of the Committee to take place one day prior to the upcoming meeting of the IABA.

3.2.10 The Representative of Nicaragua explained that his intention had not been to further delay the process, and that he had no problem with the draft resolution

(41)

39

Third Plenary Session

being reviewed only by the members of the current Executive Committee; he therefore expressed his support for the Director General’s proposal.

3.2.11 The Director General noted that it was important to enter the IABA meeting with a consensus-based draft resolution from the Executive Committee, and added that he had personally discussed the matter with several ministers and would continue to do so at every opportunity, so they would clearly understand the scope and advantages of the proposal.

3.2.12 The Chair agreed with the Representative of Saint Lucia that the item

addressed by the draft resolution had been on the agenda for a very long time, and that a decision by the IABA was unquestionably needed. He felt that obtaining such a decision was an important challenge for the future Director General of IICA. He then held a vote on the Director General's proposal, which carried unanimously.

3.2.13 The Representative of Panama thanked the working group that had assisted in drafting the resolution “Support for a Coordinated Response to Outbreaks of Foot-and-Mouth Disease in the Americas” and asked the group to meet together so he could propose a change to the text.

3.2.14 The Representative of Colombia reported that he was awaiting instructions from his minister concerning the draft resolution whose approval Panama was requesting.

3.3 The future of IICA's technical cooperation

3.3.1 The Director of Technical Cooperation described the results-based technical cooperation model currently in use by IICA. He explained that the Institute’s cooperation activities produced outcomes in support of IICA’s contributions, which in turn led to the transformations desired in the Member States and proposed by their governments. He stressed that IICA’s technical cooperation was programmed as a function of these transformations and the contributions that the member countries requested from the Institute, and for this purpose IICA made strategic investments by means of the four interlocking technical cooperation instruments set out in IICA’s 2014-2018 Medium-term Plan (MTP): flagship projects, rapid response actions, pre-investment initiatives and mobilization of external resources.

(42)

3.3.2 He added that the Institute’s technical cooperation actions were organized into five strategic themes: (a) competitiveness and sustainability of

agricultural chains, (b) inclusion in agriculture and rural territories, (c) resilience and integrated risk management in agriculture, (d) productivity

and sustainability of family farming and (e) agricultural health and food safety. He reported on the 2016 achievements made under initiatives addressing these themes and commented on the need to progress toward an IICA that not only produced results, but was also able to respond to the challenges of the future.

3.3.3 He went on to describe the main features of the future scenario in terms of their relevance for agriculture in the Americas: people, food, land, water, climate and productivity. Finally, he listed four relevant issues that IICA should bear in mind for providing technical cooperation in the future: (a) the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda, as a basis for setting the course of technical cooperation; (b) the need to coordinate actions for obtaining

regional public goods that are useful in solving shared problems; (c) technological and institutional innovation, and (d) a comprehensive vision

of agriculture and IICA's technical cooperation, to be drawn from the institution’s experiences and strengths.

3.4.1 The Representative of Brazil emphasized the importance of various issues listed by the Director of Technical Cooperation for the countries, such as people, water, climate, productivity and South-South cooperation. He cited Brazil's Semear Program as an example, noting that it had provided water to 130,000 farmers in the country's semi-arid region by collecting rainwater. The program was slated to provide water to around 6,000 schools by the end of 2017.

3.4.2 The Representative of Argentina stressed IICA's actions in his country to prevent huanglongbing (HLB) disease and to develop organic farming, as well as the Institute’s involvement in the Specialized Meeting on Family Farming (REAF). He underscored the need to lay scientific groundwork for reconciling productive interests with environmental sustainability. He closed by specifically mentioning several of the items covered in the presentation by the Director of Technical Cooperation, whom he commended for his report.

(43)

41

Third Plenary Session

3.4.3 The Representative of Mexico also praised the Director of Technical

Cooperation for having addressed the major challenges facing agriculture in his report, as this would make it easier to identify high-priority, strategic technical cooperation projects. She cited an example from her own country, which she said was working on projects with young entrepreneurs to bolster their skills in the use of new technologies as a way to discourage them from moving away.

3.4.4 The Representative of Costa Rica expressed her appreciation for the report and commended IICA for its technical team and for the way it had applied a results-based management and technical cooperation model. She pointed out that the Institute’s support helped the countries to direct their actions and resources more effectively.

3.4.5 The Observer Representative of Canada agreed with the report’s view that the Institute should focus its actions on achieving results and that its technical cooperation model should take account of national development plans. She asked whether a gap had been detected regarding strategies or policies that were worth considering to strengthen the Institute's technical cooperation. She also wished to know whether results were available on the impact of IICA actions on women and girls, an issue that merited attention in the future. 3.4.6 The Representative of Paraguay addressed the issue of changes in land use by sharing information on his country's forest management work. He explained that under a 2005 law, Paraguay had banned deforestation in the Eastern region; the law allowed for changes in land use in areas planted as forest in the Chaco region, although owners were required to keep 25% of the land as a forest reserve and to protect biological corridors and watersheds, which meant that around 40% of the land should be under forest cover. 3.4.7 The Representative of Ecuador commended IICA for its work in support of

its member countries and the Director of Technical Cooperation for his report. He felt that South-South cooperation strengthened IICA's presence in the region and made it more meaningful. He added that his country was about to launch an initiative known as the “Great National Agricultural Minga,” or collective community undertaking, whose focal points were very closely associated with the same themes covered in the presentation.

(44)

3.4.8 The Director of Technical Cooperation agreed with the representatives’

comments. He pointed out that the lessons learned in a number of projects (as in Northeastern Brazil) were applicable to other regions. He then responded to the question as to whether the IICA technical cooperation model was subject to improvement or change, expressing his view that the Institute should prepare for the challenges of the future, and improvement of the model should therefore be an ongoing exercise. When the current MTP had been written, for example, the Sustainable Development Goals had not yet taken root, but today they were strong, and therefore the next MTP should take them into account. He believed that the institution should be better prepared to take on long-standing challenges and should address them in the writing of the new MTP. He further felt that, from a conceptual standpoint, the IICA technical cooperation model was appropriate and effective and therefore he did not see the need for substantial change, although a good strategy for financing it was essential.

3.5 Presentation of candidates to the post of Director General for the 2018-2022 period and presentation of their work plans

3.5.1 The candidates were asked to give their presentations in alphabetical order by the names of their home countries, and the Chair first invited Manuel Otero, nominated by the Government of Argentina, to present his proposal for leading IICA in the 2018-2022 term. After he finished, he took comments from the United States of America, Mexico, Brazil, Paraguay, Canada and Saint Lucia.

3.5.2 The Chair then invited Carlos Furche, nominated by the Government of

Chile, to present his proposal for leading IICA during the 2018-2022 term. After he finished, he took comments from the United States of America and Canada.

3.6.1 The third plenary session of the Thirty-seventh Regular Meeting of the