The institutional history of the CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food - Water Scarcity, Livelihoods and Food Security - page 94

failed to move beyond the classic CGIAR model. A strong central team was
needed to get BDCs established. But as the BDCs became operational, many
functions of the MT became redundant. The MT never transformed from
coordinating program setup to coordinating program-wide learning and
leading (CPWF, 2013). Due to the creation of the CRPs, the dissolution of
the CPWF board and the 2012 budget cuts, the MT operated continuously
in crisis-management mode.
At the CPWF's final peer assist 4 in June 2013, several Basin Leaders discussed
the impact of the strategic decisions that the MT made in an attempt to keep
the CPWF operational. Many felt that the dissolution of the CPWF board and
budget cuts had a systemic impact on relationships within the CPWF (CPWF,
2013). Many projects were reluctant to bridge the void left by an otherwise
occupied MT. In many basins, projects were unwilling to work beyond the
confines of their required milestone and compliance deliverables. This resulted
in a failure to forge a common, cross-project vision of how to address the
identified BDCs.
WLE focused much of its efforts in 2013 on developing its focal region
approach. By the end of the year, a focal region strategy emerged that built
upon the CPWF process and structures. The CPWF's basin coordination
teams from the Nile, Ganges, Volta and Mekong were asked to lead the co-
ordination of the four focal regions prioritized by WLE (East Africa, South
Asia, West Africa and Southeast Asia). A letter circulated by the Director
General of IWMI following an IWMI board meeting in December 2013
officially noted the importance of building upon CPWF emerging outcomes
and structures.
The CPWF concluded on 31 December 2013 but project and basin activi-
ties and learning continue in other forms. Local, national and international
partners, more often than not, have positioned themselves to carry forward the
best of the CPWF's activities and achievements.
Conclusions
Despite setbacks and challenges, the CPWF made substantial progress in
generating a richness of research outputs. It transformed these outputs into
development outcomes, defined as modifications in decision-maker know-
ledge, attitudes and skills resulting in changes in policy or practice. Other
chapters of this topic expand upon that progress. But the value of an insti-
tutional history lies in making tacit knowledge explicit and examining the
institutional context within which change has, or has not, occurred. What
then can be learned from this story?
For more than a decade the CPWF tested an R4D program in an
institutional environment subject to the forces of the systems, organizations
and individuals in which it operated. In this respect, the CPWF was not
unique. It was not the first agricultural R4D program that claimed to “do
something differently,” nor will it be the last. The institutional history of the