While political influence is often assumed for international organizations, it is rarely subjected to a thorough assessment. This study addresses this empirical gap by examining the political influence exerted by the Intemational Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI) in the international negotiations pertaining to the revision of the International Undertaking for Plant Genetic Resources (IU). More specifically, the study aimed to assess the level of political influence attained by IPGRI in the renegotiations of the IU, and to obtain knowledge about the general processes by which the Institute exerts influence. The knowledge gained through this assessment would then allow the identification of potential future courses of action for IPGRI in international decision-making. The evaluation covered a five-year period (1996- 2001), representative of the different phases that marked the negotiation process. It employed a methodological framework developed expressly to assess the political influence exerted by international non-govemmental organizations in the framing of the Climate Change and Biological Diversity Conventions. This method draws conclusions from different dimensions of evidence, and is well suited to assessing political influence in complex decision-making. This study obtained evidence from IPGRI staff members who were involved in the negotiations about the expected ways and means by which IPGRI was thought to have been influential, -the so-called "ego-perception." These perceptions were then either validated or negated by the gathering of other players' perceptions of the Institute's influence ("alter-perception"). In this case, the alter-perception was provided by national delegates and by members of the secretariat of the FAO Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, which manages the negotiation process. Finally, the validity of these perceptions was checked through document analysis ("researcher's analysis"). Empirical results relating to IPGR's political influence were subsequently linked to a theoretical framework that provided a basis on which to explain IPGR's capacity to exert influence. This theoretical framework was built on three criteria: (1) that it would be consistent with the chosen methodology; (2) that it would provide explanatory knowledge on the processes of influence and fill in the gaps where the empirical data was inconclusive; and (3) that it would take into account the limited capacity of an international agricultural research center, as opposed to that of a state, to exert influence in international bargaining. A review of the pertinent international relations literature and the framing of relevant variables provided such a framework. The results indicate the most effective ways by which an international agricultural research center can exert influence in international policy-making. The provision of timely and relevant technical input (that is, input directly linked to the organization's domain of expertise) is seen as the prominent means of achieving influence in such a context. Yet, the results also show that other factors may enable or constrain organizations like IPGRI in international decision- making. While political neutrality and reliability were seen as enabling factors, it remained clear that all international organizations lack the resources or formal rights that endow states.

English

0310|AGRIS 0301|AL-Economics Program|R01PROCE

Juan Carlos Mendieta

CIMMYT Publications Collection