Overview of International Household Panel Studies. Statement of the German Council of Science and Humanities on the Status and Future Development of the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP). November 13, 2009. Appendix 6

In July 2007, the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) requested that the German Council of Science and Humanities (Wissenschaftsrat) develop recommendations on improving Germany’s scientific infrastructure in the Humanities and Social Sciences. Before the publication of the responsible working group’s report, as a first step, the German Council of Science and Humanities called upon its evaluation committee to conduct an appraisal of the current status and future prospects of the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP). This Panel is an integral part of Germany’s scientific infrastructure. Accordingly, over the course of 2009, the German Council of Science and Humanities evaluated the SOEP. This assessment, which was released in November 2009 as a report containing recommendations (see http://www.wissenschaftsrat.de/texte/9503-09.pdf), was partly based on an international comparison of household panel studies. The German Council for Social and Economic Data (RatSWD) believes that the overview of these international household panel studies produced by the German Council of Science and Humanities is of such a high standard that it is deserving of being published as a document in itself. The RatSWD is thus delighted that the German Council of Science and Humanities has agreed to allow publication of this overview as part of the RatSWD Working Paper Series.

Report to the Annual General Meeting of the CGIAR from the Standing Panel on Impact Assessment (SPIA) of the Science Council

This report to the Annual General Meeting of the CGIAR was delivered by the StandingPanel on Impact Assessment (SPIA) of the Science Council, which retains the composition of the interim Science Council’s SPIA for a one year transition period. In addition to the usual summary of progress and activities during 2002-03, this report also provides some reflections on SPIA/IAEG experience to-date emphasizing key impact assessment needs of the System, and proposes several new initiatives to help maintain continuity as the new SPIA is inaugurated. The report also emphasizes the continuing need for close working relations between the impact assessment function and two other major functions of the SC - monitoring and evaluation of on-going activities, and planning for future activities.This report was presented during the Business Meeting at AGM 2003

Science Council Commentary on the Sixth External Programme and Management Review of IRRI

Science Council commentary on IRRI's sixth EPMR. The IRRI EPMR was discussed at the Science Council's inaugural meeting at ICARDA, Syria

Science for Agricultural Development : Changing Contexts and New Opportunities

This record is the executive summary for Science for Agricultural Development : changing contexts, new opportunities prepared by the Science Council of the CGIAR, in collaboration with ICSU and TWAS. This document was discussed at the Stakeholder Meeting at AGM2005

2004 CGIAR Financing Plan

The report represents the CGIAR financing plan for 2003. It contains the SC-SC Transition Team Comments on the Center 2004-2006 Medium Term Plans and the investment and financing requirements of the 2004 CGIAR research agenda. A separate record is available with the annexes covering the summary of the 2004 Center proposals and the Center cover notes.This report was presented at the Business Meeting during AGM 2003

Assessment of Challenge Program Proposal : Improving Livelihoods and Natural Resources Management in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA): Securing the Future for Africa's Children

This report contains the Science Council commentary on the Sub Saharan Africa challenge program proposal. It also contains a letter from Per Pinstrup-Andersen, Science Council Chair to Ian Johnson. Both letter and report state that the Science Council does not find that there is sufficient information available in the proposal - in terms of specific research plans and science for the Science Council to make a judgement on the relevance and quality of the science and will therefore not justify a $ 70 million investment over the five-year plan. The Science Council, however, recommends an alternative plan which is described in the report.This report was discussed at the CGIAR Business Meeting during AGM 2004

Follow-up Review to the Fifth External Program and Management Review of CIMMYT

The Fifth CIMMYT External Program and Management Review conducted in early 2005 made a number of major recommendations in relation to management and governance at the Centre. In consideration of these recommendations, the CGIAR requested the Science Council (SC) and the CGIAR Secretariat to commission a follow-up review to the EPMR to be conducted in May/June 2006 by the EPMR panel chair Don Marshall and the governance /finance expert on the original EPMR panel. The CGIAR’s request followed the suggestion by the SC that, given the many challenges CIMMYT was facing, a brief follow-up review should be conducted one year after the completion of the EPMR. The full terms of reference for this follow-up review are given in Appendix I. The review team found that CIMMYT had made very substantial improvements in many areas relating to its finances, governance, and research management. The progress made in each area is summarized in the report

Changing Monitoring and Evaluation in the CGIAR System

tb

Consultations Toward Defining Priorities for the CGIAR : A Preliminary Report Submitted by iSC to AGM 2003

This report represents the progress report on CGIAR priority setting process by the interim Science Council to AGM03. The report was discussed at the Stakeholder Meeting 2003, under agenda item 5

Progress Report on Regional Approach to Research

At AGM 2001, TAC presented to the Group a Progress Report on Regional Approach to Research (SDR/TAC:IAR/01/32) which recorded progress achieved during2001 in the implementation of Plank 4 of the new CGIAR vision and strategy endorsed atICW 2000. The progress report highlighted the action taken by GFAR, regional andsubregional organizations and CGIAR Centres to facilitate regional consultation processes to establish a regional approach to research priority setting and implementation for the CGIAR and NARS as envisaged by Plank 4. It also recorded the steps taken by TAC, in collaboration with GFAR, national and regional institutions and CGIAR Centres, to facilitate the implementation of the Group’s decision at ICW’00 for piloting an experimental bottom-up, priority setting approach in the Central America sub-region. In support of the regional approach to research, TAC prepared or commissioned several documents during 2001 and shared them with the Group at MTM 2001 and AGM 2001. These are summarized in Section 2.This progress report (SDR/iSC:IAR/02/27) of the iSC to AGM 2002 records the actiontaken by TAC/iSC and developments since AGM 2001 in further facilitating the regionalapproach to research in the CGIAR. This is described in Sections 3 and 4. The report endswith Section 5 which offers some concluding remarks and suggestions about the future.This report was discussed at the stakeholder meeting at AGM02, agenda item 7.2 annexes are catalogued separately