50th Anniversary of Hector Kobbekaduwa Agrarian Research and Training Institute (HARTI)

by C. Narayanasuwamy

I am happy and proud to be associated with the 50th anniversary celebrations of HARTI because I still consider myself part of the institution both conceptually and emotionally. I cherish pleasant memories of the relentless efforts made to establish, incorporate, develop, direct, and manage a nascent institute in the 1970s amidst complex challenges both in the policy and administrative arenas.

It is rarely that one who played a significant role in the establishment and growth of an institution gets an opportunity to provide a message on its golden anniversary. It is noteworthy that I was called upon to provide messages on the completion of the fifth (I was still the director then) and the 15th anniversaries of the institution. I had occasion also to acknowledge the contribution of the Institute on its 46th year when I released my book, ‘Managing Development: People, Policies and Institutions’ using HARTI auditorium and facilities with the able support of the then director and staff who made the event memorable. The book contains a special chapter on HARTI.

The evolution of HARTI from humble beginnings to a dynamic and forward-looking agrarian institution fostering policy-based research and training is now well recognised and entrenched in the annals of Sri Lanka. Its rise as a regional centre for agrarian research and training within the first decade since inception speaks volumes. The solid foundation and leadership provided by me followed by successive directors helped develop organisational structures and research specific technical inputs necessary for the provision of socioeconomic data for policy formulation.

The vision of the Institute was summed up by the then Minister of Agriculture, Mr. Hector Kobbekaduwa as follows, “the institute is not one concerned with the technical aspects of growing a crop or managing an animal, it is concerned with establishing the relationships between crops, livestock, the farmer, the market, and the society in which the farming system operates”.

Fifty years ago when the conceptual parameters of the then ARTI was discussed at policy level, there were many who misunderstood the scope and purpose of ARTI and cast aspersions claiming that cattle and pigs were going to be reared in the heart of Colombo 7! The misconceptions ruled sway for almost five years and it was a Herculean task during the first five years of my tenure to prove to the policy makers and the elite in the public service that ARTI dealt purely with socioeconomic research and institutional factors controlling the relationship between man and land, and that it was a forerunner in the entire South and South East Asian region. The initial successes achieved in formulating and implementing action-oriented studies that came up with crucial, operationally relevant findings, changed the entire scenario for ever.

On ARTI’s fifth anniversary the remarkable achievements in completing 16 policy based research studies and 23 training courses were highlighted, among others, and questions were posed as to the relevance and usefulness of studies for policy formulation and for improved farmer participation in agricultural decision-making. It was concluded that despite some shortcomings in the selection of research topics which were largely crop-based, there was overall success in feeding policy makers on critical institutional and market related issues that required urgent remedial measures.

On HARTI’s 15th anniversary I was called upon again to offer some thoughts on the Institute’s future operations. The following were some of my observations, “ARTI has graduated from its stage of infancy to adolescence….Looking back it gives me great satisfaction to observe the vast strides it has made in developing itself into a dynamic multidisciplinary research institution with a complement of qualified and trained staff. The significant progress achieved in new areas such as marketing and food policy, data processing, statistical consultancies, information dissemination and irrigation management, highlights the relevance and validity of the scope and objectives originally conceived and implemented”.

Some recommendations contained in the message were significant. It may be prudent to review whether the recommendations were implemented, specifically (a) the preparation of a catalogue of research findings implemented partially or fully during policy formulation, (b) the relevance and usefulness of information services and market research activities in enhancing farmer income, and (c) the extent to which the concept of interdisciplinary research- a judicious blend of socioeconomic and technical research considered vital for problem-oriented studies- was applied to seek solutions to problems in the agricultural sector.

The thoughts expressed on the 15th anniversary also encompassed some significant management concerns, specifically, the need to study the institutional capabilities of implementing agencies, including the ‘human factor’ that influenced development, and a critical review of leadership patterns, management styles, motivational aspects, and behavioural and attitudinal factors that were considered vital to improve performance of agrarian enterprises.

A review of HARTI’s current operational processes confirm that farmer-based and policy-based studies are given greater attention, as for example, providing market information service for the benefit of producers, and undertaking credit, microfinance, and marketing studies to support policy changes. The changes introduced over the years which modified the original discipline-based research units into more functional divisions such as agricultural policy and project evaluation division, environmental and water resources management division, and agricultural resource management division, clearly signified the growing importance attached to functional, action-oriented research in preference to the narrowly focused discipline-based research activities.

HARTI has firmly established its place as a centre for excellence in socioeconomic research and training with a mature staff base. It is pertinent at this juncture to determine whether the progress of HARTI’s operations was consistently and uniformly assessed as successful over the last five decades. Anecdotal evidence and transient observations suggest that there were ups and downs in performance standards over the last couple of decades due to a variety of factors, not excluding political and administrative interventions, that downplayed the significance of socioeconomic research. The success of HARTI operations, including the impact of policy based studies, should be judged on the basis of improved legislation to establish a more structured socioeconomic policy framework for agrarian development.

Where do we go from here?

Times have changed and it is now incumbent on the Ministry of Agriculture and the Director and staff of HARTI to reinvigorate and re-energise socioeconomic research. Recent events have confirmed the need to think afresh, adopt innovative policies, and strengthen institutions to foster the development of a dynamic agricultural sector that would utilise home grown solutions to increasing productivity. HARTI can be a unifying force articulating the links between technical and institutional factors of production. But there are some hard questions which require attention and answers.

Fifty years in the life of an institution is substantial and significant enough to review, reflect and evaluate successes and shortcomings. Agrarian landscapes have changed over the last few decades and national and global trends in agriculture have seen radical transformation. Under these circumstances, such a review and reflection would provide the basis for redirecting operations and retraining staff to achieve the desired outcome for green agriculture, improved agricultural practices, well-conceived food security plans, and carefully orchestrated global interaction for minimising food shortages. This is the right time to revisit the entire legislation governing the establishment of ARTI (the ARTI Act No. 5 of 1972) and look at new vistas of opportunities to expand the original mandate. Suggestions to expand the mandate could include the following;

1-Align planning strategies in line with national priorities securing a place in central planning bodies at the highest level. Agrarian policies and programs must get high level endorsement to ensure that research and training constitute integral components of the agricultural development framework.

2-Establish links with universities and co-opt university staff to play a role in HARTI research and training activities-this was done during the initial seven year period as the founding fathers of the then ARTI envisaged that it will one day be elevated to the level of an agrarian university. It was with this end in mind that close links and joint programs were established with universities such as the Cornell University in New York, Sussex University in the UK, and several other universities in Cambridge, the Philippines, Sweden etc. Unfortunately, over the years such links were not pursued through.

3-Re-examine strategies for data acquisition and liaise with other institutions to consolidate data and disseminate on a timely basis information from studies that is relevant and significant for improving farming practices and marketing strategies. The level and content of information dissemination should include new developments in the agrarian and agricultural sector beneficial to the farmers as they ultimately are the beneficiaries and contributors to increased food production and food security.

4-Establish a management division within HARTI to provide inputs for management of agrarian enterprises, and within this division, set up a monitoring and evaluation unit to prepare results-based monitoring frameworks that would constitute key elements in operational plans of ministries and departments whose work is directly aligned with HARTI’s work programs.

5-Undertake independently, and also in unison with other institutions, evaluative studies to assess impacts of agrarian/agricultural projects and disseminate lessons learned for improving the planning and execution of future projects in the sector.

In conclusion, let us congratulate the architects and the dynamic management teams and staff that supported the remarkable growth of HARTI which today looks forward to injecting greater dynamism to build a robust institution that would gear itself to meeting the challenges of a diversified and self-reliant agrarian society. As the first director of the Institute, it is my wish that it should grow from strength to strength to maintain its objectivity and produce evidence-based studies that would help toward better policies and implementation structures for rural transformation.

(The writer was the first

Director of the ARTI)