Citation:

Clark, W. C., A. Contreras, and K. Harmsen. 2006. Report of the External Review of the Systemwide Program on Alternatives to Slash-and-Burn (ASB): Evaluation and Impact Assessment of the ASB Programme. CGIAR Science Council Secretariat, Washington, D.C.: FAO.

Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) Science Council. 2006. Report of the External Review of the CGIAR’s Systemwide Program on Alternatives to Slash and Burn (ASB): Findings and Recommendations (19/09/05); Comments and Reactions from the ASB Team (23/9/05); and Science Council Commentary (10/03/05). Review Panel authors William C. Clark, Arnoldo Contreras, and Karl Harmsen. Rome: CGIAR Science Council Secretariat.

The Report of the First External Review of the Systemwide Program on Alternatives to Slash and Burn (ASB), convened by the World Agroforestry Center (ICRAF), was commissioned by the Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) Science Council and conducted by panel members William Clark (chair; Harvard University), Arnoldo Contreras (Forest Trends) and Karl Harmsen (UN University). The Panel concluded that ASB has created the world’s preeminent system for use-driven, comparative scientific investigation of human-environment interactions at the forest margin across the pantropic domain. The Panel addressed the following questions: What have been the impacts of ASB? How effective and efficient has ASB been in performing its core functions? How well has ASB been managed and governed? What are the possible futures of ASB? The Panel concluded that ASB: has been highly relevant to the CGIAR’s core mission and system research priorities; has created the world’s preeminent system for use-driven, comparative scientific investigation of human-environment interactions at the forest margin across the pantropic domain; has developed an effective and efficient governing structure that successfully integrates capabilities and concerns across CGIAR Centers, tropical regions, scales, and disciplines; has been effective in mobilizing financial resources; and that ASB could make a unique contribution to CGIAR and Science Council goals on integrated land, water and forest management at landscape level. The Report is accompanied by two documents. The first contains the CGIAR Science Council’s commentary, which summarizes its views on the Panel Report and on the joint response of the ASB program coordinator, ASB steering group, and the World Agroforestry Center. The second is the joint response to the Panel Report from the ASB program itself.