management unit to address long-standing needs and concerns and to reduce the complex bureaucracy separating individual site activities from those who should exercise coordinated national management. To be effective, however, this national authority must possess the capability of linking program and policy development with budget authority. Placing greater decision-making and budgetary authority in a central unit and reducing the administrative inputs will reduce the multiple authorities to which individual sites are responsible and will enable the NPGS to deal directly with national needs.

Furthermore, a centralized system would provide much needed coordination, guidance, and direction to U.S. policies regarding the collection, exchange, and use of genetic resources around the world. A centralized NPGS could act as the liaison to other parts of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), other executive branch departments (e.g., the U.S. Department of State), Congress, industry, and other private efforts to manage germplasm. In so doing, the many and sometimes disparate interests and concerns of these groups would receive greater attention when policies, directions, and budgets for the NPGS are developed.

The primary barriers to consolidated, central management of the NPGS are that it is a dispersed system and that clear authority and responsibility for program direction and budget are not vested in a single office or individual. There is no distinct budget for the NPGS. Because responsibility for activities and budgets are dispersed, there is no well-defined mechanism for assuring that budgets accurately reflect or address the needs of the system. Its support is derived as a portion of the funds more broadly directed toward germplasm-related work.

Because the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) is the primary source of funds for most of the principal NPGS sites, the NPGS is frequently perceived as an ARS responsibility. Other public and private entities, however, play important roles. This perception of ARS responsibility has sometimes hampered interagency cooperation. Within ARS, management of germplasm activities through the Germplasm Matrix Team and the ARS area directors has been an obstacle to achieving a coordinated nationally focused program.

More direct control must be vested in a central, national authority. The policies and directions of the NPGS should originate from this authority and be overseen by a national board that is representative of

Front Matter (R1-R16)

Executive Summary (1-20)

1 Managing Crop Genetic Resources (21-42)

2 Elements of the National Plant Germplasm System (43-86)

3 Administration of the National System (87-106)

4 Prescription for Effectiveness (107-144)

References (145-148)

Glossary (149-153)

Abbreviations (154-155)

Authors (156-160)

Index (161-173)