cannot alone provide the sharp national focus and central authority needed.

At present, the responsibilities of advisory units within the NPGS often overlap. In many cases, no mechanism exists for considering the advice or reports of these groups. The responsibilities of the advisory groups must be clearly defined and their advice must be used in developing the system's activities, programs, and budgets. Site-specific advisory committees (such as the technical advisory committees described in Chapter 3) could be established by individual sites in cooperation with the central management office. These committees should provide expert technical and scientific advice in support of the site's nationally mandated activities.

The National Plant Genetic Resources Board must have greater independence as an adviser on national and international policies.

During its first years the NPGRB showed strong leadership in its policy recommendations and monitored their implementation diligently. By the early 1980s its role had diminished. Little regard was paid to the terms of appointment and rotation of membership, and a wholesale turnover of members resulted in a lack of continuity. The executive secretary's position, initially filled by a CSRS senior staff person, was given to a member of the ARS National Program Staff. The style of operation of the board also changed as ARS appeared to influence its agendas, recommendations, and activities more than in the past.

Despite the intent that “the Board will be composed of individuals with diverse capabilities distinguished by their knowledge and interest in plant genetic resources management” (National Plant Genetic Resources Board, 1984), the diversity of representation narrowed. The minutes of board meetings reveal that informational items were discussed and that substantive policy issues, such as plant patenting and international activities, were neither discussed nor pursued. The board produced few written formal or official statements, recommendations, or positions. Thus, it had little influence over genetic resources issues.

Although the current chair of the NPGRB has made the board more vocal about and responsive to policy issues, the board must have greater independence in advising on plant genetic resources policy. The focus of the board's activities must be clearly distinct from that of other advisory bodies, such as the National Plant Germplasm Committee

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)