0031 Applying AAALAC international's peer review program to support agricultural research programs

2016 ◽  
Vol 94 (suppl_5) ◽  
pp. 15-15
Author(s):  
J. Bradfield
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Agricultural Research ◽  
Research Programs

scholarly journals Boundary work for sustainable development: Natural resource management at the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR)

2011 ◽  
Vol 113 (17) ◽  
pp. 4615-4622 ◽  
Author(s):  
William C. Clark ◽  
Thomas P. Tomich ◽  
Meine van Noordwijk ◽  
David Guston ◽  
Delia Catacutan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Resource Management ◽  
Natural Resource Management ◽  
Natural Resource ◽  
Agricultural Research ◽  
Boundary Work ◽  
International Agricultural Research ◽  
Research Programs ◽  
Sources Of Knowledge ◽  
Consultative Group

Previous research on the determinants of effectiveness in knowledge systems seeking to support sustainable development has highlighted the importance of “boundary work” through which research communities organize their relations with new science, other sources of knowledge, and the worlds of action and policymaking. A growing body of scholarship postulates specific attributes of boundary work that promote used and useful research. These propositions, however, are largely based on the experience of a few industrialized countries. We report here on an effort to evaluate their relevance for efforts to harness science in support of sustainability in the developing world. We carried out a multicountry comparative analysis of natural resource management programs conducted under the auspices of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research. We discovered six distinctive kinds of boundary work contributing to the successes of those programs—a greater variety than has been documented in previous studies. We argue that these different kinds of boundary work can be understood as a dual response to the different uses for which the results of specific research programs are intended, and the different sources of knowledge drawn on by those programs. We show that these distinctive kinds of boundary work require distinctive strategies to organize them effectively. Especially important are arrangements regarding participation of stakeholders, accountability in governance, and the use of “boundary objects.” We conclude that improving the ability of research programs to produce useful knowledge for sustainable development will require both greater and differentiated support for multiple forms of boundary work.

scholarly journals Peer review clash in US agricultural research

Nature ◽  
1978 ◽  
Vol 274 (5672) ◽  
pp. 630-630
Author(s):  
David Dickson
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Agricultural Research

scholarly journals Targeting resilience and profitability in African smallholder agriculture: Insights from ICRISAT-led research programs

FACETS ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 545-558 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kai Mausch ◽  
Alastair Orr ◽  
B. Paige Miller
Keyword(s):  
Agricultural Research ◽  
Smallholder Farmers ◽  
Research Strategy ◽  
Smallholder Agriculture ◽  
Present Program ◽  
Product Lines ◽  
Research Programs ◽  
Success Stories ◽  
Semi Arid ◽  
Separate Product

We reviewed the strategy for Agricultural Research for Development (AR4D) adopted by the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT). The objective was to examine ICRISAT’s research strategy related to the twin challenges of resilience and profitability in developing technologies aimed at improving the livelihoods of smallholder farmers in the drylands of Africa. To do this, we examined the expected impact on resilience and profitability of its present program and the realized impact of ICRISAT’s previous research. We argue that the current CGIAR Research Programs led by ICRISAT envisage separate product lines for resilience and profitability, targeted at two groups, i.e., subsistence- and market-oriented smallholders. This approach, expected to make technology more appropriate for farmers’ needs, risks overlooking the interconnectedness of the two targets if they are too rigorously separated. Although our review of ICRISAT’s previous research program suggests that success stories have taken numerous forms—some increasing resilience, others profitability—our review also suggests that it is possible to develop win–win technologies that improve both targets. Finding ways to replicate win–win technologies will require that ICRISAT tests the resulting technologies and their implementation in specific contexts to improve and replace them as the research programs evolve.

scholarly journals Reviewer Acknowledgements for Sustainable Agriculture Research, Vol. 9, No. 3

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 114
Author(s):  
Joan Lee
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Veterinary Medicine ◽  
Sustainable Agriculture ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Agricultural Research ◽  
Research Organization ◽  
Animal Science ◽  
Application Form ◽  
University Of Connecticut

Sustainable Agriculture Research wishes to acknowledge the following individuals for their assistance with peer review of manuscripts for this issue. Their help and contributions in maintaining the quality of the journal are greatly appreciated. Sustainable Agriculture Research is recruiting reviewers for the journal. If you are interested in becoming a reviewer, we welcome you to join us. Please contact us for the application form at: [email protected]   Reviewers for Volume 9, Number 3 Bed Mani Dahal, Kathmandu University, Nepal Cristina Bianca Pocol, Univ. of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine of Cluj Napoca, Romania Daniel L. Mutisya, Kenya Agricultural & Livestock Research Organization, Kenya Entessar Mohammad Al JBawi, General Commission for Scientific Agricultural Research, Syria Gunnar Bengtsson, Sweden Inder Pal Singh, Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Science University (GADVASU), India Manuel Teles Oliveira, University Tras os Montes Alto Douro (UTAD), Portugal Mirela Kopjar, University of Osijek, Croatia Ram Niwas, Swami Keshwanand Rajasthan Agricultural University, India Samuel Obae, University of Connecticut, United States Vishwambhar Prasad Sati, Government KRG Post Graduate College, India

scholarly journals Financing Agricultural Economics Research and Extension in the Southern Region

1979 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. D. Toussaint
Keyword(s):  
Agricultural Research ◽  
Apparent Movement ◽  
Southern Region ◽  
Agricultural Economics ◽  
Fair Share ◽  
Animal Science ◽  
Research Programs ◽  
Research Areas ◽  
Crop Science ◽  
Economics Research

Each year, heads of agricultural economics departments meet to discuss mutual issues related to our teaching, extension, and research programs. A major continuing issue is our portion of research and extension funds— with a natural suspicion that we are not being allocated our “fair share.” An additional, and perhaps larger, concern has arisen in the last few years as we recognize the apparent movement toward increasing use of competitive grants for funding agricultural research. It is not the grants idea that concerns us as much as it is the research areas which have been developed and/or may be developed within which we must make our proposals.Each department in a university draws its sustenance from the same pie. Each is concerned with the size of the pieces devoured by animal science, crop science, and the others. The following comments relate to both share and “pie enlargement.”

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document