IMPACT-L Archives

Moderated conference on impact assessment of agricultural research: May 2014

Impact-L@LISTSERV.FAO.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Date:
Mon, 2 Jun 2014 15:38:07 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (1 lines)
I am Datta Rangnekar from Ahmedabad, India, involved since long in agriculture (crop and livestock) based rural livelihood development work in western and central India. 



Firstly, let me thank the FAO for organizing these e-conferences as these provide good opportunities for learning and exchange of views and experiences. I was hesitant to convey my viewpoints on post-facto evaluation of agricultural research since I am more of a development worker than a specialist. 



An article in the Times of India, Ahmedabad edition, of 30th May 2014 encouraged me to put across my viewpoints on the subject, however, my views would be biased towards utility of products of research for smallholder resource-poor farmers. The article discussed development of life saving drugs by two pharmaceutical multi-national corporations (MNCs) and their affordability for low income groups from developing countries like India. It starts with quoting statements of senior officers of two MNCs. The chief executive officer of one company states - ‘we developed drug for patients who can afford it’ while the President of the other states ’we try and never forget that medicine is for the people … the profits will follow’. The research groups of these MNCs are clear about the objectives of research for drug development, however, the difference is that the 2nd MNC considers that the drug should be affordable to low income groups who account for the bulk of the population and that is where the demand is.     



I have been a user (for about 5 decades) of products of research (technologies, recommendations and trained technical persons) in development programmes aimed at facilitating improvement in the livelihoods of smallholder producers. The most prevailing productions system of the majority of these producers can be described as ‘Low external input, crop-livestock mixed farming –dependent on rains’ and most products of research are not appropriate for this system. I had a strong perception about good product of research that it should ‘not only be technically sound but also economically beneficial and socially adoptable by small farmer’ (adoption of a long term nature and without subsidy or grants). However, after referring to reviews on agriculture research and participation in workshops and seminars on research-development linkages, I realized that there is hardly any project planned with a ‘pro–poor’ approach and it would not be fair to judge research programmes where objective is different. I found that most research proposals state ‘benefit to the farmer’ as the objective but hardly any proposal defines the kind of farmer they are aiming to benefit. I have also been wondering why the research groups are not concerned and accountable about ‘Utility of products of research for smallholders’ who account for the bulk of the farmer population in a country like India. And I wonder whether assessment/evaluation of agricultural research can consider the extent to which smallholder resource-poor farmers have benefitted from research outputs/products. Things have not changed much since a report was published by Roling way back in 1990 based on review of agriculture research in developing countries



Datta  Rangnekar 

Freelance consultant

Ahmedabad, 

Gujarat, 

India.

e-mail: Dattavr (at) rediffmail.com



Reference:

- Roling, N. (1990). The agricultural research-technology transfer interface: A knowledge system perspective. Chapter 1 in Kaimowitz, D. (editor).Making the Link. Agricultural Research and Technology Transfer in Developing Countries. ISNAR, The Hague, The Netherlands. http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/pnabe269.pdf#page=15 (6.5 MB).



########################################################################



To unsubscribe from the Impact-L list, click the following link:

https://listserv.fao.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=Impact-L&A=1


ATOM RSS1 RSS2