Sur les traces du virtuel : de la nature et du rôle de la dimension affective dans le processus de communication

La présente thèse rend compte de la dimension affective de la communication. Pour ce faire, l’expérience est d’abord considérée comme durée qualitative (Henri Bergson). Donc, l’expérience est mouvement. Point de départ : le mouvement comme caractéristique intrinsèque du corps qui, ainsi compris, devient un point de passage. Qu’est-ce qui le traverse? Des événements. Il se constitue par ce passage même, ce qui fait de lui un devenir-corps. Ici, toute expérience est acte de communication à son stade le plus pur. Qui est-ce qui communique? L’expérience est une occasion d’actualisation du virtuel. Il s’agit de l’actualisation d’une force virtuelle – que A. N. Whitehead appelle la forme subjective. Le sens du message est l’événement lui-même, c’est-à-dire ce qui émerge dans l’expérience (Gilles Deleuze). Non pas l’expérience subjective d’un sujet préconstitué, mais l’expérience pure, telle que définie par William James : une relationalité. Ce qui s’actualise est une tonalité affective (Whitehead), vécue comme qualité esthétique. Quels sont les facteurs constitutifs du sens? Élargissons la traditionnelle dualité sujet-objet à un complexe relationnel : nous pouvons ainsi percevoir des acteurs affectifs, perceptifs, humains et technologiques, dans un agencement qui se concrétise comme relationalité émergente. Tout événement est situé. Par conséquent, l’émergence du sens devient acte de co-création dans lequel participent les multiples facteurs qui conditionnent l’événement. Cette vision sort d’un anthropocentrisme pour concevoir l’événement lui-même comme sujet de ses propres expériences (Whitehead). De sorte que, tout comme chaque acte de communication, l’expérience des médias est aussi événement vécu. Ce dernier est incorporé par les dimensions du devenir-corps – la conscience-affective et la conscience-réflexive. Celles-ci sont si intimement interreliées qu’elles deviennent mutuellement inclusives dans l’expérience et totalement actives dans l’actualisation du sens.

Farm Programmes of Electronic Media: A Comparative Study of Audience Perception in Kerala

Farm communication and extension programs are vital part of the farm development attempts. Electronic media plays a major role in farm extension activities. Kerala, the consumer state, which was a complete agricultural state in pre-independence period, is the sprouting land of agricultural extension and publication activities in print media. Later AIR (All India Radio) farm programs and farm broadcasting of Doordarshan enriched the role of electronic media in farm extension activities. The media saturated southern state of India received this new electronic media farm communication revolution whole heartedly. However, after 1990, Kerala witnessed a flood of private T V channels and currently there are 24 channels in this regional language, named Malayalam. All major news and entertainment channels are broadcasting farm programs. Farm programs of AIR and Doordarshan, broadcasted in Malayalam language, have been well accepted to the farmers‘ in Kerala. However, post-independence period, witnessed the formation of Kerala state in Indian Union and the first ballot-elected communist Government started its administration. After the land reform bills, the state witnessed a gradual decrease in agricultural production. Even if it is not reflected much in the attitude and practices of farm community and farm broadcast of traditional electronic broadcasting, a change is observable after the post-liberalization era of India. Private Television channels, which were focused on entertainment value of programs, started broadcasting farm programs and the parameters of program production went through certain changes. In this situation, there is ample relevance for a study about the farm programs of electronic media in terms of a comparative study of audience perception. The study is limited in the state of Kerala as it is the most media saturated state in India. The study analyzes the rate, nature and scope of adoption of farming methods transmitted through electronic media (T.V. and Radio) in Malayalam language.All kinds of Farm programs including comprehensive program serials, success stories, seasonal cropping methods, experts opinion, been analyzed on the basis of the following objectives.  To find whether propagating new farm methods through farm programs in electronic media or the availability of adequate infrastructure and economic factors make a farmer to adopt a new farming method.  To find which electronic media has more influence on farmers to adopt agricultural programs.  To find which form of electronic media gets better feedback from farmers  To find out whether the programs of T.V. or Radio is more acceptable to farmers than the print media.  To find whether farmers gets the message through their preferred medium for the message. The researcher recorded opinions from a panel of agricultural officers, farm Information officers, agro extension researchers and experts. According to their opinions and guidelines, a pilot study is designed and conducted in Kanjikuzhy Panchayath, in Alappuzha district, Kerala. The Panchayath is selected by considering its ideal nature of being the sample for a social Science research. Besides, the nature of farming in the Panchayath, which devoid of the cultivation of cash crops also supported its sample value. As per the observations from the pilot study, researcher confirmed the Triangulation method as the methodology of research. The questionnaire survey, being the primary part contained 42 Questions with 6 independent and 32 dependent variables. The survey is conducted among 400 respondents in Idukki, Alappuzha and Pathanamthitta districts considering geographical differences and distribution of different types of crops. The response from a total of 360 respondents, 120 from each district, finally selected for tabulation and data analysis.The data analysis, based on percentage analysis, along with the results from focus group discussion among a selected group of 20 farmers, together produced the results as follows. Farmers, who are the audience of farm programs, have a very serious approach towards the medium. They are maintaining a critical point of view towards the content of the programs. Farmers are reasonably aware about the financial side of the programs and the monitory aspirations of both private and Government owned Television channels. Even though, the farmers are not aware on the technical terminology and jargons, they have ideas about success stories, program serials and they are even informed about channels are not maintaining an audience research section like AIR. Though the farmers accept Doordarshan as the credential source of farm information and methods, they are inclined to the entertainment value of programs too. They prefer to have more entertainment value for the programs of Doordarshan. Surprisingly, they have very solid suggestions on even about the shots which add entertainment value to the farm broadcasting methods of Doordarshan. Farmers are very much aware about the fact that media is just an instrument for inspiration and persuasion. They strongly believe that the source of information and new methods is agricultural research and an effective change happens only when there are adequate infrastructure and marketing facilities, along with the proper support from Government agricultural guideline and support systems like Krishi Bhavans. They strongly believe that media alone cannot create any magic in increasing agricultural production. Farmers are pointing out the lack of response to the feedback and queries of farmers on farming methods, as an evidence for the difference in levels of commitment of Government and private owned Television channels.Farmers are still perceiving AIR farm programs are far more committed to farmers and farming than any other electronic medium. However, they are seriously lacking Radio receivers with medium wave reception facility. Farmers perceive that the farming methods on new crops are more adoptable than the farming methods of traditional crops in both private and Government owned Television channels. There are multiple factors behind this observation from farmers. Farmers changed in terms of viewing habits and they prefer success stories, which are totally irrelevant and they even think that such stories encourage people to go for farming and they opined that such stories are good sources of inspiration. However, they are all very much sure about the importance and particular about the presence of entertainment factor even in farm programs. Farmers expect direct interaction of any expert of the new farming method to implement the method in their agriculture practices. Though introduction of a new idea in the T.V. is acceptable, farmers need the direct instruction of expert on field to start implementing the new farming practices Farmers still have an affinity towards print media reports and agricultural pages and they have complaints to print media on the removal of agricultural information pages from news papers. They prefer the reports in print media as it facilitates them to collect and refer articles when they need it. Farmers are having an eye of doubt about the credibility of farm programs by private T.V. channels. Even if they prefer private Television channels for listening and adopting new farming methods and other farm information, they scrutinize programs to know whether they are sponsored programs by agrochemical or agro-fertilizer manufacturer.

Institutional Repositories: New Horizon of Science & Technology Knowledge Transactions

Today higher education system and R&D in science & Technology has undergone tremendous changes from the traditional class room learning system and scholarly communication. Huge volume of Academic output and scientific communications are coming in electronic format. Knowledge management is a key challenge in the current century .Due to the advancement of ICT, Open access movement, Scholarly communications, Institutional repositories, ontology, semantic web, web 2.0 etc has revolutionized knowledge transactions and knowledge management in the field of science & technology. Today higher education has moved into a stage where competitive advantage is gained not just through access of infonnation but more importantly from new Knowledge creations.This paper examines the role of institutional repository in knowledge transactions in current scenario of Higher education.

IR: Knowledge Creation, Knowledge Management and Knowledge Dissemination

Open access iiiovemerit and open source software movement plays an important role in creation of knowledge, knowledge management and knowledge dissemination. Scholarly communication and publishing are increasingly taking place in the electronic environment. With a growing proportion of the scholarly record now existing only in digital format, serious issues regarding access and preservation are being raised that are central to future scholarship. Institutional Repositories provide access to past. present and future scholarly literature and research documentation; ensures its preservation; assists users in discovery and use; and offers educational programs to enable users to develop lifelong literacy. This paper explores these aspects on how IR of Cochin University of Science & Technology supports scientific community for knowledge creation. knowledge Management, and knowledge dissemination.

Professional Skills and Competencies for Academic Librarian in an Electronic Environment

Development of new technologies in the field of library and information science especially in academic libraries has resulted in the need for library staff to be flexible in adopting new skills and levels of awareness. In addition to core technology skills, importance is to be given to other skills in communication, management, etc. This paper attempts to describe in brief the competencies and skills required for an academic library professional in the digital era .

Strategies towards evaluation beyond scientific impact

Various research fields, like organic agricultural research, are dedicated to solving real-world problems and contributing to sustainable development. Therefore, systems research and the application of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary approaches are increasingly endorsed. However, research performance depends not only on self-conception, but also on framework conditions of the scientific system, which are not always of benefit to such research fields. Recently, science and its framework conditions have been under increasing scrutiny as regards their ability to serve societal benefit. This provides opportunities for (organic) agricultural research to engage in the development of a research system that will serve its needs. This article focuses on possible strategies for facilitating a balanced research evaluation that recognises scientific quality as well as societal relevance and applicability. These strategies are (a) to strengthen the general support for evaluation beyond scientific impact, and (b) to provide accessible data for such evaluations. Synergies of interest are found between open access movements and research communities focusing on global challenges and sustainability. As both are committed to increasing the societal benefit of science, they may support evaluation criteria such as knowledge production and dissemination tailored to societal needs, and the use of open access. Additional synergies exist between all those who scrutinise current research evaluation systems for their ability to serve scientific quality, which is also a precondition for societal benefit. Here, digital communication technologies provide opportunities to increase effectiveness, transparency, fairness and plurality in the dissemination of scientific results, quality assurance and reputation. Furthermore, funders may support transdisciplinary approaches and open access and improve data availability for evaluation beyond scientific impact. If they begin to use current research information systems that include societal impact data while reducing the requirements for narrative reports, documentation burdens on researchers may be relieved, with the funders themselves acting as data providers for researchers, institutions and tailored dissemination beyond academia.

Writing a Technical Report for Electronic and Electrical Engineers

Has a mixture of factual information (conventions on how a report should be structured) and motivational information on improving writing and communication skills

The Peruvian Citizen Perception and Expectation toward the e-Government. The Electronic Tax Payment Successful e-Gov Project

En este capítulo, los autores tratan de demostrar como los gobierno latinoamericanos, específicamente el peruano, evalúan los esfuerzos que realizan en la implementación de iniciativas de gobierno electrónico, identificando las expectativas que tienen los ciudadanos frente a estas iniciativas y como las perciben, aplicando un modelo de evaluación al servicio de  pago electrónico de impuestos implementado como una iniciativa exitosa en Latinoamérica. El modelo propuesto fue desarrollado por uno de los autores como parte de su tesis doctoral y evaluado por el otro como jurado en el tribunal de la misma. Incluye cinco constructos latentes independientes, actitud, aptitud, confianza, relevancia y satisfacción que afecta a dos constructos latentes dependientes, la percepción y la expectativa frente a su relación con la administración pública vía el uso de las tecnologías de la información y las comunicaciones – TIC, bajo el efecto de variables ilustrativas relacionadas con los ciudadanos, las instituciones y el contexto.

Integración de las técnicas de mercadeo y la relación estratégica comunitaria

Con el siguiente proyecto se pretende explicar cómo se realiza la integración de las técnicas de mercadeo y la relación estratégica comunitaria, debido a que las organizaciones utilizan conceptos comunitarios. Se analizan las principales estrategias de mercadeo como marketing mix, geomarketing, mercadeo de servicios, mercadeo relacional y mercadeo social. Se explican las técnicas de mercadeo como mercadeo directo, diferenciación de productos, segmentación de mercado, investigación de mercados, inteligencia de mercados, optimización de canales de distribución y comercio electrónico. Adicionalmente, se exponen las estrategias comunitarias como coaliciones comunitarias, organizaciones de base, liderazgo comunitario y empoderamiento. La metodología implementada para este proyecto es de tipo teórico-conceptual y reúne los aportes de varios documentos científicos de diversas áreas del conocimiento. Las fuentes de información, conceptos y teorías se seleccionan según el criterio del investigador en función de las posibilidades descriptivas de la integración propuesta. En esta investigación se concluye que las técnicas y las estrategias de mercadeo permiten la comunicación entre las organizaciones y las comunidades. Esto posibilita que exista participación entre ambas partes y es un factor clave para el surgimiento de la relación estratégica comunitaria. Se recomienda realizar investigaciones posteriores sobre la relación estratégica comunitaria, aplicadas a organizaciones y comunidades.

The effects of information and communication technologies on the banking sector and the payments system

This dissertation studies the effects of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) on the banking sector and the payments system. It provides insight into how technology-induced changes occur, by exploring both the nature and scope of main technology innovations and evidencing their economic implications for banks and payment systems. Some parts in the dissertation are descriptive. They summarise the main technological developments in the field of finance and link them to economic policies. These parts are complemented with sections of the study that focus on assessing the extent of technology application to banking and payment activities. Finally, it includes also some work which borrows from the economic literature on banking. The need for an interdisciplinary approach arises from the complexity of the topic and the rapid path of change to which it is subject. The first chapter provides an overview of the influence of developments in ICT on the evolution of financial services and international capital flows. We include main indicators and discuss innovation in the financial sector, exchange rates and international capital flows. The chapter concludes with impact analysis and policy options regarding the international financial architecture, some monetary policy issues and the role of international institutions. The second chapter is a technology assessment study that focuses on the relationship between technology and money. The application of technology to payments systems is transforming the way we use money and, in some instances, is blurring the definition of what constitutes money. This chapter surveys the developments in electronic forms of payment and their relationship to the banking system. It also analyses the challenges posed by electronic money for regulators and policy makers, and in particular the opportunities created by two simultaneous processes: the Economic and Monetary Union and the increasing use of electronic payment instruments. The third chapter deals with the implications of developments in ICT on relationship banking. The financial intermediation literature explains relationship banking as a type of financial intermediation characterised by proprietary information and multiple interactions with customers. This form of banking is important for the financing of small and medium-sized enterprises. We discuss the effects of ICT on the banking sector as a whole and then apply these developments to the case of relationship banking. The fourth chapter is an empirical study of the effects of technology on the banking business, using a sample of data from the Spanish banking industry. The design of the study is based on some of the events described in the previous chapters, and also draws from the economic literature on banking. The study shows that developments in information management have differential effects on wholesale and retail banking activities. Finally, the last chapter is a technology assessment study on electronic payments systems in Spain and the European Union. It contains an analysis of existing payment systems and ongoing or planned initiatives in Spain. It forms part of a broader project comprising a series of country-specific analyses covering ten European countries. The main issues raised across the countries serve as the starting point to discuss implications of the development of electronic money for regulation and policies, and in particular, for monetary-policy making.

Redox chemistry and electronic properties of 2,3,5,6-tetrakis(2-pyridyl)pyrazine-bridged diruthenium complexes controlled by N,C,N '-biscyclometalated ligands

To investigate the consequences of cyclometalation for electronic communication in dinuclear ruthenium complexes, a series of 2,3,5,6-tetrakis(2-pyridyl)pyrazine (tppz) bridged diruthenium complexes was prepared and studied. These complexes have a central tppz ligand bridging via nitrogen-to-ruthenium coordination bonds, while each ruthenium atom also binds either a monoanionic, N,C,N'-terdentate 2,6-bis(2'-pyridyl)phenyl (R-N boolean AND C boolean AND N) ligand or a 2,2':6',2 ''-terpyridine (tpy) ligand. The N,C,N'-, that is, biscyclometalation, instead of the latter N,N', N ''-bonding motif significantly changes the electronic properties of the resulting complexes. Starting from well-known [{Ru(tpy)}(2)(mu-tppz)](4+) (tpy = 2,2':2 '',6-terpyridine) ([3](4+)) as a model compound, the complexes [{Ru(R-N boolean AND C boolean AND N)}(mu-tppz){Ru(tpy)}](3+) (R-N boolean AND C(H)boolean AND N = 4-R-1,3-dipyridylbenzene, R = H ([4a](3+)), CO2Me ([4b](3+))), and [{Ru(R-N boolean AND C boolean AND N)}(2)(mu-tppz)](2+), (R = H ([5a](2+)), CO2Me ([5b](2+))) were prepared with one or two N,C,N'-cyclometalated terminal ligands. The oxidation and reduction potentials of cyclometalated [4](3+) and [5](2+) are shifted negatively compared to non-cyclometalated [3](4+), the oxidation processes being affected more significantly. Compared to [3](4+), the electronic spectra of [5](2+) display large bathochromic shifts of the main MLCT transitions in the visible spectral region with low-energy absorptions tailing down to the NIR region. One-electron oxidation of [3](4+) and [5](2+) gives rise to low-energy absorption bands. The comproportionation constants and NIR band shape correspond to delocalized Robin-Day class III compounds. Complexes [4a](3+) (R = H) and [4b](3+) (R = CO2Me) also exhibit strong electronic communication, and notwithstanding the large redox-asymmetry the visible metal-to-ligand charge-transfer absorption is assigned to originate from both metal centers. The potential of the first, ruthenium-based, reversible oxidation process is strongly negatively shifted. On the contrary, the second oxidation is irreversible and cyclometalated ligand-based. Upon one-electron oxidation, a weak and low-energy absorption arises.

Selected topics in probiotics and prebiotics: meeting report for the 2004 international scientific association for probiotics and prebiotics

On August 2931, 2004, 84 academic and industry scientists from 16 countries gathered in Copper Mountain, Colorado USA to discuss certain issues at the forefront of the science of probiotics and prebiotics. The format for this invitation only meeting included six featured lectures: engineering human vaginal lactobacilli to express HIV inhibitory molecules (Peter Lee, Stanford University), programming the gut for health (Thaddeus Stappenbeck, Washington University School of Medicine), immune modulation by intestinal helminthes (Joel Weinstock, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics), hygiene as a cause of autoimmune disorders (G. A. Rook, University College London), prebiotics and bone health (Connie Weaver, Purdue University) and prebiotics and colorectal cancer risk (Ian Rowland, Northern Ireland Centre for Food and Health). In addition, all participants were included in one of eight discussion groups on the topics of engineered probiotics, host-commensal bacteria communication, 'omics' technologies, hygiene and immune regulation, biomarkers for healthy people, prebiotic and probiotic applications to companion animals, development of a probiotic dossier, and physiological relevance of prebiotic activity. Brief conclusions from these discussion groups are summarized in this paper.

New scientific paradigms for probiotics and prebiotics

The inaugural meeting of the International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics (ISAPP) was held May 3 to May 5 2002 in London, Ontario, Canada. A group of 63 academic and industrial scientists from around the world convened to discuss current issues in the science of probiotics and prebiotics. ISAPP is a non-profit organization comprised of international scientists whose intent is to strongly support and improve the levels of scientific integrity and due diligence associated with the study, use, and application of probiotics and prebiotics. In addition, ISAPP values its role in facilitating communication with the public and healthcare providers and among scientists in related fields on all topics pertinent to probiotics and prebiotics. It is anticipated that such efforts will lead to development of approaches and products that are optimally designed for the improvement of human and animal health and well being. This article is a summary of the discussions, conclusions, and recommendations made by 8 working groups convened during the first ISAPP workshop focusing on the topics of: definitions, intestinal flora, extra-intestinal sites, immune function, intestinal disease, cancer, genetics and genomics, and second generation prebiotics. Humans have evolved in symbiosis with an estimated 1014 resident microorganisms. However, as medicine has widely defined and explored the perpetrators of disease, including those of microbial origin, it has paid relatively little attention to the microbial cells that constitute the most abundant life forms associated with our body. Microbial metabolism in humans and animals constitutes an intense biochemical activity in the body, with profound repercussions for health and disease. As understanding of the human genome constantly expands, an important opportunity will arise to better determine the relationship between microbial populations within the body and host factors (including gender, genetic background, and nutrition) and the concomitant implications for health and improved quality of life. Combined human and microbial genetic studies will determine how such interactions can affect human health and longevity, which communication systems are used, and how they can be influenced to benefit the host. Probiotics are defined as live microorganisms which, when administered in adequate amounts confer a health benefit on the host.1 The probiotic concept dates back over 100 years, but only in recent times have the scientific knowledge and tools become available to properly evaluate their effects on normal health and well being, and their potential in preventing and treating disease. A similar situation exists for prebiotics, defined by this group as non-digestible substances that provide a beneficial physiological effect on the host by selectively stimulating the favorable growth or activity of a limited number of indigenous bacteria. Prebiotics function complementary to, and possibly synergistically with, probiotics. Numerous studies are providing insights into the growth and metabolic influence of these microbial nutrients on health. Today, the science behind the function of probiotics and prebiotics still requires more stringent deciphering both scientifically and mechanistically. The explosion of publications and interest in probiotics and prebiotics has resulted in a body of collective research that points toward great promise. However, this research is spread among such a diversity of organisms, delivery vehicles (foods, pills, and supplements), and potential health targets such that general conclusions cannot easily be made. Nevertheless, this situation is rapidly changing on a number of important fronts. With progress over the past decade on the genetics of lactic acid bacteria and the recent, 2,3 and pending, 4 release of complete genome sequences for major probiotic species, the field is now armed with detailed information and sophisticated microbiological and bioinformatic tools. Similarly, advances in biotechnology could yield new probiotics and prebiotics designed for enhanced or expanded functionality. The incorporation of genetic tools within a multidisciplinary scientific platform is expected to reveal the contributions of commensals, probiotics, and prebiotics to general health and well being and explicitly identify the mechanisms and corresponding host responses that provide the basis for their positive roles and associated claims. In terms of human suffering, the need for effective new approaches to prevent and treat disease is paramount. The need exists not only to alleviate the significant mortality and morbidity caused by intestinal diseases worldwide (especially diarrheal diseases in children), but also for infections at non-intestinal sites. This is especially worthy of pursuit in developing nations where mortality is too often the outcome of food and water borne infection. Inasmuch as probiotics and prebiotics are able to influence the populations or activities of commensal microflora, there is evidence that they can also play a role in mitigating some diseases. 5,6 Preliminary support that probiotics and prebiotics may be useful as intervention in conditions including inflammatory bowel disease, irritable bowel syndrome, allergy, cancer (especially colorectal cancer of which 75% are associated with diet), vaginal and urinary tract infections in women, kidney stone disease, mineral absorption, and infections caused by Helicobacter pylori is emerging. Some metabolites of microbes in the gut may also impact systemic conditions ranging from coronary heart disease to cognitive function, suggesting the possibility that exogenously applied microbes in the form of probiotics, or alteration of gut microecology with prebiotics, may be useful interventions even in these apparently disparate conditions. Beyond these direct intervention targets, probiotic cultures can also serve in expanded roles as live vehicles to deliver biologic agents (vaccines, enzymes, and proteins) to targeted locations within the body. The economic impact of these disease conditions in terms of diagnosis, treatment, doctor and hospital visits, and time off work exceeds several hundred billion dollars. The quality of life impact is also of major concern. Probiotics and prebiotics offer plausible opportunities to reduce the morbidity associated with these conditions. The following addresses issues that emerged from 8 workshops (Definitions, Intestinal Flora, Extra-Intestinal Sites, Immune Function, Intestinal Disease, Cancer, Genomics, and Second Generation Prebiotics), reflecting the current scientific state of probiotics and prebiotics. This is not a comprehensive review, however the study emphasizes pivotal knowledge gaps, and recommendations are made as to the underlying scientific and multidisciplinary studies that will be required to advance our understanding of the roles and impact of prebiotics, probiotics, and the commensal microflora upon health and disease management.

The European Flood Alert System and the communication, perception, and use of ensemble predictions for operational flood risk management

Although ensemble prediction systems (EPS) are increasingly promoted as the scientific state-of-the-art for operational flood forecasting, the communication, perception, and use of the resulting alerts have received much less attention. Using a variety of qualitative research methods, including direct user feedback at training workshops, participant observation during site visits to 25 forecasting centres across Europe, and in-depth interviews with 69 forecasters, civil protection officials, and policy makers involved in operational flood risk management in 17 European countries, this article discusses the perception, communication, and use of European Flood Alert System (EFAS) alerts in operational flood management. In particular, this article describes how the design of EFAS alerts has evolved in response to user feedback and desires for a hydrographic-like way of visualizing EFAS outputs. It also documents a variety of forecaster perceptions about the value and skill of EFAS forecasts and the best way of using them to inform operational decision making. EFAS flood alerts were generally welcomed by flood forecasters as a sort of ‘pre-alert’ to spur greater internal vigilance. In most cases, however, they did not lead, by themselves, to further preparatory action or to earlier warnings to the public or emergency services. Their hesitancy to act in response to medium-term, probabilistic alerts highlights some wider institutional obstacles to the hopes in the research community that EPS will be readily embraced by operational forecasters and lead to immediate improvements in flood incident management. The EFAS experience offers lessons for other hydrological services seeking to implement EPS operationally for flood forecasting and warning. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

CGIAR research program on grain legumes

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background and context The Grain Legumes CRP was established to bring all research and development work on grain legumes within the CGIAR system under one umbrella. It was set up to provide public goods outcomes to serve the needs of the sustainable production and consumption of grain legumes in the developing world, capitalising upon their properties that enhance the natural resource base upon which production so unequivocally depends. The choice of species and research foci were finalised following extensive consultation with all stakeholders (though perhaps fewer end users), and cover all disciplines that contribute to long-lasting solutions to the issues of developing country production and consumption. ICRISAT leads Grain Legumes and is partnered by the CGIAR centers ICARDA, IITA and CIAT and a number of other important partners, both public and private, and of course farmers in the developed and developing world. Originally in mid-2012 Grain Legumes was structured around eight Product Lines (PL) (i.e. technological innovations) intersecting five Strategic Components (SC) (i.e. arranged as components along the value chain). However, in 2015, it was restructured along a more R4D output model leading to Intermediate Development Outcomes (IDOs). Thus five Flagship Projects (FP) more closely reflecting a systematic pipeline of progression from fundamental science, implementation of interventions and the development of capacity and partnerships to promote and adopt impactful outcomes: FP1) Managing Productivity through crop interactions with biotic and abiotic constraints; FP2) Determination of traits that address production constraints and opportunities; FP3) Trait Deployment of those traits through breeding; FP4) Seed Systems, post-harvest processing and nutrition; FP5) Capacity-Building and Partnerships. Another three cross-cutting FPs analyse the broader environment surrounding the adoption of outputs, the capitalising of investments in genomics research, and a focus on the Management and Governance of Grain Legumes: FP6) Knowledge, impacts, priorities and gender organisation; FP7) Tools and platforms for high throughput genotyping and bioinformatics; and FP8) Management and Governance. Five FPs focus on R4D; FPs 5 and 6 are considered cross-cutting; FP 7 has a technical focus and FP 8 has an overarching objective. Over the three year period since its inception in July 1012, Grain Legumes has had a total budget of $140 million, with $62M originally to come from W1/W2 and the remaining $78M to come from W3/bilateral. In actuality only $45M came from W1/W2 but $106M from W3/bilateral corresponding to 106% of expectation. Purpose, scope and objectives of the external evaluation Principally, the evaluation of Grain Legumes is to ensure that the program is progressing in an effective manner towards addressing the system-level outcomes of the CGIAR as they relate to grain legumes. In essence, the evaluation aims to provide essential evaluative information for decision-making by Program Management and its funders on issues such as extension, expansion and structuring of the program and adjustments in relevant parts of the program. Subsequent to the formal signing of the agreed terms of reference, the evaluation team was also invited to comment upon the mooted options for merging and/or disaggregating of Grain Legumes. The audiences are therefore manifold, from the CGIAR Fund Council and Consortium, the Boards of Trustees of the four component CGIAR centres, the Grain Legumes Steering, Management and Independent Advisory Committees, to the researchers and others involved in the delivery of R4D outcomes and their partner organisations. The evaluation was not only summative in measuring results from Grain Legumes at arm’s length; it was also formative in promoting learning and improvements, and developmental in nurturing adaption to transformational change with time. The evaluation report was written in a manner that allows for engagement of key partners and funders in a dialogue as to how to increase ownership and a common understanding of how the goals are to be achieved. We reviewed research undertaken before the CRPs but leading to impacts during Grain Legumes, and research commenced over the past 2.5 years. For related activities pre- and post-commencement of Grain Legumes, we reviewed the relevance of activities and their relation to CGIAR and the Grain Legumes goals, whether they were likely to lead to the outcomes and impacts as documented in the Grain Legumes proposal, and the quality of the science underpinning the likelihood to deliver outcomes. Throughout, we were cognisant of the extent of the reach of CGIAR centres’ activities, and those of stakeholders upon which the impact of CGIAR R4D depends. Within our remit we evaluated the original and modified management and governance structures, and all the processes/responsibilities managed within those structures. Besides the evaluation of the technical and managerial issues of Grain Legumes, we addressed cross-cutting issues of gender sensitivity, capacity building and the creation and nurturing of partnerships. The evaluation also has the objective to provide information relating to the development of full proposals for the new CRP funding cycle. The evaluation addressed six overarching questions developed from the TOR questions (listed in the Inception Report, 2015 [http://1drv.ms/1POQSZh] and others including cross-cutting issues, phrasing them within the context of traditional evaluation criteria: 1. Relevance: Global development, urbanisation and technological innovation are progressing rapidly, are the aims and focus of Grain Legumes coherent, robust, fit for purpose and relevant to the global community? 2. Efficiency: Is the structure and effectiveness of leadership across Grain Legumes developing efficient partnership management and project management across PLs? 3. Quality of science: Is Grain Legumes utilising a wide range of technologies in a way that will increase our fundamental understanding of the biology that underpins several PLs; and are collected data used in the most effective way? 4. Effectiveness: Are Product Lines strategic contributors to the overarching aims and vision for Grain Legumes? 5. Impact: Are the impact pathways that underlie each PL well defined, measureable and achievable; and are they sufficiently defined in terms of beneficiaries? Does progress towards achieving outputs and outcomes from the major research areas indicate a lasting benefit for CGIAR and the communities it serves? 6. Sustainability: Is Grain Legumes managing the increasing level of restricted funding in terms of program quality and effectiveness, including attracting and retaining quality staff? Questions for the evaluation of governance and management focused on accountability, transparency, the effectiveness and success of program execution, change management processes and communication methods, taking account of the effects of CGIAR reform. The three crosscutting issues were considered as follows: i) gender balance in program delivery, e.g. whether each PL is able to contribute to the increased income, food security, nutrition, environmental and resource conservation for resource-poor women and men existing in rural livelihoods; ii) are internal and external capacity gaps identified/met, is capacity effectively developed within each product line, and are staff at all levels engaged in contributing ideas towards capacity building; and iii) is there effective involvement of partners in research and activity programming, what are the criteria for developing partnerships, how they are formalised and how is communication between partners and within Grain Legumes managed? It was not in remit to search for output, outcomes or impact, however as highlighted later, much of our time was spent on searching for information to support claims of impact, since Grain Legumes had no effective dedicated M&E in place at the time of undertaking the review. Approach and methodology The evaluation was conducted when Grain Legumes had been operational for approximately 3 years. The approach and methodology followed that outlined in the Inception Report [http://1drv.ms/1POQSZh]. The CCEE Team based its findings, conclusions and recommendations on data collection from several sources:  review of program documents, communications with the CO, minutes and presentations from all management and governance committee meetings  review of previous assessments and evaluations  sampling of Grain Legume projects in 7 countries1  more than 66 face to face interviews, a further 133 persons in groups and 4 phone/Skype conversations: ICRISAT, ICARDA, CIAT and IITA staff, partners and stakeholders. Meetings with one Independent Science and Partnership Council (ISPC) member.  meetings with over 100 people in 16 external groups, such as farmers’ groups  online survey completed by 126 (33.4%) scientists who contribute to Grain Legumes and a number of non-CGIAR partners and Management representatives  bibliometric review of 10 publications within each PL to qualitatively assess the design, conduct, analysis and presentation of results  quantitative and qualitative self-assessment of the contributions of each of the PLs to the six criteria and 3 cross-cutting issues of evaluation mentioned above completed by PLCs (see below). We reviewed the Logical Framework that underpins the desired Goals, or Impacts of Grain Legumes, and the links between the outputs and inputs as they related to the organisational units of Grain Legumes. The logical framework approach to planning and management of Grain Legumes activities implies a linear process, leading from activities, outputs, outcomes, to impacts, but within such an approach there may be room for a more systems dynamics approach allowing for feedback at every step and within every step, in order to refine and improve upon the respective activities as new results, ideas, and directions come to light. We then developed a matrix that summarised quantitatively and qualitatively the contributions of each of the PLs to the six criteria and 3 cross-cutting issues of evaluation mentioned above. Main findings and conclusions Grain legume production and consumption remain of great importance to the food security of not inconsiderable populations in the developing world, and merit sustained research investment. We conclude that Grain Legumes continues to contribute significant returns to research investments by the CGIAR, and such investment should continue. The global research community looks to the CGIAR for leadership in Grain legumes, but needs to be assured of value adding when bringing CGIAR centres under the expected umbrella of synergy. However, there is considerable scope for improving the efficiency with which outcomes are achieved. We note that an absence of an effective M&E has hampered the assessment of the effectiveness of proposed impact pathways. Likewise progress has been hampered by the limited numbers of research partnerships with Advanced Institutes and by budgetary constraints (lamented for their stifling effects on continuation of ongoing exciting research). The unworkable management structure constrains the CRP Director’s leadership role; responsibility without authority will never lead to effective outcomes. Good fortune is responsible for many of the successes of Grain Legumes, underpinned by a devoted work force across the participating CGIAR centres and partners. The quality of the science is not uniformly high, and we believe that mentoring of scientists should be given priority where quality is poor. Simplified yet informative reporting is an imperative to this. World class science underpins the identification of, and molecular basis for, traits important for yield improvement and this expertise should be extended to all grain legume species, capitalising upon the germplasm collections. The linking of Grain Legumes with regional research and development consortia has been very successful, with outcomes aligning with those of Grain Legumes. We see that with declining funding consolidation of research effort based on likely successes will be necessary, and welcome the move afoot to incorporate grain legumes into an agri-food system focused on successful value chains that deliver sustainable outcomes. Relevance and Strategy Grain Legumes has geographic and disciplinary relevance, addressing the major supply chain issues of variety development seed system and agronomy, with some attention to quality and postharvest marketing systems. The CRP has provided the opportunity to cut ongoing and to initiate new research. Research funded by the Gates Foundation (Anon, 2014) suggests that the need for improvement is greatest in Africa and advocates reducing the number of crop by country combinations when resources are sparse. The lesser research investment in Latin America, however, is not in line with the regions’ dependency on legumes. In spite of the fact that there is no evidence of strong inter-partner CGIAR centre or internal synergy, the program is still moving ahead on most fronts in line with the overall project logframe. This is in spite of continual pushing and pulling by in particular donors and the CO. However, to quantify real impact, we believe Grain Legumes must have access to reliable baseline data on production and consumption, and this is missing. Similarly, there is little evidence of the proposed ‘Inclusive Market Oriented Development’ (IMOD) framework being used to assist with priority setting. The product lines, eight of which cover most of the historical programmes in place in the partner CGIAR centres at the commencement of the Grain Legumes, do not cover all the constraints for formal constraints analysis was not undertaken at the inception of the Grain Legumes, and some of this additionally identified research is undertaken under the umbrella of the FPs; this needs to be rationalised. We found the PLs to be isolated in activity, even with minimally-integrated activities within each PL, with little evidence of synergy between PLs. Even though the SCs should ensure a systems approach, as with the new FPs, we did not get a feel that this is so. The underplaying of agronomy, and production practices may be one reason for this. We believe that treating legume crops as if they were horticultural crops will increase farmer returns from investment. The choice of Flagship Projects makes sense, with the flow of activity firstly around crop management and agronomy followed by the logical sequence of trait discovery, incorporation into improved varieties, dissemination of those varieties through appropriate seed chains leading to market impacts, and the capacity building required at all steps. One obvious omission, however, is the lack of a central and strategic policy on the role of transgenics in Grain Legumes. We found four notable comparative advantages for Grain Legumes: the access to germplasm of component species, the use of the phenotyping facility at ICRISAT, the approach for village level industry for IPM, and the emphasis on hybrid pigeonpea. Efficiency Each centre has strong control of, and emphasis on, their ‘species’ domains, and ownership of the same detracts from possible synergy. Without synergy or value add, the Grain Legumes brings with it no comparative advantage over each centre continuing their own pre-CRP research agendas. We found little evidence of integration of programmes between centres and almost no cross-centre authorship of publications, such as could have occurred with the integrated cross-centre approaches to stress tolerance including crop modelling: the one publication (Gaur et al., 2015) on heat tolerance by ICRISAT, CIAT and ICARDA does not provide any keys to inter-centre collaboration. The integration of each centre with NARS and university research programmes is good, but the cross-centre links with NARS are poor. A better coordinated integration with Grain Legumes, , rather than through the individual centres, may reduce transactions costs for NARS, Monitoring and evaluation is, as noted throughout our report, one area of Grain Legumes research management that has not been given the attention it should have received. If it had have received proper attention, some of the issues of poor efficiency might have been nipped in the bud. A strong monitoring and evaluation system would have provided the baseline data and set the milestones that would have allowed both efficiency and effectiveness to be better appraised. We found no attempt to define comparative advantages of the CGIAR centres and their R4D activities, although practice showed the better grasp of CIAT in developing innovative seed distribution systems. During field visits and interviews, the CCEE Team observed shortcomings in the communication processes within Grain Legumes and with the broader scientific community and the public. For example, the public face of the program on the internet is out of date. Survey findings, however, suggest that information is shared freely and routinely within the PL within which scientists work. Some external issues, such as those with funding, low W1/W2 and poor sustainability of funding (especially if funding is top heavy with a few agencies), undermine research investment and confidence of partners in the system (e.g. as voiced by researchers working on crops and countries not included in TL III and the cessation of ongoing competitively-funded projects especially in India), but other issues attributable to the governance and management of the Grain Legumes, such as opaque integration of W3/bilaterals with W1/W2 funding require attention. Offsetting this, the existence of the Grain Legumes did mobilise additional funding [that it would not have if Grain Legumes did not exist]. We were concerned that Grain Legumes is simply not recognised outside of the CRP, with a limited www presence and centres promote themselves, rather than Grain Legumes (with exception in IITA). This is not a good move if one wishes to increase investment in the Grain Legumes. Although funding agencies require cost:benefit ratios, for example for each PL we faced difficulty in determining comparative value for money between investment in different types of research, and in being able to clearly attribute research and development outcomes to financial investment. There was also a time CCEE frame issue too. There is poor interaction with the private sector, notably in areas where they have a comparative financial advantage. We questioned in particular the apparent lack of interaction with the major agro-chemical companies, with respect to the development of herbicide tolerant (HT) grain legumes and the lack of evidence that the regulatory and trade aspects related to herbicide tolerant crops had been considered. Quality of science The quality of the science is highly variable across Grain Legumes, with pockets of real excellence that are linked to good levels of productivity, whereas other PLs are struggling to deliver quality publications, and outputs and outcomes that are based on these. There is much evidence of gradualism in terms of research output and outcomes, i.e. essentially the same activities that were ongoing at the time of the launch of Grain Legumes are still in place. However, there are examples of game changers including those from valuable investments in genomics, phenotyping, and bio-control. We were pleased to see large proportions of collaboration on publications with non-CGIAR centres, reflecting cooperation with partners in developed and developing countries. The value of collaboration when ensuring quality of science cannot be stressed highly enough both within the CRP, and with other global and national partners. PLs should be given incentives to collaborate with other CRPs and external institutions. There is little cohesion between PLs and with other CRPs as evidenced by publications, although there are some exceptions. We suspect the reasons for this are driven by funding. Productivity from the different PLs is also highly variable and it is not clear what other activities staff are engaged in since, in some PLs, they do not appear to lead to quality publications. Effectiveness Grain Legumes has been very effective in addressing component issues of research, but not the continuum from variety development to legumes on someone’s dinner plate. Our overall assessment of the effectiveness of Grain Legumes in stimulating synergy, innovation and impact indicate that gradualism is more prevalent than innovation. It also shows, as do publications, that there is little integration of disciplines or a focus on ‘systems’. The absence of socio-economists from research teams is evident in the general lack of an end user focus. However, research on genomics, plant breeding and seed systems have made great strides forward, on the brink of delivering impact. Agronomy has been a poor sister, but some of the competitive grants within Grain Legumes have unearthed some potential game changers, such as objective use of transplanting as an agronomic practice. As mentioned earlier, the lack of effective M&E (however, this was part of some major projects such as TL II/TL III), and therefore the ability to monitor impact pathways and achievement of impact, implies no systematic management of data. This creates difficulty when attempting to evaluate the achievement of the Grain Legumes objectives. One might have expected at least one attempt to try to develop publications between centres arguing for similar biologies/research approaches, bringing species together under one umbrella, but we did not find any evidence for this. It is most unfortunate that, due to budgetary cuts, the new ‘schemes’, e.g. competitive grants and scholarships, were cut off before gaining a foothold. With 8 species addressed by Grain Legumes, it is not unexpected that there will be little evidence of shared protocols across centres/species. One rare example was that hosted by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) on shared methods for phenotyping of legume germplasm. Researchers from CIAT, IITA, ICRISAT and three USDA stations attended, focusing in simple canopy temperature and root morphology measurements. It is our belief that as a set of research centres, the CGIAR centres should be focusing on the research for which they have a comparative advantage. While imposing the restructure to FPs, which is fine for development objectives and outcomes (funded through W3/bilateral), it is less so for a research institute, and the structure should not detract from the more basic work expected of an international CGIAR centre (or set of centres as in a CRP). Impact It is well known that research does not always lead to scientific breakthroughs. Also, activities such as plant breeding are long term; making impacts difficult to assess. We believe that sufficient progress with genomics and associated research has been made to warrant impact, but we are unable to quantify the levels of impact, or the timeframe for the same. Work in Grain Legumes has enormous potential for real impact in scientific research, commercial, farming, smallholder and household communities, much of which is being realised. However, the PLs need to become more adept at providing convincing cases that are strongly evidenced for these impacts, as this is likely to be a key factor in leveraging future funding. Claimed gains must be referenced against baseline data, and these are not always readily available. The CCEE Team realises that such impact evaluation represents a significant drain on resources, and Grain Legumes should determine whether the balance of costs to benefits favours such investment. Interviews conducted by the CCEE during site visits showed that PLs are quantifying the area of adoption of varieties, but in most cases they are not measuring the impact on environment, health/nutrition. Since the health and nutritional benefits and the environmental gains from growing legumes are major arguments for supporting grain legume research, the community is currently missing substantial opportunities to strengthen its own case for continued support. Whilst there are some impressive examples of considering the whole value chain, e.g. white beans from production through to export; in the main, the pipeline to end user is somewhat piece-meal, with no clear definition of the end user nor differential responsibility of Grain Legumes and of partners. The lack of robust time-defined impact pathways is highlighted in Section 7.4, and even though developed for PL5, timeframes are essential for measuring progress against prediction. Sustainability In summary, there is general acknowledgement that future funding is likely to become more limited, specifically in W1&2 and there is understandable concern over the support for the staff and basic infrastructure that underpin the Grain Legumes programme. For example, it is reported that staffing in parts of CIAT has been dependent on W1&2 and that this is too unstable to re-establish a critical mass. The present system whereby W3 and bilateral projects do not pay a realistic level of overheads means that such projects are being effectively subsidised by W1&2. This position is not sustainable in the long term as there will be a progressive but definite loss of basic skills and resources in the core centres. The only obvious options to prevent this outcome include a severe reduction in the fixed costs of the centres and/or a refusal to accept W3 and bilateral funding with an inadequate overhead component. In the latter case, there is an obvious danger that funders will move their resources away from the CGIAR system towards other, perhaps less expensive, suppliers of research, and possibly more relevant development expertise. This issue must be addressed. As the Grain Legumes moves into the future, and if sustainable funding cannot be assured, decisions must be made concerning a reduction in activities, keeping some caretaker breeding maintenance, and focus (as has TL III) on fewer species and a reduced geographic focus. Cross cutting issues: Gender, capacity building and partnerships Gender is not mainstreamed, but there is some evidence that this is improving, especially with dedicated gender specialists and the slow integration of gender across CRPs. There is a need to approach gender through the vision of agriculture as a social practice, with recognition of what changes will be acceptable culturally and what not, and capitalising upon the perceived and actual features of production and processing that grain legumes are primarily women-based crops. Gender awareness may be high among Scientists, but it appears to be a predominantly passive attribute with few proactively seeking opportunities for gender equity. It is, however, a sound sensitivity base on which to build. Nevertheless, examples of notable gender initiatives were identified during field visits. For example, in Benin, the development of biocontrol technologies has enthusiastically integrated diversity, engaging with women farmers’ and youths while maintaining cultural norms. Women are gathering and processing, youths are taking the product to market. The implication is that several groups benefit, rather than domination by the majority group. In Malawi, innovative approaches have been developed to improving nutrition for children, such as incorporating nutrient enriched bean flour products into snacks. In India, scientists collaborating with gender scientists and socio-economists are identifying the impact of mechanical harvesting on agricultural labour and the potential displacement of female labourers. In Kenya, a novel initiative is improving the accessibility of certified seed for new varieties. Seed suppliers have introduced small packs of grain legume seed at low unit cost, which are being purchased by young people and women. Capacity building efforts for external partners are not clearly aligned with the research mandate and delivery of Grain Legumes. However, there are a number of training activities that are being undertaken by Grain Legumes, largely through the W3/bilateral project. Gender balance never reaches parity, but it appears that efforts are made to include female participants. Within the evaluation timeframe it was not possible to conduct external surveys to further validate or review external capacity building efforts in Grain Legumes. Training of scientists is significant, with >40 benefiting. Postgraduate training is varied across PLs, and there is some opportunity to increase the numbers being supervised. We consider that support for postgraduates at ICRISAT could be better coordinated, satisfying more of the students’ needs. It is important, however, to follow up investments in capacity building by monitoring effectiveness, career progressions and so on. Training activities appear to be rather centre-specific, not following a coordinated programme managed by, nor at the level of, the Grain Legumes. Numbers of persons trained and their gender are important, but a measure of the effectiveness of the training is more important. Although optimism is expressed by the great majority of Research Managers that partnerships were working well to leverage knowledge and research capacities, scientists have a less favourable view, particularly in terms of their incentives to participate. It seems likely that the activities taking place within Grain Legumes were, in the most part, continuations of previous collaborations. This is not surprising in light of the reduction in the emphasis on partnerships as Grain Legumes evolved to a funded project, and the consequent lack of opportunity and ambition for establishing novel partnerships. Where they exist, partnerships are good on the whole, especially with US. They could be expanded where comparative advantages exist (for example with Canada and Australia for machine harvestable legumes), but some earlier identified partnerships, e.g. with Turkey, have not been capitalised upon. Others experience problems of variety access (the embargo on exports of some sources of materials from India), yet others do have relevance e.g. imported Brazilian varieties in pre-release in Ethiopia (even though two of the three are from CIAT materials). Governance and Management The standard format of committee structure and responsibilities is common to other CRPs, as are the attendant problems. One of the major problems is that the Grain Legumes Director has responsibility but no authority; hence, even with the support of the RMC, the Director is unable to ‘direct’ in the literal sense of the work the activities of Grain Legumes. We also see the same sense of helplessness with the role of the PLCs. They have responsibility but no authority in managing the affairs of their PL, and they have no access to funds with which to promote intellectual collaboration and cooperation. Minutes from governance and management meetings do not reflect the compromised weak position of the Director and the associated difficulties in the management of Grain Legumes. Nor do the minutes reflect concerns about the amount of time spent by scientists in meetings for planning, integration, evaluation and reporting. Many scientists reported significant opportunity costs in participating in the ongoing imposed [by the CO] evolution of Grain Legumes and CRPs in general. The changes brought in by the CO have not helped promote any greater authority and capacity of the Grain Legumes Director to direct. Likewise, they do not address any of the issues with the conflict of interest in having the Lead Centre chair the Steering Committee. Indeed, we believe that the combining of the Steering Committee with the Independent Advisory Committee, besides becoming unwieldy in number, annuls any sense of independence in advice offered to the Grain Legumes management. We have concerns with the declining proportion of W1/W2 funds (as expressed in the section on Sustainability), and believe that when basic financial planning takes place, integration of W1/W2 and W3/bilateral sources must occur, and be linked to anticipated outcomes and impacts. This will ensure a close alignment of collaborators’ and partners’ objectives and contributions to that of the Grain Legumes. We also queried the process for, and the formality, or lack of, surrounding, the approval of annual budgets, and the level of priority setting when budgets are cut. Recommendations for Grain Legumes The CCEE Team makes the following recommendations, critical issues are highlighted in bold, and those that require action by an entity other than the Grain Legumes Research Management Committee or Project Management united are identified in a footnote. Relevance and Strategy Recommendation 1: A period of consistency is necessary to raise confidence, morale and trust across scientists, managers and partners to foster the assembly of enduring Grain Legumes outcomes2.  There needs to be a concerted effort to undertake baseline studies and to implement a robust M&E activity during this period. Without these data the foundation for integrated research in grain legumes is jeopardised.  There is a strong need to link more closely with the private sector, especially where there are financial and other comparative advantages to do so. Recommendation 2: The agronomic and physiological trait targets of Grain Legumes (tolerance to changing climate patterns, to the pests and diseases of today and of the future, incorporation of quality traits and adaptations to intensive production systems [machine-harvestability and herbicide tolerance], and short season high yielding characters) are all worthy of continued investment when selecting for improved varieties.  There needs to be a common strategy, implemented across centres and species, as to how to address these trait targets through conventional and modern breeding approaches, but only if adequate funding is assured and secured and if a consistency and unity of purpose can be achieved across a large-scale. This should take the form of cross-species coordinated research programmes to address these breeding targets that cooperate across centres and make efficient use of facilities and other resources.  The CRP should undertake a detailed strategic review of the role of transgenics across the range of targets in the mandate crops. Efficiency Recommendation 3: The lack of an effective M&E process is a significant omission, not least in terms of more efficient use of resources and the lack of baseline data with which to measure impact, and must be rectified.  Reinforcing Recommendation 1, an effective M&E system initially directed towards baseline studies must be implemented.  Transaction costs may be reduced through bilateral projects, which are seen as more cost effective than W1/W2 where transaction costs are disproportionately higher. Recommendation 4: To improve communication and coordination within the CRP, and with a broader audience:  There is a priority need for a central database containing, names of staff associated with Grain Legumes and their time commitments, their responsibilities, and involvement in CRP activities, their progress and achievements, their publications, plans of training, travel, and other opportunities for interaction.  Regular global meetings of staff involved in managing PLs, the entire CRP management staff and the IAC are essential for effective coordination of all activity within Grain Legumes.  The website must be given a complete overhaul and improvement and then regular maintenance must be provided to keep it current. Quality of Science Recommendation 5: It is essential to continue investment in good science and to institute a change from gradualism in research output and outcomes to an expectation of innovative and concrete achievements that can be attributed clearly to people, centres and core facilities.  A cost:benefit analysis and subsequent strategic planning must be undertaken to justify further investment in the genomics and phenotyping facilities at ICRISAT especially as such technologies advance rapidly. Strategic planning and coordination must also be implemented for capitalising on the investment in crop simulation modelling. (The phenotyping facility of ICRISAT needs to focus on delivering some outcomes, not only outputs.)  PLs should be given incentives to collaborate with other CRPs and external institutions. The CCEE recommends special recognition of high quality collaborative papers, thereby encouraging increased quality of the research programmes and widening the penetration of research impacts.  More importance should be placed on the quality of publication, rather than quantity of outputs and there should be recognition of other types of outputs from Grain Legumes. The CRP Director must be party to this.  If staff are engaged in activities that relate more to impact than publication then this needs to be monitored and recorded and a clearer understanding developed of what constitutes a pathway to impact and how success of such activities can be evaluated. A system must be devised and incorporated into the M&E to enable recognition of other types of outputs (non- publication based) from Grain Legumes, e.g. varieties for breeders. Effectiveness Recommendation 6: To develop greater synergy, Grain Legumes should review management processes and the direction of research activities. In particular, far more extensive integration of research and knowledge exchange should take place across both African and Asian continents so that the best aspects of both can be shared. A multidisciplinary approach is recommended that considers processing solutions, as well as breeding solutions, to capitalise upon the nutritional benefits of the grain legume crops. We recommend:  A better collaboration with social scientists at the design stage of experiments in order to improve the utility of the work carried out and to understand its reach.  Supporting3 the adoption of best practice electronic data collection, central storage and open access, particularly of genomic data, for public use.  Given the focus on the link between phenotyping and genotyping, we note that there is a lack of congruence between the populations that are being phenotyped and those being genotyped, and therefore these could be better aligned within each species.  Concentrating investment external to Grain Legumes on scaling up production of varieties with the most promising trait profiles to meet the basic seed requirement.  Developing a more holistic approach that coordinates an understanding of the disease pathology and epidemiology, and of new chemicals before they become commercially available, together with agronomic practice such that recommendations can be made for growers. Continuing work to establish whether agronomic factors hold true in different environments and to assess GxE effects within breeding programmes. Such rigorous trial practices should be used to inform the evaluation of breeding lines and to provide phenotype data to associate with markers for traits such as heat, drought and herbicide tolerance.  Considering grain legumes as if they were vegetable crops in terms of the strategy for intensification of production, both from the management perspective and for seed systems, will be a useful development objective into the future. This will bring about more rapid intensification and is likely to increase farmer returns from investment. Recommendation 7: The CGIAR centres should focus in on the research for which they have a comparative advantage. While imposing the restructure to FPs, which is fine for development objectives and outcomes (funded through W3/bilateral) it is less so for a research institute, and should not detract from the more basic work expected of an international CGIAR centre (or set of centres in a CRP).  Collaborative approaches should be explored within Grain Legumes, e.g. similar biologies/research approaches, bringing species together under one umbrella. Similarly better alignment is needed to address the lack of congruence between the populations that are being phenotyped and those being genotyped.  Despite positive impacts from research in genomics, plant breeding and seed systems, the lack of an effective M&E, already mentioned elsewhere, has reduced the ability to monitor impact pathways. This must be addressed.  The absence of socio-economists from research teams is evident in the general lack of an end user focus. Responsibilities of the different actors in the whole value chain must be considered and identified when developing impact targets, and the pathway leading to them, for individual projects. People with socio-economist skills must be part of the team from project inception so that appropriate frameworks are incorporated for measuring and influencing sociological and economic changes brought about by Grain Legumes research. Impact Recommendation 8: PLs need to become more adept at providing convincing cases in which impact is strongly evidenced, as this is likely to be a key factor in leveraging future funding.  Claimed gains must be referenced against baseline data, and these are not always readily available. The CCEE Team realises that such impact evaluation represents a significant drain on resources, and Grain Legumes should determine whether the balance of costs to benefits favours such investment.  It is essential that Grain Legumes provides training to staff on what constitutes impact and how it can be recorded.  Specific, rather than generalised, potential impacts arising from activity within Grain Legumes should be defined at the time of justifying the programme of work and a pathway to impact should form part of the documentation prepared ahead of a piece of research commencing. . In other words, centres should submit work plans to Grain Legumes before they are undertaken using W1/W2 funds Recommendation 9: The reporting activity must be streamlined to a single (brief) format that can be used to report to Grain Legumes, Centres and to donors for special project activities4. Sustainability Recommendation 10: As Grain Legumes moves into the future, and if sustainable funding cannot be assured, decisions must be made concerning a reduction in activities, keeping some caretaker breeding maintenance, and focus (as has TL III) on fewer species and a reduced geographic focus. Zeigler (Director General of IRRI) states “…time and effort would be better spent … making tough decisions about which programs deserve the precious support.”  The present system whereby W3 and bilateral projects do not pay a realistic level of overheads means that such projects are being effectively subsidised by W1&2 and there will be a progressive but definite loss of basic skills and resources in the core centres. To prevent this outcome it is necessary to significantly reduce the fixed costs of the centres and/or refuse to accept W3 and bilateral funding without an adequate overhead component.  In the absence of long term certainty, the scale of the budget allocated to each of the new CRPs should be very conservative, a feature that can only be achieved by restricting/reducing the scope, probably quite significantly. Cross cutting issues: Gender, capacity building and partnerships Recommendation 11: The challenge for Grain Legumes is to achieve pro-active gender mainstreaming, which facilitates opportunities for gender diversity within all activities, from employment processes through research to end users.  Strategic measurable gender indicators need to be embedded in research design, for instance, through specific IDOs for each of the flagships projects. Accurate baseline data are also required to facilitate M&E reviews of progress.  Implementation of the Gender Strategy is the responsibility of everyone, not solely the Gender Team. Thus, ownership could be encouraged by setting personal development for key personnel objectives with specific outcomes, e.g. employment practices or research outcomes.  Recognising the positive gender initiatives in progress or planned, feedback must be communicated and integrated into broader research planning to share opportunities, methods and outcomes.  In addition to promoting gender equity in research, Grain Legumes also needs to ensure that working environments are gender sensitive and that recruitment processes, including promotion opportunities are equitable. Gender imbalance in management should be actively examined to identify further opportunities for developing female leadership. Recommendation 12: It is recommended that a training plan be devised to ensure that capacity building efforts are more clearly aligned with the research mandate, delivery and timeframe of Grain Legumes. Moreover, we recommend that ICRISAT develop a strategy to treat their new cohort of researchers more equitably in the future. Recommendation 13: To develop a more coherent strategic programme designed to eliminate overlap and promote synergy between programmes with common aims, Grain Legumes should hold a meeting with a range of partners. Governance Recommendation 14: Governance processes should be re-assessed and the structure altered to ensure that the Grain Legumes Director has the authority and budget control to drive the execution of strategy.  The ISC should be truly independent and given the power to influence strategic decisions before they become final. We also recommend that PLCs are provided with the authority to manage the direction and finances of their PL; and that ring-fenced funds are provided for the promotion of collaboration, coordination and staff training5. The way ahead In our view, having seen the ineffectiveness of much of the attempts [or lack of attempts] to harness synergies between multiple centres, and of the strength in few or sole centre partnerships, we believe that there is little to justify a full retention of the 8 legume species and 4 CGIAR centres in a CRP. TL I and II and PABRA have shown to be reasonably good cross-centre and single centre integrated programmes, but even they suffer from incomplete value chain approaches to increasing rural incomes while increasing food and nutritional security; they both need multi-faceted solutions which are not immediately forthcoming from Grain Legumes. It is important to embed Grain Legumes research within the agri-food systems these crops serve. Figure ES1 broadly shows the perceived current and potential degrees of synergy between centres, PLs and species, and is discussed more in the text. It is clear that the value chains for individual species from trait determination to nutritional impact have more cohesion than do the individual activities (e.g. trait deployment) across species. For this reason we believe that the future for research in Grain Legumes is best addressed by focusing on each of the species separately, and within an ecosystem framework; any synergy for research across species can be effected through communication and not necessarily through obligatory cooperative research. The ecosystem framework will allow for strengthening of agronomy type systems research, the arguments for benefits of inclusion of grain legumes in cropping systems, which is notable by its absence in much of what Grain Legumes currently undertakes. Figure ES1. Current and potential degrees of synergy between centres, PLs and crop species We therefore agree with the innovation in agri-food systems approach of the CG, and believe that Grain Legumes rightly belongs in the Dryland Cereals and Legumes Agri-food Systems. We believe that the option of combining the crops of dryland cereals and legumes in the cereal-legume-livestock systems of subsistence farming communities for whole-farm productivity is closest to the best way forward. Indeed the inclusion of grain legumes may not warrant even a CRP alone, rather the legume components should fit in with the major crops that determine the production systems. Legumes will always be subservient to the major cereals, as necessary adjuncts to the whole production system, providing both nutritional diversity and environmental services, neither achievable from cereals alone. Figure ES2. Most suitable option for integration of Grain Legumes and Dryland Cereals into an Agri-Food Systems CRP Most suitable option for integration of Grain Legumes and Dryland Cereals into an Agri-Food Systems CRP, which  Incorporates ex-Dryland Systems, Dryland Cereals, Grain Legumes, some HumidTropics, some ex-Livestock &Fisheries into a new CRP  Will cover full agri-food system VC for all 8 legumes in all ecologies, but must interact (dock) with the relevant AFS-CRPs for the dominant cereal in the relevant ecology  Hence, will need to negotiate with other Agrifood Systems-CRPs on who does what for legumes  In addition, responsible for sorghum and millet in the mixed dryland crop-livestock agro-ecologies For major game changers to be effected, we believe that the game has to change, and there is little evidence of this. The direction of CRPs is the correct route, but the journey has not yet come to its destination. A major change of game [such as the adoption of a Flagship Project approach as exemplified by the Australian CSIRO – where flagships contract services from centres of research excellence] would be painful to implant. The CGIAR system is going down the right pathway but it has not gone far enough.