Mid-term evaluation of African Technology Policy Studies Network Phase VI Strategic Plan: for the period January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2010

The African Technology Policy Studies Network (ATPS) is a multidisciplinary network of researchers, private sector actors, policymakers and civil society. ATPS has the vision to become the leading international centre of excellence and reference in science, technology and innovation (STI) systems research, training and capacity building, communication and sensitization, knowledge brokerage, policy advocacy and outreach in Africa. It has a Regional Secretariat in Nairobi Kenya, and operates through national chapters in 29 countries (including 27 in Africa and two Chapters in the United Kingdom and USA for Africans in the Diaspora) with an expansion plan to cover the entire continent by 2015. The ATPS Phase VI Strategic Plan aims to improve the understanding and functioning of STI processes and systems to strengthen the learning capacity, social responses, and governance of STI for addressing Africa's development challenges, with a specific focus on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). A team of external evaluators carried out a midterm review to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the implementation of the Strategic Plan for the period January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2010. The evaluation methodology involved multiple quantitative and qualitative methods to assess the qualitative and quantitative inputs (human resources, financial resources, time, etc.) into ATPS activities (both thematic and facilitative) and their tangible and intangible outputs, outcomes and impacts. Methods included a questionnaire survey of ATPS members and stakeholders, key informant interviews, and focus group discussions (FGDs) with members in six countries. Effectiveness of Programmes Under all six strategic goals, very good progress has been made towards planned outputs and outcomes. This is evidenced by key performance indicators (KPIs) generated from desk review, ratings from the survey respondents, and the themes that run through the FGDs. Institutional and Programme Cost Effectiveness Institutional Effectiveness: assessment of institutional effectiveness suggests that adequate management frameworks are in place and are being used effectively and transparently. Also technical and financial accounting mechanisms are being followed in accordance with grant agreements and with global good practice. This is evidenced by KPIs generated from desk review. Programme Cost Effectiveness: assessment of cost-effectiveness of execution of programmes shows that organisational structure is efficient, delivering high quality, relevant research at relatively low cost by international standards. The evidence includes KPIs from desk review: administrative costs to programme cost ratio has fallen steadily, to around 10%; average size of research grants is modest, without compromising quality. There is high level of pro bono input by ATPS members. ATPS Programmes Strategic Evaluation ATPS research and STI related activities are indeed unique and well aligned with STI issues and needs facing Africa and globally. The multi-disciplinary and trans-boundary nature of the research activities are creating a unique group of research scientists. The ATPS approach to research and STI issues is paving the way for the so called Third Generation University (3GU). Understanding this unique positioning, an increasing number of international multilateral agencies are seeking partnership with ATPS. ATPS is seeing an increasing level of funding commitments by Donor Partners. Recommendations for ATPS Continued Growth and Effectiveness On-going reform of ATPS administrative structure to continue The on-going reforms that have taken place within the Board, Regional Secretariat, and at the National Chapter coordination levels are welcomed. Such reform should continue until fully functional corporate governance policy and practices are fully established and implemented across the ATPS governance structures. This will further strengthen ATPS to achieve the vision of being the leading STI policy brokerage organization in Africa. Although training in corporate governance has been carried out for all sectors of ATPS leadership structure in recent time, there is some evidence that these systems have not yet been fully implemented effectively within all the governance structures of the organization, especially at the Board and National chapter levels. Future training should emphasize practical application with exercises relevant to ATPS leadership structure from the Board to the National Chapter levels. Training on Transformational Leadership - Leading a Change Though a subject of intense debate amongst economists and social scientists, it is generally agreed that cultural mindsets and attitudes could enhance and/or hinder organizational progress. ATPS’s vision demands transformational leadership skills amongst its leaders from the Board members to the National Chapter Coordinators. To lead such a change, ATPS leaders must understand and avoid personal and cultural mindsets and value systems that hinder change, while embracing those that enhance it. It requires deliberate assessment of cultural, behavioural patterns that could hinder progress and the willingness to be recast into cultural and personal habits that make for progress. Improvement of relationship amongst the Board, Secretariat, and National Chapters A large number of ATPS members and stakeholders feel they do not have effective communications and/or access to Board, National Chapter Coordinators and Regional Secretariat activities. Effort should be made to improve the implementation of ATPS communication strategy to improve on information flows amongst the ATPS management and the members. The results of the survey and the FGDs suggest that progress has been made during the past two years in this direction, but more could be done to ensure effective flow of pertinent information to members following ATPS communications channels. Strategies for Increased Funding for National Chapters There is a big gap between the fundraising skills of the Regional Secretariat and those of the National Coordinators. In some cases, funds successfully raised by the Secretariat and disbursed to national chapters were not followed up with timely progress and financial reports by some national chapters. Adequate training in relevant skills required for effective interactions with STI key policy players should be conducted regularly for National Chapter coordinators and ATPS members. The ongoing training in grant writing should continue and be made continent-wide if funding permits. Funding of National Chapters should be strategic such that capacity in a specific area of research is built which, with time, will not only lead to a strong research capacity in that area, but also strengthen academic programmes. For example, a strong climate change programme is emerging at University of Nigeria Nsukka (UNN), with strong collaborations with Universities from neighbouring States. Strategies to Increase National Government buy-in and support for STI Translating STI research outcomes into policies requires a great deal of emotional intelligence, skills which are often lacking in the first and second generation universities. In the epoch of the science-based or 2GUs, governments were content with universities carrying out scientific research and providing scientific education. Now they desire to see universities as incubators of new science- or technology-based commercial activities, whether by existing firms or start-ups. Hence, governments demand that universities take an active and leading role in the exploitation of their knowledge and they are willing to make funds available to support such activities. Thus, for universities to gain the attention of national leadership they must become centres of excellence and explicit instruments of economic development in the knowledge-based economy. The universities must do this while working collaboratively with government departments, parastatals, and institutions and dedicated research establishments. ATPS should anticipate these shifting changes and devise programmes to assist both government and universities to relate effectively. New administrative structures in member organizations to sustain and manage the emerging STI multidisciplinary teams Second Generation universities (2GUs) tend to focus on pure science and often do not regard the application of their know-how as their task. In contrast, Third Generation Universities (3GUs) objectively stimulate techno-starters – students or academics – to pursue the exploitation or commercialisation of the knowledge they generate. They view this as being equal in importance to the objectives of scientific research and education. Administratively, research in the 2GU era was mainly monodisciplinary and departments were structured along disciplines. The emerging interdisciplinary scientific teams with focus on specific research areas functionally work against the current mono-disciplinary faculty-based, administrative structure of 2GUs. For interdisciplinary teams, the current faculty system is an obstacle. There is a need for new organisational forms for university management that can create responsibilities for the task of know-how exploitation. ATPS must anticipate this and begin to strategize solutions for their member institutions to transition to 3Gus administrative structure, otherwise ATPS growth will plateau, and progress achieved so far may be stunted.

Design and management of sustainable built environments

The United Nation Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) makes it clear that climate change is due to human activities and it recognises buildings as a distinct sector among the seven analysed in its 2007 Fourth Assessment Report. Global concerns have escalated regarding carbon emissions and sustainability in the built environment. The built environment is a human-made setting to accommodate human activities, including building and transport, which covers an interdisciplinary field addressing design, construction, operation and management. Specifically, Sustainable Buildings are expected to achieve high performance throughout the life-cycle of siting, design, construction, operation, maintenance and demolition, in the following areas: • energy and resource efficiency; • cost effectiveness; • minimisation of emissions that negatively impact global warming, indoor air quality and acid rain; • minimisation of waste discharges; and • maximisation of fulfilling the requirements of occupants’ health and wellbeing. Professionals in the built environment sector, for example, urban planners, architects, building scientists, engineers, facilities managers, performance assessors and policy makers, will play a significant role in delivering a sustainable built environment. Delivering a sustainable built environment needs an integrated approach and so it is essential for built environment professionals to have interdisciplinary knowledge in building design and management . Building and urban designers need to have a good understanding of the planning, design and management of the buildings in terms of low carbon and energy efficiency. There are a limited number of traditional engineers who know how to design environmental systems (services engineer) in great detail. Yet there is a very large market for technologists with multi-disciplinary skills who are able to identify the need for, envision and manage the deployment of a wide range of sustainable technologies, both passive (architectural) and active (engineering system),, and select the appropriate approach. Employers seek applicants with skills in analysis, decision-making/assessment, computer simulation and project implementation. An integrated approach is expected in practice, which encourages built environment professionals to think ‘out of the box’ and learn to analyse real problems using the most relevant approach, irrespective of discipline. The Design and Management of Sustainable Built Environment book aims to produce readers able to apply fundamental scientific research to solve real-world problems in the general area of sustainability in the built environment. The book contains twenty chapters covering climate change and sustainability, urban design and assessment (planning, travel systems, urban environment), urban management (drainage and waste), buildings (indoor environment, architectural design and renewable energy), simulation techniques (energy and airflow), management (end-user behaviour, facilities and information), assessment (materials and tools), procurement, and cases studies ( BRE Science Park). Chapters one and two present general global issues of climate change and sustainability in the built environment. Chapter one illustrates that applying the concepts of sustainability to the urban environment (buildings, infrastructure, transport) raises some key issues for tackling climate change, resource depletion and energy supply. Buildings, and the way we operate them, play a vital role in tackling global greenhouse gas emissions. Holistic thinking and an integrated approach in delivering a sustainable built environment is highlighted. Chapter two demonstrates the important role that buildings (their services and appliances) and building energy policies play in this area. Substantial investment is required to implement such policies, much of which will earn a good return. Chapters three and four discuss urban planning and transport. Chapter three stresses the importance of using modelling techniques at the early stage for strategic master-planning of a new development and a retrofit programme. A general framework for sustainable urban-scale master planning is introduced. This chapter also addressed the needs for the development of a more holistic and pragmatic view of how the built environment performs, , in order to produce tools to help design for a higher level of sustainability and, in particular, how people plan, design and use it. Chapter four discusses microcirculation, which is an emerging and challenging area which relates to changing travel behaviour in the quest for urban sustainability. The chapter outlines the main drivers for travel behaviour and choices, the workings of the transport system and its interaction with urban land use. It also covers the new approach to managing urban traffic to maximise economic, social and environmental benefits. Chapters five and six present topics related to urban microclimates including thermal and acoustic issues. Chapter five discusses urban microclimates and urban heat island, as well as the interrelationship of urban design (urban forms and textures) with energy consumption and urban thermal comfort. It introduces models that can be used to analyse microclimates for a careful and considered approach for planning sustainable cities. Chapter six discusses urban acoustics, focusing on urban noise evaluation and mitigation. Various prediction and simulation methods for sound propagation in micro-scale urban areas, as well as techniques for large scale urban noise-mapping, are presented. Chapters seven and eight discuss urban drainage and waste management. The growing demand for housing and commercial developments in the 21st century, as well as the environmental pressure caused by climate change, has increased the focus on sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS). Chapter seven discusses the SUDS concept which is an integrated approach to surface water management. It takes into consideration quality, quantity and amenity aspects to provide a more pleasant habitat for people as well as increasing the biodiversity value of the local environment. Chapter eight discusses the main issues in urban waste management. It points out that population increases, land use pressures, technical and socio-economic influences have become inextricably interwoven and how ensuring a safe means of dealing with humanity’s waste becomes more challenging. Sustainable building design needs to consider healthy indoor environments, minimising energy for heating, cooling and lighting, and maximising the utilisation of renewable energy. Chapter nine considers how people respond to the physical environment and how that is used in the design of indoor environments. It considers environmental components such as thermal, acoustic, visual, air quality and vibration and their interaction and integration. Chapter ten introduces the concept of passive building design and its relevant strategies, including passive solar heating, shading, natural ventilation, daylighting and thermal mass, in order to minimise heating and cooling load as well as energy consumption for artificial lighting. Chapter eleven discusses the growing importance of integrating Renewable Energy Technologies (RETs) into buildings, the range of technologies currently available and what to consider during technology selection processes in order to minimise carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels. The chapter draws to a close by highlighting the issues concerning system design and the need for careful integration and management of RETs once installed; and for home owners and operators to understand the characteristics of the technology in their building. Computer simulation tools play a significant role in sustainable building design because, as the modern built environment design (building and systems) becomes more complex, it requires tools to assist in the design process. Chapter twelve gives an overview of the primary benefits and users of simulation programs, the role of simulation in the construction process and examines the validity and interpretation of simulation results. Chapter thirteen particularly focuses on the Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulation method used for optimisation and performance assessment of technologies and solutions for sustainable building design and its application through a series of cases studies. People and building performance are intimately linked. A better understanding of occupants’ interaction with the indoor environment is essential to building energy and facilities management. Chapter fourteen focuses on the issue of occupant behaviour; principally, its impact, and the influence of building performance on them. Chapter fifteen explores the discipline of facilities management and the contribution that this emerging profession makes to securing sustainable building performance. The chapter highlights a much greater diversity of opportunities in sustainable building design that extends well into the operational life. Chapter sixteen reviews the concepts of modelling information flows and the use of Building Information Modelling (BIM), describing these techniques and how these aspects of information management can help drive sustainability. An explanation is offered concerning why information management is the key to ‘life-cycle’ thinking in sustainable building and construction. Measurement of building performance and sustainability is a key issue in delivering a sustainable built environment. Chapter seventeen identifies the means by which construction materials can be evaluated with respect to their sustainability. It identifies the key issues that impact the sustainability of construction materials and the methodologies commonly used to assess them. Chapter eighteen focuses on the topics of green building assessment, green building materials, sustainable construction and operation. Commonly-used assessment tools such as BRE Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM), Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design ( LEED) and others are introduced. Chapter nineteen discusses sustainable procurement which is one of the areas to have naturally emerged from the overall sustainable development agenda. It aims to ensure that current use of resources does not compromise the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Chapter twenty is a best-practice exemplar - the BRE Innovation Park which features a number of demonstration buildings that have been built to the UK Government’s Code for Sustainable Homes. It showcases the very latest innovative methods of construction, and cutting edge technology for sustainable buildings. In summary, Design and Management of Sustainable Built Environment book is the result of co-operation and dedication of individual chapter authors. We hope readers benefit from gaining a broad interdisciplinary knowledge of design and management in the built environment in the context of sustainability. We believe that the knowledge and insights of our academics and professional colleagues from different institutions and disciplines illuminate a way of delivering sustainable built environment through holistic integrated design and management approaches. Last, but not least, I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the chapter authors for their contribution. I would like to thank David Lim for his assistance in the editorial work and proofreading.

An evolutionary innovation perspective on the selection of low and zero carbon technologies in new housing

The Code for Sustainable Homes (the Code) will require new homes in the United Kingdom to be ‘zero carbon’ from 2016. Drawing upon an evolutionary innovation perspective, this paper contributes to a gap in the literature by investigating which low and zero carbon technologies are actually being used by house builders, rather than the prevailing emphasis on the potentiality of these technologies. Using the results from a questionnaire three empirical contributions are made. First, house builders are selecting a narrow range of technologies. Second, these choices are made to minimise the disruption to their standard design and production templates (SDPTs). Finally, the coalescence around a small group of technologies is expected to intensify with solar-based technologies predicted to become more important. This paper challenges the dominant technical rationality in the literature that technical efficiency and cost benefits are the primary drivers for technology selection. These drivers play an important role but one which is mediated by the logic of maintaining the SDPTs of the house builders. This emphasises the need for construction diffusion of innovation theory to be problematized and developed within the context of business and market regimes constrained and reproduced by resilient technological trajectories.

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.

As prescrições curriculares oficiais para rede de escolas de educação tecnológica do estado do Pará no contexto da implantação do ensino médio integrado no período de 2004 a 2009

O presente estudo teve como objetivo central analisar as prescrições curriculares oficiais para a implantação do ensino médio integrado na Rede de Escolas de Educação Tecnológica do Estado do Pará (EETEPA) no período de 2004 a 2009. Obteve financiamento do CNPq e foi vinculado ao Grupo de Estudos e Pesquisa sobre Currículo e Formação de Professores na Perspectiva da Inclusão (INCLUDERE). Trata-se de um estudo caso de caráter documental. A trajetória do estudo foi realizada por meio de pesquisa exploratória em estudos correlatos, com revisão bibliográfica em fontes secundárias da área de educação seguida de pesquisa documental em fontes primárias, como: leis, atos normativos, boletins informativos, proposta pedagógica, plano de curso de informática de uma unidade tecnológica da Rede EETEPA por meio de critério seletivo. Os aspectos discursivos tratados foram: os fundamentos teóricos para implantação do ensino médio integrado à educação profissional; As políticas curriculares para o ensino médio e educação profissional destacando o caráter dual entre a formação geral e profissional. Bem como, foi resgatado o movimento da implantação do ensino médio integrado em nível nacional e localmente no estado paraense mediante as prescrições curriculares oficiais. Os resultados alcançados: referiram-se primeiramente as estratégias adotadas pela SEDUC para implantação do ensino médio integrado nos estabelecimentos de ensino da Rede de EETEPA, a saber: Criação da Diretoria de Ensino Médio, com duas coordenações, a de Ensino Médio e de Educação Profissional; Quebra do contrato com a OSETPP, resgatando para a administração da SEDUC, as 11 (onze) escolas; Criação da Rede EETEPA; Realização de eventos (conferências, fóruns e seminários); Elaboração da proposta educacional para Rede EETEPA; Elaboração do Projeto Político-Pedagógico para Rede EETEPA; Orientações para reestruturação dos projetos políticos-pedagógicos das escolas tecnológicas e construção dos planos de cursos técnicos; Abertura de edital público para oferta de cursos subsequentes, integrado e PROEJA; e, Iniciação das reformas físicas nas unidades tecnológicas. Foi realizada, também, a identificação e análise das prescrições curriculares oficiais para Rede EETEPA, a saber, Proposta Educacional para a Rede EETEPA; Orientações para implantação de cursos técnicos de nível médio na forma integrada para a Rede EETEPA; Diretrizes Específicas II: Orientações Gerais para o Ensino Médio Integrado. Ao analisar esses documentos, constatei que a proposta educacional prescrita para Rede EETEPA pela COEP/DEMP-SEDUC, coaduna com a proposta idealizada pelo Ministério de Educação, ambas resgatam elementos já disseminados pelo pensamento educacional brasileiro desde as décadas dos anos 1980, com a finalidade de se erigir os fundamentos de uma escola unitária e politécnica, deixando explicita a concepção filosófica inspiradora do documento. Contudo, constatou-se que, o plano de curso de informática da Escola Técnica Magalhães Barata (localizada a região metropolitana de Belém do Pará) não conseguiu apresentar uma proposta coerente com os fundamentos do ensino médio integrado.

Service Innovation: the state of the art and a proposal of a research agenda

The service sector has acquired a growing importance in every country economy, which has stimulated research in the field of service innovation, a new field in management studies. This text aimed to state a research agenda upon service innovation, based on an articulated discussion of the results of several articles that compose the state of the art of this concept. 73 empirical articles were analyzed, 33% of them exploring the innovation strategies and technology; 18% of the articles describe research on economic performance and enterprise productivity; 16% are related to antecedents and determinants of innovation; another 16% about network capacity development, alliances and collaboration among organizations; 9% of the articles explore service quality, innovation taxonomy, flexible systems and regional systems of innovation; and another 8% are related to themes such as intensive knowledge, research and development. The researches were concentrated in the Engineering & Technology and Hospitality Industries, which accounted for 31% and 24% of the texts, respectively. The remaining 45% of the articles referred to sectors such as Telecommunications, Health, Retail, Financial & Insurance and Public Services. The main gaps identified in these texts refer to the difficulties on measuring service innovation, besides the small number of researches on the public sector. At the end, a research agenda in the subject is presented, including the development of a scale for orientating the innovation and identifying the determining factors of the innovation in the public environment.

Technology Development and Consumer Acceptance of Innovation in Fruit Production

Precision Agriculture (PA) and the more specific branch of Precision Horticulture are two very promising sectors. They focus on the use of technologies in agriculture to optimize the use of inputs, so to reach a better efficiency, and minimize waste of resources. This important objective motivated many researchers and companies to search new technology solutions. Sometimes the effort proved to be a good seed, but sometimes an unfeasible idea. So that PA, from its birth more or less 25 years ago, is still a “new” management, interesting for the future, but an actual low adoption rate is still reported by experts and researchers. This work aims to give a contribution in finding the causes of this low adoption rate and proposing a methodological solution to this problem. The first step was to examine prior research about Precision Agriculture adoption, by ex ante and ex post approach. It was supposed as important to find connections between these two phases of a purchase experience. In fact, the ex ante studies dealt with potential consumer’s perceptions before a usage experience occurred, therefore before purchasing a technology, while the ex post studies described the drivers which made a farmer become an end-user of PA technology. Then, an example of consumer research is presented. This was an ex ante research focused on pre-prototype technology for fruit production. This kind of research could give precious information about consumer acceptance before reaching an advanced development phase of the technology, and so to have the possibility to change something with the least financial impact. The final step was to develop the pre-prototype technology that was the subject of the consumer acceptance research and test its technical characteristics.

Investigating strategies and indicators for sustainable campus: Comparison and synergies between University of Bologna and Delft University of Technology

Sustainable development is one of the biggest challenges of the twenty fist-century. Various university has begun the debate about the content of this concept and the ways in which to integrate it into their policy, organization and activities. Universities have a special responsibility to take over a leading position by demonstrating best practices that sustain and educate a sustainable society. For that reason universities have the opportunity to create the culture of sustainability for today’s student, and to set their expectations for how the world should be. This thesis aim at analyzing how Delft University of Technology and University of Bologna face the challenge of becoming a sustainable campus. In this context, both universities have been studied and analyzed following the International Sustainable Campus Network (ISCN) methodology that provides a common framework to formalize commitments and goals at campus level. In particular this work has been aimed to highlight which key performance indicators are essential to reach sustainability as a consequence the following aspects has been taken into consideration: energy use, water use, solid waste and recycling, carbon emission. Subsequently, in order to provide a better understanding of the current state of sustainability on University of Bologna and Delft University of Technology, and potential strategies to achieve the stated objective, a SWOT Analysis has been undertaken. Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats have been shown to understand how the two universities can implement a synergy to improve each other. In the direction of framing a “Sustainable SWOT” has been considered the model proposed by People and Planet, so it has been necessary to evaluate important matters as for instance policy, investment, management, education and engagement. Regarding this, it has been fundamental to involve the main sustainability coordinators of the two universities, this has been achieved through a brainstorming session. Partnerships are key to the achievement of sustainability. The creation of a bridge between two universities aims to join forces and to create a new generation of talent. As a result, people can become able to support universities in the exchange of information, ideas, and best practices for achieving sustainable campus operations and integrating sustainability in research and teaching. For this purpose the project "SUCCESS" has been presented, the project aims to create an interactive European campus network that can be considered a strategic key player for sustainable campus innovation in Europe. Specifically, the main key performance indicators have been analyzed and the importance they have for the two universities and their strategic impact have been highlighted. For this reason, a survey was conducted with people who play crucial roles for sustainability within the two universities and they were asked to evaluate the KPIs of the project. This assessment has been relevant because has represented the foundation to develop a strategy to create a true collaboration.

Fostering sustainable urban development in Nakuru, Kenya Rift Valley

The town of Nakuru—Kenya's fourth largest town—lies in a unique setting in the Great Rift Valley. Recent developments on the Menengai Crater, the Mau Escarpment, and the Bahati Highlands exemplify the impacts of poorly planned urban growth on mountain ecosystems. The Nakuru Local Urban Observatory (LUO) project was initiated by the Municipal Council of Nakuru in January 2003, in collaboration with the Centre for Development and Environment (CDE) of the University of Berne and the Intermediate Technology Development Group (ITDG), and with funding from the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC). The project aims to provide a framework for sustainable urban development practices by building technical skills and improving participation by local stakeholders in decision-making processes. The potentials of information technology (IT) are being tapped to provide up-to-date information to decision-makers and democratize access to information, in order to improve public participation. The overall objective is to find ways of achieving better urban management in order to mitigate non-sustainable development trends in the town and its surroundings.

Compilation of scientific results of the OASIS project

Seamounts are of great interest to science, industry and conservation because of their potential role as 'stirring rods' of the oceans, their enhanced productivity, their high local biodiversity, and the growing exploitation of their natural resources. This is accompanied by rising concern about the threats to seamount ecosystems, e.g. through over-fishing and the impact of trawling. OASIS described the functioning characteristics of seamount ecosystems. OASIS' integrated hydrographic, biogeochemical and biological information. Based on two case studies. The scientific results, condensed in conceptual and mass balanced ecosystem models, were applied to outline a model management plan as well as site-specific management plans for the seamounts investigated. OASIS addressed five main objectives: Objective 1: To identify and describe the physical forcing mechanisms effecting seamount systems Objective 2: To assess the origin, quality and dynamics of particulate organic material within the water column and surface sediment at seamounts. Objective 3: To describe aspects of the biodiversity and the ecology of seamount biota, to assess their dynamics and the maintenance of their production. Objective 4: Modelling the trophic ecology of seamount ecosystems. Objective 5: Application of scientific knowledge to practical conservation.

OER Development and Promotion. Outcomes of an International Research Project on the OpenCourseWare Model

In this paper, we describe the successful results of an international research project focused on the use of Web technology in the educational context. The article explains how this international project, funded by public organizations and developed over the last two academic years, focuses on the area of open educational resources (OER) and particularly the educational content of the OpenCourseWare (OCW) model. This initiative has been developed by a research group composed of researchers from three countries. The project was enabled by the Universidad Politécnica de Madrid OCW Office�s leadership of the Consortium of Latin American Universities and the distance education know-how of the Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja (UTPL, Ecuador). We give a full account of the project, methodology, main outcomes and validation. The project results have further consolidated the group, and increased the maturity of group members and networking with other groups in the area. The group is now participating in other research projects that continue the lines developed here

Los agentes de la edificación desde el punto de vista de la Gestión Integral de Proyectos: diferencias y semejanzas entre la Legislación Española y los Estándares Internacionales = Expert agents in the Global Development of a building project: differences and similarities between Spanish and International contexts.

Desde los años 60, crece en Europa y Estados Unidos la preocupación y la necesidad de mejorar los procesos de gerencia de los proyectos de construcción al volverse estos más complejos. Esto ha llevado a la continua aparición de nuevos profesionales desde la fecha citada hasta nuestros días. De ahí la complejidad de conocer las cualidades de cada uno de ellos, así como las funciones a realizar o la formación que deben tener para poder desarrollar el puesto de trabajo según el papel que desempeñan para cada actividad. Muchos agentes son los que pueden intervenir en la edificación, muchas son las funciones que llevan a cabo estos agentes, muchas son las habilidades que se necesitan para realizar estas misiones, y una buena gestión de la edificación es la que hay que desarrollar para lograr el gran éxito. El presente trabajo fin de máster, dirigido a arquitectos, arquitectos técnicos, ingenieros, abogados, economistas y todos los profesionales del sector inmobiliario y de la construcción, trata de resolver todas aquellas dudas sobre los diferentes sujetos que estarán presentes desde la definición del proyecto en la fase inicial hasta el final de la obra, pasando por las fases de pre-construcción, construcción y post-construcción. (ENGLISH VERSION) Since the 1960s, most construction projects have become more and more complex, and new concerns and necessities related to the management of a project have been on the rise in Europe and in the United States. Thence, the need for more specialized professionals in the field has become a common fact, as well as the inclusion of new curricular subjects in most building engineering studies. There are different agents that play a relevant role in a building project; some of them are expected to perform a highly specialized set of functions that require specific management skills for the work to be successful. This research work—aimed mainly at engineers, quantity surveyors, lawyers, economists, real estate and construction professionals—shows the major implications of the building construction process including both pre-tender/construction and post-tender/construction stages as far as the main expert agents are involved.

Desarrollo de un modelo de predimensionado de costes de construcción en el proyecto arquitectónico

El objetivo de la presente investigación es el desarrollo de un modelo de cálculo rápido, eficiente y preciso, para la estimación de los costes finales de construcción, en las fases preliminares del proyecto arquitectónico. Se trata de una herramienta a utilizar durante el proceso de elaboración de estudios previos, anteproyecto y proyecto básico, no siendo por tanto preciso para calcular el “predimensionado de costes” disponer de la total definición grafica y literal del proyecto. Se parte de la hipótesis de que en la aplicación práctica del modelo no se producirán desviaciones superiores al 10 % sobre el coste final de la obra proyectada. Para ello se formulan en el modelo de predimensionado cinco niveles de estimación de costes, de menor a mayor definición conceptual y gráfica del proyecto arquitectónico. Los cinco niveles de cálculo son: dos que toman como referencia los valores “exógenos” de venta de las viviendas (promoción inicial y promoción básica) y tres basados en cálculos de costes “endógenos” de la obra proyectada (estudios previos, anteproyecto y proyecto básico). El primer nivel de estimación de carácter “exógeno” (nivel .1), se calcula en base a la valoración de mercado de la promoción inmobiliaria y a su porcentaje de repercusión de suelo sobre el valor de venta de las viviendas. El quinto nivel de valoración, también de carácter “exógeno” (nivel .5), se calcula a partir del contraste entre el valor externo básico de mercado, los costes de construcción y los gastos de promoción estimados de la obra proyectada. Este contraste entre la “repercusión del coste de construcción” y el valor de mercado, supone una innovación respecto a los modelos de predimensionado de costes existentes, como proceso metodológico de verificación y validación extrínseca, de la precisión y validez de las estimaciones resultantes de la aplicación práctica del modelo, que se denomina Pcr.5n (Predimensionado costes de referencia con .5niveles de cálculo según fase de definición proyectual / ideación arquitectónica). Los otros tres niveles de predimensionado de costes de construcción “endógenos”, se estiman mediante cálculos analíticos internos por unidades de obra y cálculos sintéticos por sistemas constructivos y espacios funcionales, lo que se lleva a cabo en las etapas iniciales del proyecto correspondientes a estudios previos (nivel .2), anteproyecto (nivel .3) y proyecto básico (nivel .4). Estos cálculos teóricos internos son finalmente evaluados y validados mediante la aplicación práctica del modelo en obras de edificación residencial, de las que se conocen sus costes reales de liquidación final de obra. Según va evolucionando y se incrementa el nivel de definición y desarrollo del proyecto, desde los estudios previos hasta el proyecto básico, el cálculo se va perfeccionando en su nivel de eficiencia y precisión de la estimación, según la metodología aplicada: [aproximaciones sucesivas en intervalos finitos], siendo la hipótesis básica como anteriormente se ha avanzado, lograr una desviación máxima de una décima parte en el cálculo estimativo del predimensionado del coste real de obra. El cálculo del coste de ejecución material de la obra, se desarrolla en base a parámetros cúbicos funcionales “tridimensionales” del espacio proyectado y parámetros métricos constructivos “bidimensionales” de la envolvente exterior de cubierta/fachada y de la huella del edificio sobre el terreno. Los costes funcionales y constructivos se ponderan en cada fase del proceso de cálculo con sus parámetros “temáticos/específicos” de gestión (Pg), proyecto (Pp) y ejecución (Pe) de la concreta obra presupuestada, para finalmente estimar el coste de construcción por contrata, como resultado de incrementar al coste de ejecución material el porcentaje correspondiente al parámetro temático/especifico de la obra proyectada. El modelo de predimensionado de costes de construcción Pcr.5n, será una herramienta de gran interés y utilidad en el ámbito profesional, para la estimación del coste correspondiente al Proyecto Básico previsto en el marco técnico y legal de aplicación. Según el Anejo I del Código Técnico de la Edificación (CTE), es de obligado cumplimiento que el proyecto básico contenga una “Valoración aproximada de la ejecución material de la obra proyectada por capítulos”, es decir , que el Proyecto Básico ha de contener al menos un “presupuesto aproximado”, por capítulos, oficios ó tecnologías. El referido cálculo aproximado del presupuesto en el Proyecto Básico, necesariamente se ha de realizar mediante la técnica del predimensionado de costes, dado que en esta fase del proyecto arquitectónico aún no se dispone de cálculos de estructura, planos de acondicionamiento e instalaciones, ni de la resolución constructiva de la envolvente, por cuanto no se han desarrollado las especificaciones propias del posterior proyecto de ejecución. Esta estimación aproximada del coste de la obra, es sencilla de calcular mediante la aplicación práctica del modelo desarrollado, y ello tanto para estudiantes como para profesionales del sector de la construcción. Como se contiene y justifica en el presente trabajo, la aplicación práctica del modelo para el cálculo de costes en las fases preliminares del proyecto, es rápida y certera, siendo de sencilla aplicación tanto en vivienda unifamiliar (aisladas y pareadas), como en viviendas colectivas (bloques y manzanas). También, el modelo es de aplicación en el ámbito de la valoración inmobiliaria, tasaciones, análisis de viabilidad económica de promociones inmobiliarias, estimación de costes de obras terminadas y en general, cuando no se dispone del proyecto de ejecución y sea preciso calcular los costes de construcción de las obras proyectadas. Además, el modelo puede ser de aplicación para el chequeo de presupuestos calculados por el método analítico tradicional (estado de mediciones pormenorizadas por sus precios unitarios y costes descompuestos), tanto en obras de iniciativa privada como en obras promovidas por las Administraciones Públicas. Por último, como líneas abiertas a futuras investigaciones, el modelo de “predimensionado costes de referencia 5 niveles de cálculo”, se podría adaptar y aplicar para otros usos y tipologías diferentes a la residencial, como edificios de equipamientos y dotaciones públicas, valoración de edificios históricos, obras de urbanización interior y exterior de parcela, proyectos de parques y jardines, etc….. Estas lineas de investigación suponen trabajos paralelos al aquí desarrollado, y que a modo de avance parcial se recogen en las comunicaciones presentadas en los Congresos internacionales Scieconf/Junio 2013, Rics‐Cobra/Septiembre 2013 y en el IV Congreso nacional de patología en la edificación‐Ucam/Abril 2014. ABSTRACT The aim of this research is to develop a fast, efficient and accurate calculation model to estimate the final costs of construction, during the preliminary stages of the architectural project. It is a tool to be used during the preliminary study process, drafting and basic project. It is not therefore necessary to have the exact, graphic definition of the project in order to be able to calculate the cost‐scaling. It is assumed that no deviation 10% higher than the final cost of the projected work will occur during the implementation. To that purpose five levels of cost estimation are formulated in the scaling model, from a lower to a higher conceptual and graphic definition of the architectural project. The five calculation levels are: two that take as point of reference the ”exogenous” values of house sales (initial development and basic development), and three based on calculation of endogenous costs (preliminary study, drafting and basic project). The first ”exogenous” estimation level (level.1) is calculated over the market valuation of real estate development and the proportion the cost of land has over the value of the houses. The fifth level of valuation, also an ”exogenous” one (level.5) is calculated from the contrast between the basic external market value, the construction costs, and the estimated development costs of the projected work. This contrast between the ”repercussions of construction costs” and the market value is an innovation regarding the existing cost‐scaling models, as a methodological process of extrinsic verification and validation, of the accuracy and validity of the estimations obtained from the implementation of the model, which is called Pcr.5n (reference cost‐scaling with .5calculation levels according to the stage of project definition/ architectural conceptualization) The other three levels of “endogenous” construction cost‐scaling are estimated from internal analytical calculations by project units and synthetic calculations by construction systems and functional spaces. This is performed during the initial stages of the project corresponding to preliminary study process (level.2), drafting (level.3) and basic project (level.4). These theoretical internal calculations are finally evaluated and validated via implementation of the model in residential buildings, whose real costs on final payment of the works are known. As the level of definition and development of the project evolves, from preliminary study to basic project, the calculation improves in its level of efficiency and estimation accuracy, following the applied methodology: [successive approximations at finite intervals]. The basic hypothesis as above has been made, achieving a maximum deviation of one tenth, in the estimated calculation of the true cost of predimensioning work. The cost calculation for material execution of the works is developed from functional “three‐dimensional” cubic parameters for the planned space and constructive “two dimensional” metric parameters for the surface that envelopes around the facade and the building’s footprint on the plot. The functional and building costs are analyzed at every stage of the process of calculation with “thematic/specific” parameters of management (Pg), project (Pp) and execution (Pe) of the estimated work in question, and finally the cost of contractual construction is estimated, as a consequence of increasing the cost of material execution with the percentage pertaining to the thematic/specific parameter of the projected work. The construction cost‐scaling Pcr.5n model will be a useful tool of great interest in the professional field to estimate the cost of the Basic Project as prescribed in the technical and legal framework of application. According to the appendix of the Technical Building Code (CTE), it is compulsory that the basic project contains an “approximate valuation of the material execution of the work, projected by chapters”, that is, that the basic project must contain at least an “approximate estimate” by chapter, trade or technology. This approximate estimate in the Basic Project is to be performed through the cost‐scaling technique, given that structural calculations, reconditioning plans and definitive contruction details of the envelope are still not available at this stage of the architectural project, insofar as specifications pertaining to the later project have not yet been developed. This approximate estimate of the cost of the works is easy to calculate through the implementation of the given model, both for students and professionals of the building sector. As explained and justified in this work, the implementation of the model for cost‐scaling during the preliminary stage is fast and accurate, as well as easy to apply both in single‐family houses (detached and semi‐detached) and collective housing (blocks). The model can also be applied in the field of the real‐estate valuation, official appraisal, analysis of the economic viability of real estate developments, estimate of the cost of finished projects and, generally, when an implementation project is not available and it is necessary to calculate the building costs of the projected works. The model can also be applied to check estimates calculated by the traditional analytical method (state of measurements broken down into price per unit cost details), both in private works and those promoted by Public Authorities. Finally, as potential lines for future research, the “five levels of calculation cost‐scaling model”, could be adapted and applied to purposes and typologies other than the residential one, such as service buildings and public facilities, valuation of historical buildings, interior and exterior development works, park and garden planning, etc… These lines of investigation are parallel to this one and, by way of a preview, can be found in the dissertations given in the International Congresses Scieconf/June 2013, Rics‐Cobra/September 2013 and in the IV Congress on building pathology ‐Ucam/April 2014.

Inter-organizational information systems adoption for service innovation in building sector

The building sector has experienced a significant decline in recent years in Spain and Europe as a result of the financial crisis that began in 2007. This drop accompanies a low penetration of information and communication technologies in inter-organizational oriented business processes. The market decrease is causing a slowdown in the building sector, where only flexible small and medium enterprises (SMEs) survive thanks to specialization and innovation in services, which allow them to face new market demands. Inter-organizational information systems (IOISs) support innovation in services, and are thus a strategic tool for SMEs to obtain competitive advantage. Because of the inherent complexity of IOIS adoption, this research extends Kurnia and Johnston's (2000) theoretical model of IOIS adoption with an empirical model of IOIS characterization. The resultant model identifies the factors influencing IOIS adoption in SMEs in the building sector, to promote further service innovation for competitive and collaborative advantages. An empirical longitudinal study over six consecutive years using data from Spanish SMEs in the building sector validates the model, using the partial least squares technique and analyzing temporal stability. The main findings of this research are the four ways an IOIS might contribute to service innovation in the building sector. Namely: a) improving client interfaces and the link between service providers and end users; b) defining a specific market where SMEs can develop new service concepts; c) enhancing the service delivery system in traditional customer?supplier relationships; and d) introducing information and communication technologies and tools to improve information management.

La Península Ibérica en el transporte masivo de mercancías entre Europa y África : futuras autopistas del mar

La competitividad del transporte de mercancías depende del estado y funcionamiento de las redes existentes y de sus infraestructuras, no del modo de transporte. En concreto, la rentabilidad o la reducción de los costes de producción del transporte marítimo se vería incrementado con el uso de buques de mayor capacidad y con el desarrollo de plataformas portuarias de distribución o puertos secos, ya que el 90% del comercio entre la Unión Europea y terceros países se realiza a través de sus puertos a un promedio de 3,2 billones de toneladas de mercancías manipuladas cada año y el 40% del tráfico intraeuropeo utiliza el transporte marítimo de corta distancia. A pesar de que los puertos europeos acogen anualmente a más de 400 millones de pasajeros, los grandes desarrollos se han producido en los puertos del norte de Europa (Róterdam, Amberes, Ámsterdam). Los países del Sur de Europa deben buscar nuevas fórmulas para ser más competitivos, ya sea mediante creación de nuevas infraestructuras o mediante refuerzo de las existentes, ofreciendo los costes de los puertos del Norte. El fomento del transporte marítimo y fluvial como alternativa al transporte por carretera, especialmente el transporte marítimo de corta distancia, ha sido impulsado por la Comisión Europea (CE) desde 2003 a través de programas de apoyo comunitario de aplicación directa a las Autopistas del Mar, a modo de ejemplo, cabría citar los programas Marco Polo I y II, los cuales contaron con una dotación presupuestaria total de 855 millones de euros para el período 2003 – 2013; en ese período de tiempo se establecieron objetivos de reducción de congestión vial y mejora del comportamiento medio ambiental del sistema de transporte de mercancías dentro de la comunidad y la potenciación de la intermodalidad. El concepto de Autopista del Mar surge en el Libro Blanco de Transportes de la Comisión Europea “La política europea de transportes de cara al 2010: La hora de la verdad” del 12 de diciembre de 2001, en el marco de una política europea para fomento y desarrollo de sistemas de transportes sostenibles. Las Autopistas del Mar consisten en rutas marítimas de corta distancia entre dos puntos, de menor distancia que por vía terrestre, en las que a través del transporte intermodal mejoran significativamente los tiempos y costes de la cadena logística, contribuyen a la reducción de accidentes, ruidos y emisiones de CO2 a la atmósfera, permite que los conductores pierdan horas de trabajo al volante y evita el deterioro de las infraestructuras terrestres, con el consiguiente ahorro en mantenimiento. La viabilidad de una Autopista del Mar depende tanto de factores de ubicación geográficos, como de características propias del puerto, pasando por los diferentes requerimientos del mercado en cada momento (energéticos, medio ambientales y tecnológicos). Existe un elemento nuevo creado por la Comisión Europea: la red transeuropea de transportes (RTE-T). En el caso de España, con sus dos accesos por los Pirineos (La Junquera e Irún) como únicos pasos terrestres de comunicación con el continente y con importantes limitaciones ferroviarias debido a los tres anchos de vía distintos, le resta competitividad frente al conjunto europeo; por el contrario, España es el país europeo con más kilómetros de costa (con más de 8.000 km) y con un emplazamiento geográfico estratégico, lo que le convierte en una plataforma logística para todo el sur de Europa, por lo que las Autopistas del Mar tendrán un papel importante y casi obligado para el desarrollo de los grandes corredores marítimos que promueve Europa. De hecho, Gijón y Vigo lo han hecho muy bien con sus respectivas líneas definidas como Autopistas del Mar y que conectan con el puerto francés de Nantes-Saint Nazaire, ya que desde ahí los camiones pueden coger rutas hacia el Norte. Paralelamente, la Unión Europea ha iniciado los pasos para el impulso de la primera Autopista del Mar que conectará España con el mercado de Reino Unido, concretamente los Puertos de Bilbao y Tilbury. Además, España e Italia sellaron un acuerdo internacional para desarrollar Autopistas del Mar entre ambos países, comprometiéndose a impulsar una docena de rutas entre puertos del litoral mediterráneo español y el italiano. Actualmente, están en funcionando los trayectos como Barcelona-Génova, Valencia-Civitavecchia y Alicante- Nápoles, notablemente más cortos por mar que por carretera. Bruselas identificó cuatro grandes corredores marítimos que podrían concentrar una alta densidad de tráfico de buques, y en dos de ellos España ya tenía desde un principio un papel crucial. La Comisión diseñó el 14 de abril de 2004, a través del proyecto West-Mos, una red de tráfico marítimo que tiene como vías fundamentales la denominada Autopista del Báltico (que enlaza Europa central y occidental con los países bálticos), la Autopista de Europa suroriental (que une el Adriático con el Jónico y el Mediterráneo más oriental) y también la Autopista de Europa occidental y la Autopista de Europa suroccidental (que enlazan España con Reino Unido y la Francia atlántica y con la Francia mediterránea e Italia, respectivamente). Para poder establecer Autopistas del Mar entre la Península Ibérica y el Norte de Europa primará especialmente la retirada de camiones en la frontera pirenaica, donde el tráfico pesado tiene actualmente una intensidad media diaria de 8.000 unidades, actuando sobre los puntos de mayor congestión, como por ejemplo los Alpes, los Pirineos, el Canal de la Mancha, las carreteras fronterizas de Francia y Euskadi, y proponiendo el traslado de las mercancías en barcos o en trenes. Por su parte, para contar con los subsidios y apoyos europeos las rutas seleccionadas como Autopistas del Mar deben mantener una serie de criterios de calidad relacionados con la frecuencia, coste “plataforma logística a plataforma logística”, simplicidad en procedimientos administrativos y participación de varios países, entre otros. Los estudios consideran inicialmente viables los tramos marítimos superiores a 450 millas, con un volumen de unas 15.000 plataformas al año y que dispongan de eficientes comunicaciones desde el puerto a las redes transeuropeas de autopistas y ferrocarril. Otro objetivo de las Autopistas del Mar es desarrollar las capacidades portuarias de forma que se puedan conectar mejor las regiones periféricas a escala del continente europeo. En lo que a Puertos se refiere, las terminales en los muelles deben contar con una línea de atraque de 250 m., un calado superior a 8 m., una rampa “ro-ro” de doble calzada, grúas portainer, y garantizar operatividad para un mínimo de dos frecuencias de carga semanales. El 28 de marzo de 2011 se publicó el segundo Libro Blanco sobre el futuro del transporte en Europa “Hoja de ruta hacia un espacio único europeo de transporte: por una política de transportes competitiva y sostenible”, donde se definió el marco general de las acciones a emprender en los próximos diez años en el ámbito de las infraestructuras de transporte, la legislación del mercado interior, la reducción de la dependencia del carbono, la tecnología para la gestión del tráfico y los vehículos limpios, así como la estandarización de los distintos mercados. Entre los principales desafíos se encuentran la eliminación de los cuellos de botella y obstáculos diversos de nuestra red europea de transporte, minimizar la dependencia del petróleo, reducir las emisiones de GEI en un 60% para 2050 con respecto a los niveles de 1990 y la inversión en nuevas tecnologías e infraestructuras que reduzcan estas emisiones de transporte en la UE. La conexión entre la UE y el norte de África provoca elevados niveles de congestión en los puntos más críticos del trayecto: frontera hispano-francesa, corredor del Mediterráneo y el paso del estrecho. A esto se le añade el hecho de que el sector del transporte por carretera está sujeto a una creciente competencia de mercado motivada por la eliminación de las barreras europeas, mayores exigencias de los cargadores, mayores restricciones a los conductores y aumento del precio del gasóleo. Por otro lado, el mercado potencial de pasajeros tiene una clara diferenciación en tipos de flujos: los flujos en el período extraordinario de la Operación Paso del Estrecho (OPE), enfocado principalmente a marroquíes que vuelven a su país de vacaciones; y los flujos en el período ordinario, enfocado a la movilidad global de la población. Por tanto, lo que se pretende conseguir con este estudio es analizar la situación actual del tráfico de mercancías y pasajeros con origen o destino la península ibérica y sus causas, así como la investigación de las ventajas de la creación de una conexión marítima (Autopista del Mar) con el Norte de África, basándose en los condicionantes técnicos, administrativos, económicos, políticos, sociales y medio ambientales. The competitiveness of freight transport depends on the condition and operation of existing networks and infrastructure, not the mode of transport. In particular, profitability could be increased or production costs of maritime transport could be reduced by using vessels with greater capacity and developing port distribution platforms or dry ports, seeing as 90% of trade between the European Union and third countries happens through its ports. On average 3,2 billion tonnes of freight are handled annualy and 40% of intra-European traffic uses Short Sea Shipping. In spite of European ports annually hosting more than 400 million passengers, there have been major developments in the northern European ports (Rotterdam, Antwerp, Amsterdam). Southern European countries need to find new ways to be more competitive, either by building new infrastructure or by strengthening existing infrastructure, offering costs northern ports. The use of maritime and river transport as an alternative to road transport, especially Short Sea Shipping, has been driven by the European Commission (EC) from 2003 through community support programs for the Motorways of the Sea. These programs include, for example, the Marco Polo I and II programs, which had a total budget of 855 million euros for the period 2003-2013. During this time objectives were set for reducing road congestion, improving the environmental performance of the freight transport system within the community and enhancing intermodal transport. The “Motorway of the Sea” concept arises in the European Commission’s Transport White Paper "European transport policy for 2010: time to decide" on 12 December 2001, as part of a European policy for the development and promotion of sustainable transport systems. A Motorway of the Sea is defined as a short sea route between two points, covering less distance than by road, which provides a significant improvement in intermodal transport times and to the cost supply chain. It contributes to reducing accidents, noise and CO2 emissions, allows drivers to shorten their driving time and prevents the deterioration of land infrastructure thereby saving on maintenance costs. The viability of a Motorway of the Sea depends as much on geographical location factors as on characteristics of the port, taking into account the different market requirements at all times (energy, environmental and technological). There is a new element created by the European Commission: the trans-European transport network (TEN-T). In the case of Spain, with its two access points in the Pyrenees (La Junquera and Irun) as the only land crossings connected to the mainland and major railway limitations due to the three different gauges, it appears less competitive compared to Europe as a whole. However, Spain is the European country with the most kilometers of coastline (over 8,000 km) and a strategic geographical location, which makes it a logistics platform for the all of Southern Europe. This is why the Motorways of the Sea will have an important role, and an almost necessary one to develop major maritime corridors that Europe supports. In fact, Gijon and Vigo have done very well with their respective sea lanes defined as Motorways of the Sea and which connect with the French port of Nantes-Saint Nazaire, as from there trucks can use nort-heading routes. In parallel, the European Union has taken the first steps to boost the first Motorway of the Sea linking Spain to the UK market, specifically the ports of Bilbao and Tilbury. Furthermore, Spain and Italy sealed an international agreement to develop Motorways of the Sea between both countries, pledging to develop a dozen routes between ports on the Spanish and Italian Mediterranean coasts. Currently, there are sea lanes already in use such as Barcelona-Genova, Valencia-Civitavecchia and Alicante-Naples, these are significantly shorter routes by sea than by road. Brussels identified four major maritime corridors that could hold heavy concentrate shipping traffic, and Spain had a crucial role in two of these from the beginning. On 14 April 2004 the Commission planned through the West-Mos project, a network of maritime traffic which includes the essential sea passages the so-called Baltic Motorway (linking Central and Western Europe with the Baltic countries), the southeast Europe Motorway (linking the Adriatic to the Ionian and eastern Mediterranean Sea), the Western Europe Motorway and southwestern Europe Motorway (that links Spain with Britain and the Atlantic coast of France and with the French Mediterranean coast and Italy, respectively). In order to establish Motorways of the Sea between the Iberian Peninsula and Northern Europe especially, it is necessary to remove trucks from the Pyrenean border, where sees heavy traffic (on average 8000 trucks per day) and addressing the points of greatest congestion, such as the Alps, the Pyrenees, the English Channel, the border roads of France and Euskadi, and proposing the transfer of freight on ships or trains. For its part, in order to receive subsidies and support from the European Commission, the routes selected as Motorways of the Sea should maintain a series of quality criteria related to frequency, costs "from logistics platform to logistics platform," simplicity in administrative procedures and participation of several countries, among others. To begin with, studies consider viable a maritime stretch of at least 450 miles with a volume of about 15,000 platforms per year and that have efficient connections from port to trans-European motorways and rail networks. Another objective of the Motorways of the Sea is to develop port capacity so that they can better connect peripheral regions across the European continent. Referring ports, the terminals at the docks must have a berthing line of 250 m., a draft greater than 8 m, a dual carriageway "ro-ro" ramp, portainer cranes, and ensure operability for a minimum of two loads per week. On 28 March 2011 the second White Paper about the future of transport in Europe "Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area – Towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system" was published. In this Paper the general framework of actions to be undertaken in the next ten years in the field of transport infrastructure was defined, including internal market legislation, reduction of carbon dependency, traffic management technology and clean vehicles, as well as the standardization of different markets. The main challenges are how to eliminate bottlenecks and various obstacles in our European transport network, minimize dependence on oil, reduce GHG emissions by 60% by 2050 compared to 1990 levels and encourage investment in new technologies and infrastructure that reduce EU transport emissions. The connection between the EU and North Africa causes high levels of congestion on the most critical points of the journey: the Spanish-French border, the Mediterranean corridor and Gibraltar Strait. In addition to this, the road transport sector is subject to increased market competition motivated by the elimination of European barriers, greater demands of shippers, greater restrictions on drivers and an increase in the price of diesel. On the other hand, the potential passenger market has a clear differentiation in type of flows: flows in the special period of the Crossing the Straits Operation (CSO), mainly focused on Moroccans who return home on vacation; and flows in the regular session, focused on the global mobile population. Therefore, what I want to achieve with this study is present an analysis of the current situation of freight and passengers to or from the Iberian Peninsula and their causes, as well as present research on the advantages of creating a maritime connection (Motorways of the Sea) with North Africa, based on the technical, administrative, economic, political, social and environmental conditions.