Risking peace in the ‘War against the Poor’? Social exclusion and the legacies of the Northern Ireland conflict

Discourses around poverty, dependency and austerity take a particular form when it comes to Northern Ireland which is seen as ripe for economic ‘rebalancing’ and public sector reduction. The Welfare Reform Act 2012 is pivotal in that it provides the muscle for disciplining claimants for a low-waged, flexible labour market. But the Northern Ireland Assembly has not passed the Act or agreed a budget and the return of Direct Rule beckons as a result. The article sheds light on the stand-off over the Welfare Reform Act using data from the 2012 PSE Survey. It demonstrates that the impact of violent conflict is imprinted on the population in terms of high rates of deprivation, poor physical and mental health, and significant differences between those experiencing little or no conflict, and those with ‘high’ experience. In ignoring these legacies of the conflict, the Westminster government is risking peace in its ‘war against the poor’.

Gramsci, austerity common sense and the attacks on the welfare state: The need to understand and resist the imposition of the global neoliberal agenda and the role of the social work profession.

During the last 30 years governments almost everywhere in the world are furthering a global neoliberal agenda by withdrawing the state from the delivery of services, decreasing social spending and lowering corporate taxation etc. This restructuring has led to a massive transfer of wealth from the welfare state and working class people into capital. In order to legitimize this restructuring conservative governments engage in collective blaming towards their denizens. This presentation will examine some of the well circulated phrases that have been used by the dominant elite in some countries during the last year to legitimize the imposition of austerity measures. Phrases such as, ‘We all partied’ used by the Irish finance minister, Brian Lenihan, to explain the Irish crisis and collectively blame all Irish people, ‘We must all share the pain’, deployed by another Irish Minister Gilmore and the UK coalition administration’s sound bite ‘We are all in this together’, legitimize the imposition of austerity measures. Utilizing the Gramscian concept of common sense (Gramsci, 1971), I call these phrases ‘austerity common sense’. They are austerity common sense because they both reflect and legitimate the austerity agenda. By deploying these phrases, the ruling economic and political elite seek to influence the perception of the people and pre-empt any intention of resistance. The dominant theme of these phrases is that there is no alternative and that austerity measures are somehow self-inflicted and, as such, should not be challenged because we are all to blame. The purpose of this presentation is to explore the “austerity common sense” theme from a Gramscian approach, focus on its implications for the social work profession and discuss the ways to resist the imposition of the global neoliberal agenda.

Da avaliação do impacte à articulação da investigação - práticas - o caso da articulação na formação didáctica pós-graduada de professores de ciências e desafios futuros

A linha de investigação deste estudo é a ‘articulação da Investigação em Didáctica das Ciências e Práticas de Ensino dos Professores de Ciências’. O seu enquadramento teórico e metodológico inicial assentou nos estudos das áreas ‘Relações entre Investigação e as Práticas’ e ‘Avaliação da Formação Pós-Graduada – vertente impacte/articulação’. Inicialmente, fez-se uma análise histórico-epistemológica da Didáctica desde a sua génese até aos dias de hoje, para se compreender quer as raízes do gap entre académicos e práticos em geral, quer a crescente necessidade de articulação. Posteriormente, avançou-se para a primeira área, partindo da polémica despoletada por Hargreaves, ao defender que o ensino deveria ser uma profissão baseada na investigação. Em seguida, partiu-se de uma análise mais geral sobre a Investigação e as Práticas no contexto educacional em vários países antes se centrar especificamente no contexto da Didáctica das Ciências (impacte da IDC nas Práticas e constrangimentos na articulação). Analisou-se também brevemente as relações entre a IDC e Práticas no contexto da Formação de Professores, e não a área da Formação de Professores, para mantermos sempre o foco nas questões inerentes à articulação. Culminou-se na análise das culturas e epistemologias da acção e da investigação, com especial destaque para o conceito de professorinvestigador na actualidade e para a descrição das barreiras epistemológicas e ontológicas. Concluiu-se que as comunidades da investigação e da acção utilizavam o conceito ‘articulação’ indiscriminadamente como sinónimo de interacções, contacto, aproximação, impacte, etc., o que acabou esvaziando-o do seu verdadeiro significado. No que diz respeito à segunda área, a sua análise partiu da descrição da evolução de dez anos (1997-2007) de estudos sobre a Avaliação do Impacte dos CM nas práticas por ser considerada uma forma eficaz de articular as dimensões da Didáctica em direcção a um novo olhar sobre o conceito ‘articulação’. Além disso, apontou a dificuldade de se avaliar o impacte ao nível macro, por um lado, por não se tratar de uma prática investigativa institucionalizada no estatuto da carreira dos professores dos EB e ES e, por outro, por ainda colidir com diferentes concepções da natureza das investigações realizadas por Professores encontradas em ambas as comunidades, entendida ora como processo cognitivo (para o desenvolvimento profissional dos professores), ora como prática social (para construção de conhecimento no campo da Didáctica). Foram compiladas ainda as sugestões para se potenciar o impacte da IDC nas Práticas e/ou a articulação entre a IDC-Práticas em contexto formativo de diversos estudos avaliativos. Finalizou-se a análise chamando a atenção para cinco aspectos que ainda carecem de maior aprofundamento nesta área. Este longo enquadramento evidenciou a complexidade da problemática ‘articulação’ decorrente da interdependência das várias dimensões (epistemológica, política, ontológica, psicológica, ética, entre outras). Por exemplo, a ausência de consenso sobre critérios para a avaliação da qualidade da investigação produzida por professores (dimensões política e epistemológica) acaba, por vezes, por não conferir legitimidade às mesmas e por influenciar a legitimação pela comunidade académica, o que resulta na necessidade de diferenciação dos contributos e no maior afastamento entre as comunidades (dimensão ontológica), entre outros. Assim, optou-se por iniciar a análise do fenómeno ‘articulação entre IDCPráticas’ através dos primeiros modelos de articulação investigação-ensino, os quais visavam, contudo, fundamentalmente o impacte da IDC nas Práticas de Ensino das Ciências. Posteriormente, foram apresentadas as potencialidades da Avaliação ↔ Feedback, TIC e Colaboração (estratégias/métodos) para potenciar a articulação entre Investigação- Práticas. No que diz respeito à investigação empírica, realizou-se um estudo de caso descritivo e explorativo de natureza mista. O caso único, crítico e instrumental foi o fenómeno “articulação entre a IDC-Práticas na Formação Didáctica Pós- Graduada” no contexto da unidade curricular ‘Metodologia do Ensino da Física’ (MEF) do Curso de Mestrado em Ensino de Física. A técnica de análise geral utilizada foi a “descrição do caso” pelo facto de não se ter um referencial teórico especificamente sobre o caso. O caso contemplou três unidades de análise, a saber: Caracterização dos Professores-Formandos; Funcionamento da Unidade Curricular e Dinâmica dos currículos dos módulos articuladores. Estas unidades de análises permitiram evidenciar de que forma as características e/ou alterações implementadas na disciplina MEF contribuíram (ou podem contribuir) para a articulação da IDC-Práticas e descrever as dinâmicas do currículo (intencional – negociado – acção), evidenciando em que medida promoveram (ou inibiram) a articulação IDC – práticas. O estudo de caso aqui descrito revelou, ainda, a existência de dois níveis de articulação entre a Investigação e as Práticas no contexto formativo. O primeiro nível foi a articulação entre a Investigação sobre o Ensino Superior/Formação de Professores de Ciências (patente nas estratégias/métodos utilizados na disciplina) e a prática formativa dos IF no contexto da disciplina. O segundo nível centrou-se na articulação entre a Investigação sobre o Ensino não-Superior/Didáctica das Ciências e as práticas de Ensino das Ciências, base orientadora do currículo da disciplina aqui analisada, concretizado nos dois módulos articuladores descritos. Destacam-se algumas dimensões de análise descritas na presente investigação empírica, a saber: Utilização das TIC; Avaliação do Ensino baseada no feedback dos alunos; Avaliação Formativa das Aprendizagens e feedback; Trabalho de grupo realizado nos módulos articuladores; Currículo centrado na IDC; Currículo centrado na articulação da IDC-Práticas de Ensino das Ciências; Currículo centrado nas Práticas de Ensino das Ciências; Currículo centrado na articulação da Investigação-Práticas formativas e Currículo centrado nas Políticas Educativas. Relativamente a dinâmica dos currículos (intencional - negociado - acção) dos dois módulos articuladores, foram definidos quatro construtos (objectos de ensino, objectos de aprendizagem, objectivos de ensino e objectivos de aprendizagem) que culminaram na discussão de vários aspectos a serem considerados nos próximos cursos como, por exemplo: 1) Importância de o contrato didáctico prever a inclusão de objectos de aprendizagem; 2) Incompatibilidade do objectivo de aprendizagem ‘compreender a importância da IDC e a sua relevância para as práticas lectivas em contextos específicos’ num quadro formativo articulador; e 3) Importância de os cursos de formação de professores explicitarem quais ferramentas investigativas são necessárias à produção autónoma de conhecimento no contexto escolar e académico (mesmo que não sejam mobilizadas), de forma a que os professores possam delinear previamente planos individuais de formação/investigação. O estudo termina com a apropriação do modelo de articulação entre a Investigação Educacional e Práticas de McIntyre (2005) ao contexto da Didáctica das Ciências evidenciando uma relação dialógica com a investigação empírica. Apesar de este modelo priorizar a dimensão epistemológica (que aceita o gap pela impossibilidade epistemológica do seu total desaparecimento), na sua apropriação foi considerada a influência das outras dimensões. Esta apropriação assentou, portanto, numa visão moderada de articulação e na complexidade inerente à interdependência das dimensões. Foram propostos três caminhos epistemológicos complementares para a articulação entre a IDC-Práticas: 1º) Interacções entre Didáctica Investigativa – Didáctica Profissional; 2º) Utilização de estratégias na IDC especialmente desenhadas para informar as práticas de ensino; e 3º) Realização de IDC pela escola. Em cada um destes caminhos procurou-se enquadrar algumas sugestões e iniciativas já levadas a cabo para potenciar o impacte e/ou articulação e que se encontravam referenciadas na literatura em geral e no contexto português em particular. O primeiro caminho (composto por cinco etapas) evidenciou-se como aquele que leva a maior vantagem pelas inúmeras intervenções possíveis. A investigação empírica aqui apresentada enquadrou-se inclusivamente neste primeiro caminho pelo facto de ter sido uma iniciativa com a intencionalidade explícita de articular a Didáctica Investigativa e Profissional e por ter sido realizada no contexto da Formação Pós-Graduada (cenário considerado privilegiado para a promoção de interacções). Esta iniciativa foi realizada exclusivamente no âmbito curricular da Formação Pós-Graduada (Didáctica Curricular) e procurou articular as dimensões epistemológicas da Didáctica através da utilização de ‘mecanismos potencialmente articuladores’ (Avaliação - feedback, TIC e Colaboração). Foram descritas as quatro etapas deste primeiro caminho percorridas empiricamente com variações no grau de concretização, com excepção da quinta etapa ‘Investigação sobre a prática de ensino com generalização situada’ porque a vertente dissertativa do respectivo curso não fez parte do corpus. Assim, a articulação ocorreu fundamentalmente no nível epistemológico (currículo da disciplina). No que diz respeito ao 2º caminho, é aquele em que a comunidade académica mais tem investido, quer pelas críticas voltadas especificamente para a investigação, quer pelo sucesso na potenciação do impacte nas propostas até agora implementadas. Deve ser utilizado de forma complementar ao 1º, envolvendo, de preferência, os Professores que percorrem frequentemente o 1º caminho na sua prática diária. Esta condição justifica-se pela necessidade de se integrar legitimamente os professores nas equipas de investigação, aumentando concomitantemente a contribuição das Práticas para a construção de conhecimento no campo educacional. Finalmente, o 3º caminho é aquele que ainda não pode ser concretizado porque, para as Escolas serem diferentes das actuais na dimensão epistemológica (tornando-se produtoras de conhecimento didáctico), seriam necessárias medidas estruturais e articuladas nas várias dimensões anteriormente referidas. Entretanto, foram apontadas algumas soluções como, por exemplo, a utilização de investigações de generalização situada nas Escolas e a ligação das Escolas em redes. Estas investigações locais não substituiriam, mas mobilizariam a IDC produzida nas Universidades (centradas na construção do campo Didáctica das Ciências). Este caminho visionário culmina por um lado, com uma análise prospectiva assente na relação de complementaridade entre as evidências científicas e experienciais porque uma prática sem suporte investigativo é imprudente e uma investigação sem suporte experiencial é imatura. Por outro com uma constatação tardia (deveras reconfortante) que os estudos centrados na relação entre a Investigação e Práticas são estudos voltados para a Formação de Investigadores-Seniores por exigirem uma meta-reflexão da prática investigativa e do processo investigativo. As implicações do estudo são: (i) futuras iniciativas de articulação entre IDCPráticas; (ii) implementar e avaliar as sugestões advindas em novos contextos formativos; e (iii) na Educação a distância na área da Didáctica e Formação Didáctica de Professores. Assume-se a limitação estrutural da investigação resultante da alteração do projecto inicial que o restringiu a uma única etapa. Faz-se ainda uma reflexão do processo formativo-investigativo mediante a descrição dos constrangimentos de natureza interna e externa. Explicitam-se as limitações de carácter geral e específico e algumas tentativas de minimização dos respectivos efeitos no estudo. Finaliza-se o estudo com algumas sugestões de trabalhos futuros, a saber: (i) Continuidade dos estudos centrados na articulação entre IDC-Práticas; (ii) Continuidade dos estudos de Avaliação da Formação Pós-Graduada em termos de eficiência, eficácia, impacte e articulação; (iii) Análise da Epistemologia da Prática Docente em comunidades de práticas escolares; (iv) Articulação entre a Investigação sobre a Formação de Professores e as práticas dos formadores e futuros-formadores; e (v) Constituição de “Scholarship of teaching” na Formação de Professores.

La grammaire de soi ; l’enquête psychanalytique, un mode d’organisation des interactions propre aux sociétés démocratiques contemporaines

Une multitude de gens, au XXe siècle, se sont servis de la psychanalyse pour se rendre compte de leurs faits et gestes. En s’appuyant ainsi sur la psychanalyse, ils démontraient la profondeur de la confiance qu’ils lui accordaient. Cette diffusion ample et profonde, qui a laissé une empreinte très marquée sur la culture contemporaine, demeure largement inexpliquée. Ce phénomène étonnant devient intelligible dès lors qu’on aborde la psychanalyse comme une grammaire de l’intériorité, qui a guidé des interactions en les médiatisant par des symboles et des significations communes (normes, valeurs, etc.) propres aux sociétés démocratiques contemporaines (celles qui se conçoivent comme émanant d’un accord entre individus). Cette pratique sociale, l’enquête psychanalytique, peut être analysée en situant dans leurs contextes d’interactions les discours dans lesquels des désirs refoulés étaient imputés à différentes conduites. L’œuvre de Freud offre un échantillon de tels discours. La description de la forme et du sens que ces imputations de désirs refoulés conféraient à différentes interactions en cours nous permet d’identifier les traits caractéristiques de l’enquête psychanalytique. Freud montre que le refoulement naît d’un conflit entre une volonté présociale refoulée et une volonté socialisée, refoulante, née des exigences inculquées par l’autorité parentale. Pour identifier un désir refoulé, il faut donc simultanément identifier une relation refoulante. L’enquête psychanalytique amène à passer en revue les différentes relations interpersonnelles et intrapersonnelles dans lesquelles est impliqué l’auteur du refoulement. Cet exercice permet de départager les relations qui contraignent la volonté intérieure présociale à des exigences sociales de celles qui, en sens inverse, émanent de cette volonté intérieure. Comme les premières suscitent le refoulement et les symptômes indésirables qu’il entraîne, la guérison du refoulement exige que le porteur du refoulement prenne ses distances des exigences sociales héritées, de manière à parvenir à reconnaître sa volonté présociale. En soupesant ainsi la contrainte exercée sur les volontés présociales par les relations particulières, l’enquête psychanalytique jaugeait ces dernières à partir d’une exigence propre aux sociétés démocratiques contemporaines : celle de fonder les relations sociales sur les volontés non contraintes des partenaires. L’enquête psychanalytique participait ainsi d’un imaginaire social moderne qui donnait, à des relations variées, la forme d’un contrat. Les contemporains qui recouraient à cette enquête manifestaient un souci de respecter cette exigence et ils suscitaient une réaction critique envers les relations qui contraignaient la volonté. En somme, l’enquête psychanalytique offrait aux contemporains une manière d’ordonner les relations qui était adaptée à une société accordant une autorité prééminente aux exigences « contractuelles ». Voilà qui explique en grande partie l’ampleur et la profondeur de la diffusion de la psychanalyse au XXe siècle.

La partición en vida y otras figuras similares: Protección judicial a los acreedores

El propósito del tema a desarrollar a través de este documento es el de analizar y comprender, bajo una óptica crítica y reflexiva, la institución jurídica de la partición en vida, su noción, regulación y efectos, con miras a determinar los posibles perjuicios que pueda generar la aplicación de esta figura a los acreedores de quien lleva a cabo la misma. Basados en dicho objetivo, se expone a la partición en vida como institución jurídica, analizando el fallo de la Corte Constitucional mediante el cual se declara su exequibilidad, y contrastándola con la partición por donación, usada en Argentina, como referente extranjero. Así mismo, son abordadas distintas instituciones jurídicas cuyo análisis permite denotar el alcance de la partición en vida en la práctica social colombiana, y a su vez, determinar cómo puede verse afectado el patrimonio de aquellos terceros que fungen como acreedores del partidor.

Embodied social capital and geographic perspectives: performing the habitus

This paper reopens debates of geographic theorizations and conceptualizations of social capital. I argue that human geographers have tended to underplay the analytic value of social capital, by equating the concept with dominant policy interpretations. It is contended that geographers could more explicitly contribute to pervasive critical social science accounts. With this in mind, an embodied perspective of social capital is constructed. This synthesizes Bourdieu's capitals and performative theorizations of identity, to progress the concept of social capital in four key ways. First, this theorization more fully reconnects embodied differences to broader socioeconomic processes. Second, an exploration of how embodied social differences can emerge directly from the political-economy and/or via broader operations of power is facilitated. Third, a path is charted through the endurance of embodied inequalities and the potential for social transformation. Finally, embodied social capital can advance social science conceptualizations of the spatiality of social capital, by illuminating the importance of broader sociospatial contexts and relations to the embodiment of social capital within individuals.

Theorizing Literacy, Politics and Social Process: revisiting Maktab literacy in Rian in search of a paradigm

Literacy as a social practice is integrally linked with social, economic and political institutions and processes. As such, it has a material base which is fundamentally constituted in power relations. Literacy is therefore interwoven with the text and context of everyday living in which multi-levelled meanings are organically produced at both individual and societal level. This paper argues that if language thus mediates social reality, then it follows that literacy defined as a social practice cannot really be addressed as a reified, neutral activity but that it should take account of the social, cultural and political processes in which literacy practices are embedded. Drawing on the work of key writers within the field, the paper foregrounds the primary role of the state in defining the forms and levels of literacy required and made available at particular moments within society. In a case-study of the social construction of literacy meanings in pre-revolutionary Iran, it explores the view that the discourse about societal literacy levels has historically constituted a key terrain in which the struggle for control over meaning has taken place. This struggle, it is argued, sets the interests of the state to maintain ideological and political control over the production of knowledge within the culture and society over and against the needs identified by the individual for personal development, empowerment and liberation. In an overall sense, the paper examines existing theoretical perspectives on societal literacy programmes in terms of the scope that they provide for analyses that encompass the multi-levelled power relations that shape and influence dominant discourses on the relative value of literacy for both the individual and society

”Potato seeking rice”: language, culture, and identity in gay personal ads in Hong Kong

This paper examines the relationship between language, culture, and identity in a corpus of gay personal ads collected from two publications in Hong Kong in the three years before the 1997 transition of sovereignty. Gay personal ads are seen äs an "island of discourse," whose marginal nature is reflected in the use of language and in turn reflects issues of marginalization in the larger social context. Using Fairclough's (1992, 1993) three- dimensional model for critical discourse analysis, an attempt is made to uncover the relationship between text structure and issues ofpower/ideology in the society that produces the texts. On the level of text, it was found that structural components, particularly the degree of grammatical elaboration, differ according to the stated race or cultural background of the authors and their targets. On the level of discourse practice, authors were found to appropriate a variety of "voices"from the larger culture arena, the use of which amplifies or limits the participation of particular classes of individuals. Finally, on the level of social practice, the ads were found to reflect and re-create both the racial stereotypes and heterosexist ideology found in the dominant culture.

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.

Participação Cidadã na Gestão Pública: Estudo de Caso do Programa Favela-Bairro do Município do Rio de Janeiro

In the Brazilian political history, the power of the State was always associated to the classes that hold the production means. The state intervention to solve the lacks of the population induced the cooptation of the less favored classes, guaranteeing the continuity of the elites in the power and discouraging initiatives of the bases participation. The citizen participation is one of the analysis dimensions of the public power decision process and it must consist in a key dimension at the identification of solutions for the development. Through the evaluation of a municipal program addressed to the resident population in slums of medium load in Rio de Janeiro - the Programa Favela-Bairro - the study aims to verify, at the present time, if the participation remain an expression of the theoretical speech of the public administration or if it is understood as a social right. It intends to evaluate the mechanisms and the spaces of the communities dialogue with the public municipal managers. The field research consisted of interviews with social actors of the executive and municipal legislative, as well as with members of the organized civil society (inhabitants associations), community leaders and beneficiaries of the program, residents in the slum. The work raises the discussion about the necessary conditions to the public politics produce effective results, in terms of the human satisfaction, and to lead the social subjects to the understanding and learning of the active citizenship and democracy. It also intends to identify an evaluation methodology whose produced knowledge acts in the transformation of the society, reinforcing the critical researcher's paper, whose commitment is to study the reality and to point the roads that lead to the change in the social practice.

Orientação para o mercado e prática social: estudo de caso em empresa ex-estatal do setor de telecomunicações

The concept of market orientation appeared in the beginning of the year 1990 as one of the main marketing developments, getting prominence, at the end of the decade, in the strategy area as well. However due to universalization presuppositions and due to the statistical positivism, this concept seems to be limited for an organization type that still receives from researchers' little attention: nationalized companies. These companies origin is linked to the privatization processes, which happened throughout the years after 1990 in Brazil. Using an interdisciplinary approach, this thesis recognizes the main marketing and strategy debates; however it points for neglectful dimensions in both areas, necessary for a broader OPM concept understanding. With the objective of a broader understanding of the OPM concept, this thesis searches for the alignment of the OPM concept with the strategy as social practice conceptions as a framework for the conduction of a case study on nationalized companies belonging to the telecommunication sectors. The exploratory character of the study reveals important subjects that can help the development of the OPM concept in a broader way for future researches as: the government influence over markets, market culture development in nationalized companies and different market concepts existence.

Os empoderados da agricultura familiar: capital social nos territórios do seridó e do sertão do Apodi/RN

The study of social practices aims to overcome the theoretical dichotomies that insist on separating the individual from the social structures and vice versa. In this sense, the debate between objectivism and subjectivism in the construction of social reality still has occupied much time and reflection of various scholars of the humanities. Pierre Bourdieu has extensive work that seeks to advance in relation to the theoretical framework of traditional sociological explanations. Bourdieu`s approach regarding social practices is considered by some researchers as a synthesis of classical theories and by others as an attempt of complexify contemporary studies on the significance of social life. This thesis sharesthis effort to understand the social practices of agents, aiming to analyze the strategies of social and political leaders of family farming in the territories of Seridó and Apodi in Rio Grande do Norte, and it has as reference the theoretical and methodological concepts of habitus, field and capital, in Bourdieu. Therefore, we studied the trajectories of social leaders, here called agents as family farming in the two locations in Rio Grande do Norte. As techniques and procedures of the study, we resortedto semi-structured interviews, observations, participation in events and other researches. In conclusion, this thesis gives an account of the construction of two different relational fields for the activities of agents of family farming in the territories of Seridó and Apodi. Although the relational fields in the territories have been structured under the same prevailing institutions, which are: church, union and political party, the social practice of agents shows itself from social position and political variety. Even with the similarities and differences identified and analyzed in different fields of construction, the social relations of the agents in the territories result in the construction of gated communities, the social capital that is the substrate which the agents called empowered .

Uma prática educativa ambiental na construção de agenda 21 local.

This proposal is to search, investigate practical experience in environmental education for the construction of Local Agenda 21, in the municipality of Maxaranguape-RN, attended that brought together various subject and collective social actors of civil society organizations, among them, the Center for Education and Advice Herbert de Souza - CEAHS (NGOs who serves on the council since 1999), associations of farmers and farmers in areas of settlements, teachers / as, groups of women and young people, entrepreneurs, public power, the German partner entities IBAMA. INCRA, BNB in the project of Agenda 21. They are members and participants, constituents of the Permanent Forum of Agenda 21, the main actor privileged in the search. As an object of study to identify the limits and scope of this practice, with regard to aspects of awareness / participation and awaken to an awareness of critical social subjects in the collective social and environmental perspective. The study seeks to investigate if this experience has allowed the individual and collective social subjects, understand and act in their daily life, as the changes in attitudes postures, and expand their interests to participate in various public spaces this intention, is considered the educational activities made with the principles of environmental education in the construction of Agenda 21 that have contributed in raising awareness / participation of social actors of the Permanent Forum of Agenda 21. While reference methodology, the research focuses on theoretical design Freireana with relevance on the dimensions of dialogue, critical thinking and the human dimension comprising the act as educational practice of freedom, the prospect of human emancipation and social transformation of reality, and bring other thinkers as, Carvalho (2004), Trigueiro (2003), Days (2004), among others. The investigation of this practice points to the subject of education, which ECOCIENCIA to install the Agenda 21 and its effect on demand under municipal, German, providing a change of attitudes and postures and certainly, generating a new look and act in the world, broadening their interests and desires of inserting themselves, to participate in public spheres, particularly in establishing relations with dialogical criticality with the authorities and face the demands socio-environmental locations.

As práticas exitosas de leitura no ensino fundamental: vozes sociais de professores e de estudantes

The school is the social place which should provide the formation of critical readers. In this context, the role of the teacher is crucial when it comes to teaching reading. Thus, this doctoral research aims to explicit the reading practices evidenced from social voices of teachers and Fundamental School students from state public schools at RN that have successful results, according to IDEB 2009. Moreover, we seek to explicit, through the positions of teachers, the conceptions of reading underlying their reading activities, as well as elucidate the social voices related to teaching of reading that are present in the National Curriculum Guide for 9 years Fundamental School and in the Political-Pedagogical Projects of the educational institutions investigated. In order to accomplish this goal, we carried out observations in the classroom, applied questionnaires with teachers and students in the 9th grade of Fundamental School, in classes of Portuguese Language, and also performed dialogical meetings with the management and pedagogics schools teams. The theoretical foundation that guides the research comes from bakhtinian thinking (2009, 2010), which addresses the dialogical perspective of language and active responsive comprehension. Furthermore, this work is anchored in theoretical reflections of Antunes (2005, 2009) and Geraldi (2003, 2006, 2010) about the reading and writing in the country, which contribute to the resizing of the teaching and learning process of Portuguese Language. This study belongs to the field of Applied Linguistics, which investigates language as social practice in the context of learning mother language or in contexts where relevant questions about the use of language are evidenced. The parameters of qualitative research in a social-historic perspective are adopted seeking to understand the school context by the subjects involved in research. The research corpus is composed of: (i) information constructed through the use of questionnaires with teachers and students; (ii) information constructed from the observed lesson and dialogue with management and pedagogical teams; (iii) a set of selected information, i.e., empiricism built through documentary analysis of the National Curriculum Guide for 9 years Fundamental School (CONSELHO NACIONAL DE EDUCAÇÃO, 2010) and the Political- Pedagogical Projects of the investigated schools. The analysis of the sayings of teachers and students suggest reading practices from various texts, in particular, from the literary sphere, in activities involving discussions, reading and reading comprehension exercises, interviews, songs, seminars organizations, concerts, dramatizations, literary weeks, among other practices. Furthermore, these analyses reveal that teach Portuguese Language requires commitment, responsibility and satisfaction, as well as more grounded theoretical principles, which make teaching practice more efficient. The research also reveals that the success of the teaching-learning process occurs by virtue of the involvement of school s segments in the educational process, creating therefore a network of responsibilities. In this sense, this research may contribute to the production of knowledge that can guide and enrich the teaching and learning of reading, envisioning a pedagogical practice constructed from the relationship with the other, i.e., from the dialogism which provides formation of young people that exercise their citizenship

Agroindústria canavieira e unidade de conservação: Impactos Sociais na comunidade de pescadores de Baía Formosa (RN)

The conservation unities emerged in response to the environmental damages. In the Atlantic Forest of the Brazilian Northeast, the most of the damages come from the sugar-cane agro-industry, especially by the deforestation for the introduction of sugar-cane fields and installation of the industry structure. Besides the damages over the biodiversity, there are critical social problems that affect the communities which survive using directly or indirectly the biome from the Atlantic Forest. The objective of this research is to analyze the social impacts on the fishermen of Baía Formosa/RN generated by the changes and socio-environmental transformations occurred starting the installation of a sugar-cane factory and the creation of a conservation area in the municipality of Baía Formosa/RN community. The research is based on a qualitative and diachronic perspective, for both approach, it was used the method of oral history in conjunction with the literature search and some technical and research tools such as direct observation, interview, records images and recordings . The results show that social and symbolic practices of the community in the conservation unit Mata Estrela last more strongly presented. Today fewer natural resources are used, due to factors such as limit access to forest and disappearance of some natural resources by deforestation. It is believed that the loss of free access to space for the community is the most significant negative impact, as promoted changes in the relationship of the community with the Star Forest that contributed to the fading of their social and symbolic practices. The loss of free access caused the decline in the practice of agriculture, which resulted in the loss of one of the means of social reproduction of the community