Preamble to the meeting
ILCA, ADDIS ABABA
Statement by Jackson A. Kategile
K.O. Adeniji, chief, animal production section OAU/IBAR Nairobi, Kenya
Speech by Honourable L.J. Chimango, MP, minister of finance, Malawi
Keynote address: The institutional and research factors that affect the optimisation of research results use
Ben H. Dzowela
Workshop Organising Secretary
ILCA, P. O. Box 46847, NAIROBI, Kenya
We the organisers, A.N. Said and myself, take pleasure in welcoming you to Lilongwe, the venue of this year's joint ARNAB and PANESA workshop on the theme "Utilization of research results on forage and agricultural by-product materials as animal feed resources in Africa". We look forward to having useful discussions with you individually where possible and more especially with other participants in the course of the coming week.
The theme of this year's workshop has special significance to African crop-livestock agricultural production systems. The introduction of new, high-yielding cultivars of wheat and rice in the early 1960's led to dramatic increases in food production in many developed countries. This phenomenon, often referred to as the "Green Revolution", gave rise to a widespread optimism that similar "revolutions" could be achieved in most commodities. Since then, however, few other such widespread and dramatic increases in productivity have actually been achieved in the tropics and subtropics in spite of the many efforts of national and international agricultural research institutions. According to a recent IDRC report (Crop and Animal Production Systems Programme Report, June 1988), many of the research-generated technological packages in the tropics and subtropics of Africa have not been adopted by the majority of farmers because:
a) most of the farmers are small-scale who are economically rational and generally only willing to adopt innovations they consider to be advantageous;b) most of these small-scale farmers live in highly unpredictable environments, where input and marketing infrastructures are often unreliable;
c) most of them cannot simply take risks;
d) all too often, research objectives are based on the preconceptions of scientists who have little appreciation of the real problems of small-scale farmers; and
e) in some cases the technological packages are in a language not easily understood by the farmers.
Some useful research, nevertheless, has been conducted in the African countries represented here. Because the small-scale livestock producers in the tropics and subtropics have limited resources, low input technologies particularly the use of legumes, shrubs and trees that can fix nitrogen, alone or in combination with grasses, have received a good deal of research resources allocation in national and international centres. The improvement of the present feed resource base, native pastures and rangelands has also been given priority especially where land is not a serious constraint in the semi-arid environments. Where land is a main constraint in the high potential tropical and subtropical plateaux and highlands, the research emphasis has centred on the use of high-yielding grasses and legumes for cut-and-carry management using less trees and shrubs as forages.
Attention to research has also been given to agricultural by-products which are an important feed resource in many animal production systems in developing tropical and subtropical African countries. With the decline and degradation of grazing lands through overgrazing and the expansion of arable cropping, agricultural by-products have become increasingly important. The use of farm-produced by-products (stovers, straws, bean and ground nut haulms and house hold offals) and of agro-industrial by-products as animal feed is an efficient and ecologically sound use of feed resources.
Technologies have been developed in national and international research centres in forages and agricultural by-products in Africa. It is for this reason that the theme of this workshop has been especially chosen to take stock of how the results of this research are being utilised by the majority of African farmers, small-scale/smallholder farmers, in improving the efficiency of their production systems.
Shortfalls in the utilisation of these research results have been experienced by the majority of farmers in Africa. As scientists we should, through the workshop, be able to modify research strategy to enable us to better serve the farming community. We have every hope that this will be done in the course of the workshop week.
The workshop theme has been subdivided into four sessions, namely:
Session I: Research Review on Utilisation of Feed Resources
Session II: On-farm Feeding Systems
Session III: Feed Resources Evaluation
Session IV: Technology Testing, Evaluation and Adoption
This subdivision has arisen primarily from the enormous diversity of the types of research that has been done in Africa. We are confident that together, in spite of this diversity, we shall come up with useful discussions, sharing of experiences and with recommendations that are likely to redirect us in our efforts to improve the sustained yields and output of livestock production systems.
Address to the opening session of the First Joint ARNAB/PANESA workshop on "Utilization of research results on forage and agricultural by-product materials as animal feed resources in Africa". Lilongwe, Malawi
J.C. Tothill
Honourable Minister of Finance, Your Worship the Mayor of the city of Lilongwe, Mr. Chairman and Principal Secretary, Distinguished guests, Ladies and Gentlemen Colleagues.
It gives me great pleasure to welcome you to this first joint workshop of the African Research Network on Agricultural By-Products (ARNAB) and the Pastures Network for Eastern and Southern Africa (PANESA). I would like to convey to you our thanks to the Government of Malawi for the courtesy they have extended to us by hosting this meeting. This is actually the second time Malawi has graciously hosted the annual workshop of ARNAB, but the first time for that of PANESA.
At this meeting there are more than 80 delegates from 24 countries from West, East and Southern Africa.
This, the first occasion of these two networks holding a joint meeting, recognises the common bond between them in representing interests and activities in crucial areas of feed resources basic to the nutrition of livestock. We see these resources as the vital elements which link livestock and crop production which is such a basic characteristic of the predominantly smallholder farming systems of Africa.
For this meeting we come to Malawi because it provides us with well-developed examples of these smallholder systems, where not only exemplary progress has been made in improving production but also where considerable potential for further development is recognised, and with this, an environment of receptivity to research and development.
We welcome the Malawi government's generosity and foresight in allowing its scientists to participate and contribute so freely in our activities and deliberations. With this commitment to continuing such support we can, through networking, effectively enlarge the critical mass of scientific manpower and activity for both individual countries and for the region, by bringing the totality of the scientists of many regions together and, in collaboration, their skills and ideas to bear jointly on the problems of these regions. Through discussions and the planning of collaborative research between themselves and other national and international scientists, its subsequent execution with financial help from interested donors, its interpretation both on a regional and a national basis, research effectiveness can be substantially increased. Thus in addressing the problems of the region, instead of having a handful of scientists, we have a large body of scientists.
Networking is a powerful tool in promoting this type of collaboration in:
- information exchange (newsletters, meetings);
- training (courses, participation, interactivity);
- collaborative research (peer joint planning and review).
Development of collaborative research
Both PANESA and ARNAB are now at the critical phase of developing their collaborative research programmes, PANESA at the point of implementation and ARNAB at the proposal formulation stage.
This has led to a considerable involvement of the active membership in planning meetings for the development of research protocols which address:
- The problems that the national scientists perceive as important for researching
- Ways in which these problems can be addressed more effectively by a collective approach to planning, implementation and interpretation.
- How the international research centres fit and can collaborate in these developments
This has required the continued participation of most o the active members in order to bring these plans to fruition. Having accomplished this we anticipate the participation will broaden out to reach the younger upcoming scientists. The network must follow a path that at the same time leads to a collegial spirit of collaboration, communication and peer criticism without becoming an "old-boys club".
The activities of the network will largely be centred around:
1. General meetings or workshops, such as this one, held regularly, where presentation and discussion of mature research is carried out. These annual meetings are also the Annual General Meeting at which the office bearers of the Steering Committee are elected to represent the membership in matters of policy and activity developments and directives to the Coordinator, thus an important channel of information between the national scientists and the international centres.2. Research planning and review meetings where the coordinated research plans of the network are formulated, results presented and discussed and a regional basis for interpretation of the results developed.
3. Training courses which provide opportunities to develop specific skills e.g. PANESA's seed production course in Zimbabwe in 1988.
ILCA's Network activities
Since the last general workshop meeting of PANESA in Arusha, Tanzania in May 1987 and of ARNAB in Bamenda, Cameroon in October 1987 the main activities of the networks have been:
· Presentation of Phase II funding proposals to the Donor (International Development Research Centre of Canada) just approved for ARNAB and that of PANESA being considered.· Collaborative Research Planning Meetings for PANESA:
- September 1987, Nairobi - proposal developed and submitted to SPAAR "Special Programme for African Agricultural Research) in October 1987 and donor identified
- September 1988, Addis Ababa - research protocols formulated for implementation during 1988-89
· First Joint Steering Committee Meeting PANESA-ARNAB, May 1988.
· PANESA Seed Production course, Zimbabwe, June 1988
ILCA'S other developments are:
- The likelihood of ILCA opening a regional facilitation office in Harare to coordinate the developing collaboration within SACCAR for the SADCC countries as well as to complement the activities of other international centres such as ICRISAT and CIMMYT.- The establishment of a Forage Seed Production Unit at ILCA (Debre Zeit):
- to boost intermediate seed production;
- develop adaptive research in seed technology;
- carry out training and technical development;
- establish regional production and training sub-centres.- The likely emergence in 1989 of a Feed Resources Network in West Africa based on initiatives of national scientists, ILCA, CIAT and IEMVT.
Finally we commend to the Honourable Minister
- The outstanding work of the coordination of the networks - Dr. Dzowela for PANESA and Prof. Said for ARNAB.- The invaluable work of the Steering Committees who are the voice of the membership and "ground truth" for our work.
- The Donors, particularly IDRC, but also OAU/IBAR and potentially the Italian Government for research implementation.
- The membership for their hard work and enthusiasm.
Honourable Minister, I thank you on behalf of us all for your gracious presence and the honour of having you open this meeting.
International Development Research Centre (IDRC)
Regional Office For Eastern And Southern Africa
P. O. BOX 62084, Nairobi, Kenya
The Honourable Minister, L.J. Chimango, Minister of Finance of the Malawi Government. I wish to introduce IDRC to those who do not know it. The organisation was established by an act of the Canadian Parliament in 1970 with a mission to assist in the promotion of indigenously determined social and economic advancement of the developing regions of the world, with particular focus on the poorest peoples of those regions. Within this mission, IDRC has two principal objectives.
- First to support research of direct relevance to third world development and having direct demons/ratable links to the poor, and- Second, to assist developing countries to build indigenous research and research-supporting capacity mainly at the national and regional levels.
IDRC focusess its activities in six main areas of
- Agriculture, food and nutrition sciences
- Communication
- Earth and Engineering sciences
- Health sciences
- Information sciences and
- Social sciences
The Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Sciences (AFNS) Division's mission within the centre is to contribute to agricultural development through specific research and research-supporting activities. A number of participants here come from countries and institutions which receive IDRC support and I need not elaborate on the types of support which you are already familiar with. I would, however, like to elaborate on IDRC support to networks. Projects supported by the Crop and Animal Production Systems are often linked in networks based on the discipline and commodities. In order to facilitate the interactions, IDRC supports coordinating units based in international centres or regional centres. Of specific interest here are the two sister networks, PANESA and ARNAB. A series of workshops supported by IDRC led to the creation of PANESA with the main objectives of facilitating the exchange of information, and germplasm, training, and technical backup. In 1981, AAASA and ILCA established the African Research Network for Agricultural By-Products (ARNAB). A series of workshops, partly funded by IDRC, in various African countries stressed the need for extra financial support for ARNAB. In 1984, IDRC provided a grant to ILCA to coordinate the network and additional funds have been made available in 1988. A major aim of ARNAB is to develop standard evaluation methodologies, standard terminology for accurately describing by-product feed and on-farm study methods. Noteworthy also is that IDRC gives high priority to dissemination of research results. On the average, 2 to 5% of the project funds are now allocated to publications and dissemination of research results.
The current joint workshop by the two networks is in recognition of the fact that both networks are aiming at finding alternative solutions to the common problem of livestock feed shortages which the livestock keepers face in Africa. I am certain that you will seise the opportunity to exchange information and experiences.
Mr. Chairman and the Honourable Minister, let me briefly address the theme of this workshop. In choosing the theme of the workshop, I believe that the organisers had reason for this selection. The present scenario is typified by having centres of excellence and areas of non-development. The centres of excellence include:
- Research Stations
- Universities/Colleges
- Large Farms
- Pockets of modern agriculture in rural areas
The other side are the areas of undeveloped agriculture which is common in the bulk of rural Africa. The two subsectors are very different as there is a large gap between the technologies used in the research stations, universities and the commercial sector and the rudimentary technologies practiced by rural farmers. Expectedly, the same agricultural output/livestock production differ by the same magnitude if not more. The reasons for these differences are many: However,
- the researcher has his own reasons
- the extension worker has his own story, and
- the farmer has his own view on the "ivory towers" and his own environment. Among the causes for the low adoption rates of the researcher-generated technologies, the following are considered to be most important:
1. Poor dissemination of research results to the farmers. Here we find that the majority of the farmers in Africa
- do not know the existence of the research stations as they have no direct access to these- African farmers have no access to the esteemed journals through which researchers communicate their research results.
- The flow of information from researchers to extension workers is slow due to weak/poor linkages between research and extension systems. Each is an empire by itself.
2. Inappropriateness of the developed technologies for the farmers.
The majority of the researchers do not make a deliberate effort to understand the environment in which the African farmer lives. The environmental aspects include:
(a) Physical-rainfall, soil conditions, temperatures, and altitude. This is usually considered by the researcher to fit the technologies(b) Economic - labour, costs, availability of inputs, availability of credit, marketing channels and disposal of incomes.
(c) Social - social structures, family structures, settlement patterns, education/literacy and farmers, aspirations and motivations
(d) Cultural environment - preferences, religion, beliefs, taboos and tastes
The economic, social and cultural factors influence the decision of farmers to adopt new technologies. Experiences demonstrate clearly that farmers accept technologies which improve their occupation and raise the levels of living e.g. coffee, cocoa, tobacco, milk production and horticulture.
It is certainly gratifying to see that an increasing number of researchers are recognising the importance of the socio-economic and cultural environment in designing research programmes which are aimed at developing appropriate technologies and testing the technologies on-farm. I trust that this forum will deliberate the issue at length and come up with specific recommendations on strategies for increasing the extent of two-way communication with farmers to enhance the utilisation of research results.
Address to a Workshop on Utilisation of Research Results in Forages and By-Products Animal Feed Resources in Africa
Mr. Chairman, Honourable Minister for Finance, Hon. L.J. Chimango, Your Worship the Mayor of the City of Lilongwe, the District Party Chairman, Distinguished Delegates, Ladies and Gentlemen,
On behalf of the Secretary General of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU), H.E. Ide Omarou, it gives me great pleasure to welcome you to a Workshop on "Utilisation of Research Results in Forages and Agricultural By-Products Animal Feed Resources in Africa". The OAU is indeed honoured to have been invited to co-sponsor this workshop which is of immense importance to our programme of work in IBAR.
When our office was established in 1951, it dealt only with all aspects of epizootic diseases in Africa. In 1960, the functions were expanded to include other conditions of ill health of physiological, nutritional and genetic origin. It was not until 1970, when the functions were further expanded to embrace animal production activities that my section started to function. The main objectives of IBAR as from then on are:
1. To coordinate the activities of all the Member States of the OAU in the field of Animal Health and Production;2. To collect, collate and disseminate information in all aspects of Animal Health and Production amongst Member States;
3. To initiate and execute projects in the disciplines of Animal Health and Production;
4. To liaise with the appropriate authorities of Member States, regional groups, inter-governmental and international organisations
Animal feed resources in Africa have received attention in IBAR. We started by attempting to assess the feed potential in Africa but before we could gather enough information for compilation and publication an international organisation (FAO) came up with a publication which contained all the data we had collected. We were however consoled by the fact that the idea originated from IBAR.
The range areas of Africa form a natural resource which is of vital importance in the development of livestock particularly beef animals. In one of the OAU meetings on animal health and production, a trans-national joint action on rangelands development in Africa involving IBAR and other international organisations was recommended. IBAR working alone impressed on Member States of the OAU to control grazing and allow enough time for natural revegetation, develop water through sinking bore holes and constructing dams for people and livestock in the range areas; revegetate the rangelands through various means including seeding etc., organise livestock marketing to ensure reasonable offtake; and introduce legislation to enable the enforcement of the above measures and of course control animal diseases.
Agricultural production in many countries of Africa over the past two decades is now better organised as more and more development plans give priority to food production for domestic use. As a result large track are being mechanised with resultant increases in the number of agriculture - based industries. However, large quantities of these agro-industrial by-products and crop residues available in Africa which could be used for animal feeding either go to waste or are under-utilised. In Sudan, a survey on agro-industrial by-products and crop residues indicated the availability of 4.5 million tonnes and that the energy present in these products could satisfy about 9% of the maintenance requirements of the national herd. In Cameroon, it was reported that cottonseed meal, an agro-industrial by-product and the major protein source, has promoted efficient growth when fed to non-ruminant and ruminant livestock. In the Ethiopian highlands, approximately 80% of feed resources are provided by crop residues and stubble grazing (mostly of straws of teff, barley, wheat and sorghum). In Kenya and Tanzanian highlands, the thriving small-scale milk production depends substantially on by-products such as bean haulms and maize stover as feed. In Nigeria and Senegal, agricultural by-products and crop residues are also widely used. Practically, in all countries of Africa where inventories of agricultural by-products have been conducted, large quantities are found. In some countries it has been shown that without the availability of crop residues, cattle will survive the long dry season only with poor condition. These products should be considered as a very valuable feed resource and could often constitute a basic component of less expensive rations for livestock.
IBAR is aware that a lot of research and experimental work has been done on the chemical and feeding properties of agricultural by-products but there is lack of knowledge of the effect of these feedstuffs on the performance of animals when used in practical situations and applying different feeding systems. In order to improve the efficiency of utilisation of the ration, more detailed investigation is also needed on the digestion, absorption and metabolism of some of the less well known but locally available by-products. IBAR therefore, proposed a project to be executed by the Agricultural Research Institutes (A.R.I.) of Member States of which the main objective is to improve the status of animal nutrition and hence the performance of the animal by promoting the use of locally available agro-industrial by-products and crop residues and therefore provide feeding techniques to the farmer.
The project proposed was approved by the Council of Ministers and Heads of States Meeting in Addis Ababa in 1985 CM/Res.997 (XLII). Consequently, IBAR informed Member States to draw up project proposals on locally important by-products for funding. The response was very encouraging and contracts are in the process of being concluded with some countries. As more funds become available, other countries will benefit from the assistance provided by IBAR.
IBAR's decision to join the African Research Network for Agricultural By-Products (ARNAB) stems from its main objectives of strengthening and developing an African Network in support of research on the utilisation of agricultural by-products and crop residues through collaborative research. The title for this workshop is of particular interest to the OAU and the outcome will be of tremendous assistance in IBAR's programme of work on the utilisation of agricultural by-products and crop residues in livestock feeding.
I should add that the OAU's ministerial conference on animal resources in Africa has approved our membership. ARNAB workshops being annual events, IBAR will endeavour to continue to cosponsor the workshops for as long as the network is in existence.
The OAU is happy to be associated with the workshop and wish the participants successful deliberations.
Thank you for your attention.
Mr. Chairman,
Your Excellencies, Members of the Diplomatic Corps, the District Chairman of the Malawi Congress Party, Honourable Members of Parliament, Your Worship the Mayor of the City of Lilongwe, Distinguished Delegates, Ladies and Gentlemen.
I am grateful to His Excellency the Life President, Ngwazi Dr. H. Kamuzu Banda, for directing that I may open this workshop. It is an honour and a privilege for me to have the opportunity to officiate at this inaugural function of the workshop on the "Utilization of Research Results on Forage and Agricultural By-Product materials as Animal Feed Resources in Africa". To you all distinguished delegates, welcome to Malawi. I am privileged and delighted to extend this welcome on behalf of His Excellency the Life President, Ngwazi Dr. H. Kamuzu Banda, who is also the Minister of Agriculture. We are delighted to have you here.
The subject of your workshop is a very challenging and important one. The Government of the Republic of Malawi attaches very high importance to workshops of this nature, particularly at this time when our continent is faced with food production problems, when Africa is struggling to attain sustainable food and nutrition security at the farm level, at the national level, at the regional and at the continental level.
You who have gathered here, representing various organisations and institutions in Sub-Saharan Africa. You have come to discuss an important subject, a subject that affects livestock productivity in our respective countries. It is generally recognised that the biggest challenge to animal production is under-nutrition of animals. This is a serious problem during the dry period. It is more so in those countries experiencing an unimodal rainfall pattern. A lot of animals fail to produce to their maximum genetic potential of those livestock products, such as meat, milk and traction. I might add that these are products which countries strive to be self-reliant in. The cause for the deficiencies is resources shortage. This is therefore a challenge to us all.
The vast majority of our population on the continent live in traditional settings. They keep livestock and graze them in the dambos and open grazing spaces. Traditional feed resources, the customary grazing lands, however, continue to be threatened by the opening up of land for cultivation as human populations increase. Overgrazing, leading to degeneration of vegetal cover, and the drought conditions that the continent has experienced of late, have made the situation worse. It is imperative, therefore, that alternative feed must be explored in the form of forages and agricultural by-products.
In Malawi, our scientists are making pasture intervention efforts. The aim is to boost feed resources, of the smallholder livestock farmer both quantitatively and qualitatively, through the integration of improved forages in maize crop production systems.
Maize and groundnuts are the major food crops in Malawi. It is not surprising, therefore, that maize stover is the most abundant crop residue. Groundnut tops are second in importance. These are widely used for in site grazing and stall-feeding of cattle. The stall-fed cattle are also given maize bran as the main supplement whilst cottonseed cake and leucaena leaf meal are sometimes fed with the maize bran.
In our country the smallholder farmers who raise both crops and cattle have the potential to utilise crop residues. In addition, small-scale zero grazing commercial livestock production, based on one to four dairy cows or steers, is practiced. One has to add, for our Kenyan colleagues, that here "zero" grazing is used in its classical sense. Zero grazing is, in fact, already popular in Malawi. This is so because of immediate cash benefits from the sale of milk or fattened cattle. It is also because of the large quantities of organic manure produced in the feeding pens. The manure produced is widely used in the production of crops such as tobacco and maize. The production of milk and high quality beef from grade dairy cows and fattened steers respectively makes a tremendous saving on imports of animal products by the country.
So much research information has been generated in some Sub-Saharan countries, notably: Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Kenya, Tanzania, Ghana, Cote d'Ivoire, Uganda, Ethiopia and here at home in Malawi. However, only a very small proportion of this research information is actually being used by farmers, especially those in the traditional sector that produce the bulk of the animal products. Probably the technologies embodied in this research information are not appropriate for this group of producers. If the results are technically adaptable, then the information must be in a language that our farmers may not understand. Possibly also, the infrastructure for adoption of these technologies is nonexistent or not fully developed. Whatever the problem, it is now time for a break-through.
The importance of livestock cannot be over emphasized. Indeed it is a well known fact that livestock is an essential aspect of human existence and a very essential fuel of industrial development.
I, therefore, urge you to discuss the papers thoroughly so as to come up with recommendations that will be directed at meeting the needs of ordinary farmers, particularly the smallholder. Furthermore, I hope that you will take full cognizance of the socioeconomic and environmental constraints which face the African farmer. In so doing you will come up with ideas which can easily be translated into action by the target populations. This will not only enhance your professional capabilities but will also help to improve the quality of livestock and the nutritional and economic status of farmers in your respective countries. Africa today depends upon the scientist who has initiative. To prosper our people must benefit from the innovative scientist who is capable of generating relevant and practical technologies. We have hope therefore, in you. I trust that you will deliver the goods in your respective endeavours. We wish you well.
At this point, I would like to express our gratitude to the workshop organisers. I mention in particular Professor Said of the African Research Network for Agricultural By-Products and Dr. Dzowela of the Pastures Network for Eastern and Southern Africa. We also appreciate the financial assistance made available by the International Development Research Centre of Canada and the Organisation of African Unity. Without these the International Livestock Centre for Africa and the Inter-African Bureau for Animal Resources, would not have been able to co-sponsor this workshop.
Distinguished delegates, you have a very busy schedule, I do hope, however, that you will have an opportunity to visit the surrounding countryside to see for yourselves results of the efforts that Malawi is making in the field of agriculture, in general, and animal production in particular. Our efforts in the fields are commendable but we are also the first to concede that more could be done to enable more farm families to open up. This the Malawi Government is committed to doing.
It is the wish of His Excellency the Life President that you should feel free to go anywhere you like. You are free to talk to anyone you like. So feel free to do so because you are among friends here. Should your commitments permit, you are free to extend your period of stay. In any case, we hope to see you again, you and your families, in Malawi on holiday.
Once again, I am very pleased to welcome you and we feel greatly honoured to be your host.
Distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen, I declare this workshop officially open. Thank you very much.
Professor C.A. Onyango
Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs,
Egerton University, Njoro, Kenya
The theme of this workshop is "Utilization of Research Results in Forages and By-Products Animal Feed Resources in Africa". I believe that the various papers which will be presented during the workshop will focus on specific aspects of the theme. I was requested to deal with what I consider to be a broad area of concern to researchers in general, and while addressing my comments to the topic I was assigned, I hope I will make reference to what may be considered relevant to the theme of the workshop.
I would like to start my remarks by reflecting on the concept of research.
Creative thought is of great significance in today's society; Many advances which we accept as commonplace without thinking of their origin, arose from the abilities of individuals to perceive a certain problem and think of an original solution to it (Olive, 1962). This is what constitutes research. Dominowski (1980) defines it as a complex problem solving activity, "the perfect study" an ideal to be sought after rather than attainable achievements.
Generally therefore, research is a systematic way of seeking out answers to questions. Such answers may be abstract and general as is often the case in basic research, or they may be highly concrete and specific as is the case in demonstrative or applied research.
The basic definition gives us an opportunity to note one important point before going any further, and that is the fact that positive research results are by no means an adequate measure of the value of research. If for instance, a study has been carried out systematically, thoroughly and using sound and appropriate methodology, a contribution has been made towards expanding knowledge even though the findings from the study may be as yet inconclusive. We are aware that studies which may apparently appear to be unsuccessful, like in the case of what led to the discovery of penicillin, sometimes lead to an unexpected but nevertheless very useful information, or by their own nature form the basis for further investigation on a larger scale, with even more defined research technique. We are well aware that any amount of controversial research results generally lead to a greater intensity to verify the results which subsequently expand or clarify existing knowledge. In recent years, controversial statements made by certain researchers regarding the origin of the dreaded disease AIDS made it possible for others to try and prove the statements wrong, and thank God we know that there is no scientific proof to associate the origin of the disease with Africa or the green monkey found in its tropical forests. Research as we can see has its own built-in mechanisms for self checking and verification, even if in some cases this may be time and resource consuming.
The topic of my discussion is "The Institutional and research Factors which Affect the Optimisation of Research results". The dictionary definition of optimisation (to optimize) implies making the best use of taking; the best value of something. The implication of the above statement for this workshop is that we are/or may be sometimes not making the best use of research results; and that this is due to institutional and research factors. Whereas I will address myself to these factors, let us not assume that there are no other factors besides those which relate specifically to these two areas.
Institutional factors affecting optimisation of research results
The term "institution" here refers to an organisation or an organised system through which or in which research is carried out. The organisation may be social, economic, political or scientific. It may be public or private. It may also be local or, national, international or multi-national. Specific organisations I have in mind include such bodies as research or experiment stations, teaching/research institutions such as universities, colleges and university research farms, international research bodies such as IDRC, ILCA, ICRAF, ILRAD, ICIPE and so on. There are several problems of optimisation of research results which relate to these organisations.
Organisational Objectives may impinge upon the optimisation of research results. Take, for example, a university whose main function is to teach and award diplomas and degrees to its students. In a university, a lot of research is presumably done towards awarding Masters or Doctorate degrees. The professional academics who guide students and who also do their own research publish most of the result in reputable scientific journals. Apart from conducting and directing "brilliant academic" research, they aim to gain academic promotion and recognition among the peers. The rest of the research ends up in university libraries and archives. Many research organisations have no formal mandate to disseminate their results for day to day or immediate use. They therefore neither engage personnel for such activities, nor put any funds into it, unless prompted to do so. Kenyan universities for instance were recently challenged to be interested in solving problems which the public face. One main contribution Nairobi University has recorded is through the Rhizobia research project (providing a cheap organic fertilizer to the farmers) and current efforts to develop cheap housing for urban people. But the rate of dissemination is very low. Many research stations without clearly defined objectives may experience similar problems. This is why I think we are aware of a lot of good research gathering cobwebs in shelves at research stations.
Research programmes should be adequately coordinated and lack of this may result in poor optimisation of research results. In research stations for instance, research may be carried out without the farmers in mind. This lack of focus on a target group may lead to results which are not appropriate for optimum utilisation. University postgraduate research programmes experience this problem. Conservation on the part of those who direct research make it difficult especially for young researchers to tackle problems which may have immediate utility and even when they obtain utilisable results, it may not be spread for reasons stated above.
Institutional bias also plays an important role in the realisation of the research results. In one way, bias towards a certain direction or a certain discipline helps the researcher to produce exhaustive and up to date research results. However, it is disadvantageous towards the end results in a number of ways. First, the narrowness in focus, where the researcher is not exposed to other aspects of the same discipline. For instance it is important for an economic geographer to know something in medical geography. The two areas may be inter-related and can supplement each other. Reliance on economic geography without reference to certain aspects of medical geography may affect the research results in the sense that the arguments may be narrower and without sound basis for justification.
Second, most of the records used by researchers are products of self-reporting by different researchers and institutions.
Reports, especially those in the public sectors are written from a certain institutional standpoint as well as the biases of the author who may be bound by circumstances to please his institution. There are two overall effects of institutional bias on the optimum utilisation of research results. One, there is often lack of adequate recognition of what should be done. Institutions are often reluctant to promote a viable innovation due to lack of commitments. Two, they will also commit very little inputs (efforts) in such endeavour.
Perhaps the most important areas to consider is research funding. Luck of adequate finance or financial resources not only affects the institutions, ability to carry out research, but also the diffusion of research results. I have already given the example of research results being shelved in research stations. But much worse can happen. Often situations arise where raw data, meticulously collected, cannot be analysed due to lack of funds. Even the material which is already analysed may not be written up due to lack of such simple things as paper and duplicating facilities. Consequently the results may not be released for public consumption.
Universities in particular find it extremely difficult to convince government treasury to fund them for research. If one were to look at any university budget in Africa, one would hardly find a line item for research, and where it is included, the amount allocated is likely to constitute a very small percentage of the total budget. There is often nothing for disseminating any information.
Research stations or centres are not spared this problem. Their budgets often fall far too short of what the expectations are and limit their capacity to communicate any results through extension.
Lack of qualified research personnel is another institutional factor affecting the utilisation of research results. The forerunner of this problem is low salaries, lack of promotion and lack of recognition to qualified and well-trained researchers who very readily resign their positions to join better-paying organisations. The result is that in many research stations you find people without adequate research techniques and hence relatively poor research output. we can cite the case of Kenya where manpower has been constantly depleted from the National Agricultural Laboratories, NAL, National Research Stations, NARS Kitale and Katumani, resulting in the subsequent importation of (as it were) researchers from outside. The recent efforts by government, in providing a better scheme of service to researchers is intended to stem this tide, and in my opinion, is a step in the right direction. Shoddy research carried out by incompetent individuals is of no use to anyone.
The role of supervisory personnel may be connected with research utilisation in two ways. First, in institutions which have no qualified researchers to supervise the research undertakings, the quality of research and results are bound to be poor. The converse is true where the quality of supervision is good.
Research undertaken in research stations must have good supervision for the quality and pace to be maintained. In the universities, there is at least a greater collaboration among peers and mediocre research can be improved through peer criticism and the system of external assessment for student research projects. In experiment stations which have no affiliation to university systems this self or peer criticism may be totally lacking and efforts should be made to avoid it. Secondly research supervisors may have what I would like to term supervisory overload. This may be more common in universities than anywhere else. Researchers based in universities are also expected to teach students. If they take on teaching as well as research, their time must be carefully divided between the two functions. The number of students an individual supervises will invariably affect the quality of his research. Often research suffers more than the teaching in the case of overload, and we are certainly well aware of the extended and frustrating periods post-graduate students take to earn their degrees due to lack of adequate supervision resulting from staff overload. These researchers often have very little linkage with extension, and in the event of time constraint they are bound to carry on with the research or teaching without communicating their results for public utilisation.
Facilities play an important part in the optimisation of research results. Reference has already been made to the problem of financing which affects the acquisition of research facilities and materials. Research institutions often have limited transportation which they can use to implement on-farm research. The problem may be even more acute at universities where research competes with teaching and other administrative requirements for transportation. Lack of library and reference facilities in institutions greatly affects the research process. This hampers the speed at which researchers can make reference to other people's findings, which in turn they can utilise. Research stations or universities hardly have adequate facilities for diffusing their messages. The traditional role of a researcher is "to do research" and this is more so in Africa where basic facilities, transport, seed, fertilizer, communication equipment is available on a very limited scale. Where research results exist in libraries without being applied or referred to, they are unaccessible and incomprehensible to many ordinary people. Even the shelfing systems, the delivery methods, hours of access, and the fact that there are few instruments to read the available material, acts to the disadvantage of many prospective users of already well documented results.
The wholesome attitude towards research and reward system by institutions to researchers may have adverse effect on the utilisation of research results. This could be partly due to lack of incentives to good researchers. Universities for instance, insist on comprehensive list of research and publication and yet hardly provide adequate funding for research. Research stations on the other hand hardly reward any good and valuable research since they are restricted by Government promotional red tape. Researchers without a good system of reward may tend to do very little. They also tend to leave vital projects unfinished, thus setting back research which could otherwise solve pressing problems.
Conflict of priorities between institution and individual researcher may impige upon the quality and utilisation of research. International organisations in particular release funds on condition their priorities and methods are followed. Often this restriction does not give adequate consideration to local problems about which local researchers are concerned. Thus the focus of research being carried out may be irrelevant to the local scene. When researchers concentrate on and achieve results which are not appropriate to the local scene, the results may not be applied. Conflict also relates to what is wanted and by whom. Farmers are not often consulted and they do not participate in determining the research priorities. They may as a consequence stay away from utilising research results.
Social Constraints may also create a problem to research. Good research requires adequate planning, vigorous use of correct methodology and critical unbiased analysis and interpretation of results. Good results may not be utilised due to poor methods of dissemination which are at variance with the socio-cultural practices of the intended clients. Methods of disseminating and communicating research results is important to consider in the utilisation of the research results. Research institutions tend not be charged with the responsibility of disseminating their findings to the public for use. This activity is generally expected to be carried out by extension services. The implication is that the extension services must first of all interpret the research results correctly and secondly find the correct medium to spread it among the users. The various media used for such purposes include demonstrations, on-farm trials, publications and various other communication channels. Whenever any of these media is not correctly used, the message contained in the results is generally lost. It is therefore important to have the correct personnel, the right facilities and to us the appropriate methodology to disseminate research results. This is the only way of attempting to guarantee the utilisation of the results.
Research factors affecting the optimisation of research results
In addition to the institutional factors, there are also various research factors which need to be considered in discussing the optimisation of research results. These factors cannot be overlooked, for they involve the actual process leading to the research results.
Identification sod choice of a research problem plays an important role in the realisation of research results. Once a research problem to be investigated has been identified. other research procedures can easily follow. Failure to state the problem adequately is the first step in failure to carry out a project unless the problem is explicity stated.
We are aware, that stating a research problem adequately is often a problem especially for young inexperienced scientists. Many of them in their enthusiasm initially want to tackle a very wide scope of work, and when advised to limit their work (like often happens in the case of postgraduate students), they feel very discouraged. The reality of the situation only rears its head when the researcher realises that there are many variables to contend with and he does not know how, or have the capacity to handle them. The underlying question is however, who states the problem? Why can't farmers be involved in participation to identify the research problem. Assumptions are often made about their lack of knowledge, but yet they recognise their problem.
Objectives and Scope of the research relate directly to the statement of the problem and are affected by or affect it.
A researcher may find himself in a situation where there is limited resources, time and other facilities. The scope of his work therefore becomes automatically affected. Failure to state the objectives clearly and precisely may lead to wastage of time. Once stated well, the objectives give the researcher a sense of direction, knowing what to look for, where and when. Failure may also lead the researcher into giving false information in the results. In stating the objectives and scope of the research, appropriate assumptions or hypotheses must also be made. This enables the researcher to eliminate any conflicts, and hence, carry out an investigation whose results are valid and reliable. But for purposes of utilisation, research should also relate to what may have impact on society. It must also be economically beneficial, and finally those who can disseminate the results should be clearly stated.
Once the objectives are stated, it is important for the researcher to identify appropriate method to investigate the problem. The design of the research is important and the researcher must understand it fully. Whether experimental or non-experimental design is chosen, the researcher must be in a position to understand and follow his chosen method fully. We are cognizant that each research design has its own peculiar strength and weakness for application in given situations. An appropriate design leads to correct and utilisable situations. If these results are applicable in a particular case (i.e. technologically speaking) they can be utilised. This applies also if the results have a superior utility to what exists. Researchers should therefore aim at bringing about technological as well as social change.
Traditionally, research results are processed using simple instruments, "paper and pencil" as it were. But scientific research has grown with technology, and now researchers have to use highly technical instruments to analyse their data. Very often instruments for research are lacking, and therefore there are delays in both the actual research as well as in the analysis of research data. I am particularly having in mind computers and computing facilities including software. In the case of many of us in the developing world, there is the problem of technological backwardness where even when the technology is at hand, we can hardly use it readily. Many of us can hardly type (a very simple skill) our raw data into a computer. Worse still we cannot write simple programmes suitable for our research work. When the publication of research findings is delayed, the utilisation also becomes limited. Technology is always becoming better. Research should be completed in time and should be aimed at solving existing (real life) problems which farmers recognise.
The manner of writing and reprinting, especially the choice of words in giving the research findings, may have adverse effects. Typing errors and ommission of certain important facts can go along way to affect the findings.
Researchers have a tendency to write in detailed scientific jargon. Whereas this is understood and useful to their peers, the common users (e.g. farmers) may require additional and simple interpretations or translations; something scientists either do not have time to do, or interest to carry out since it "dilutes" their level of ability and thus reduces their level of recognition by peers.
The role played by ocher researchers especially supervisors and collaborators in similar research is very important. Supervisors are expected to ensure that the correct procedures are followed and that the researchers keep to ethical practice. Collaborators provide a mechanism through which a researcher counterchecks his procedures and results. It gives one an opportunity for comparison. Assuming there is successful co-operation and collaboration among researchers, results can be verified quickly and released for use. Unless a system of verification is insured, research results may not be released in time.
There are a few other factors of research which I would like to mention.
Social, Political and Cultural Influence may also affect the optimisation of the research results i.e. on certain occasions people write what is likely to be favoured by their upbringing and that of their audience.
Patience and careful attention to the experimental design (Curtis, 1976) is desirable. Occasionally some researchers are impatient and end up doing the experiments in a hurry. This leads to tempering with instruments and thus interferes with research results.
Ethical issues could also affect the optimisation of the research results i.e. there are some researchers, especially those who choose interviewing as a methodology towards accomplishing the research results, who involve the respondents without asking them whether or not they wish to participate. Sometimes, some investigators have withheld from their subjects certain information about the research in which they were taking part. Furthermore some researchers force people to participate, or deceive the participants. The researchers even lead the research participants to commit acts that diminish their self-respect. Consequently the participant may withhold certain important and beneficial information that would be important to the research results. The subsequent results from such research, even when utilised, are not realistic.
In conclusion, I would like to emphasize that whereas we consider both institutional and research factors to affect the optimisation of research, the cardinal point is that research, if it is to be useful must be geared towards existing practice or intended practice.
In the university we carry out a lot of theoretical research which, even though adding to new scientific knowledge, has no immediate application in people's daily lives. Similarly at research station level some of the research carried out has no immediate application.
It is, therefore, necessary for researchers to consider seriously the development of applied research, as opposed to basic research. They should utilise existing knowledge from basic research to develop appropriate problem-solving projects. As often remarked, "we should not spend too much time trying to re-invent the wheel, but rather to make the wheel carry out various functions for us".
Bleek, W. 1987. Lying Information A Field work Experience from Ghana. Population and Development Review Vol. 13 No. 2.
Barzun, J. and Graff, H.F. 1977: The Modern Researcher. Chicago: Harcourt Brace Inc.
Barber, T.X. 1976. Pitfalls in Human Research: Ten Pivotal Points. New York: Pergamon Press Inc.
Curtis, D.J. (ed) 1976. Research Problems In Biology: Investigation For Students. 2nd Edition. New York: Oxford University Press.
Dominowski, R.L. 1980. Research Methods. London: Prentice Hall Inc.
East African Academy. 1976. Research Services in East Africa. Nairobi, East African Publishing House.
Goode, W.J. 1952. Methods in Social Research. New York; Mc Graw Hill Book Company.
Good, C.V. 1966. Essentials of Educational Research. New York, Applaton Century Crafts Inc.
Hillway, T. 1984. Introduction to Research. Second Edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Journal of Research and Development in Education Vol. II No. 2 (1967). Proceedings of the National Conference on Needed Research on Mathematics Education. University of Georgia.
Kidder, Louise, H. 1981. Selltiz Wrightman and Cook's Research Methods in Social Relations. 4th Edition. New York; Holt Rinehart and Winston.
Prewitt, K. 1980. Introductory Research Methodology. IDS University of Nairobi Discussion Paper No. 10.
Olive, It. A. 1962. A Research Handbook Education. South Street Minneapolis, Burgress Publishing Company.
Sleber, S.D. 1973. The integration of Fieldwork and Survey Methods. American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 78 No. 6. pp. 1335-1359.
Trarers, R.M.W. 1978. An Introduction to Educational Research. 4th Edition New York pp. 375-393 Macmillian Publishing Company Inc.
Turabia, K.L. 1973. A Manual for writers of Term Papers. Thesis and Dissertations, 4th Edition. Chicago. University of Chicago.
Witney, F.L. 1980. The Elements of Research. 3rd Edition London. Prentice Hall, Inc.
