Session guide: Scientific and technical information in a developing-country research institute
Reading note: Scientific and technical information in a developing-country research institution
|
DATE |
|
|
TIME |
|
|
FORMAT |
Plenary participatory lecture |
|
TRAINER |
|
OBJECTIVES
|
At the end of this session, participants should have become familiar with: 1. The importance of being able to reach into a store of accumulated knowledge. 2. Ways to extract the information that an institute needs to shape its research activities and keep its scientists up to date. 3. The functions of an internal information unit and the related staff qualities needed. |
INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS
|
Exhibit 1 |
Five stages of research |
|
Exhibit 2 |
Why produce information? |
|
Exhibit 3 |
Expectations from an information system |
|
Exhibit 4 |
Functions of an information specialist |
|
Exhibit 5 |
Duties of an information specialist |
|
Hand-out 1 |
Stages of research and common information services |
|
Hand-out 2 |
Searching the literature: the main variables |
REQUIRED READING
|
Reading note: Scientific and technical information in a developing-country research institute. |
BACKGROUND READING
|
None. |
SPECIAL EQUIPMENT AND AIDS
|
Overhead projector and chalkboar |
Why produce information?
Expectations from an information system
Functions of an information specialist
Duties of an information specialist
Initiate the session by highlighting the importance and use of information in the research process. Draw on the experience of participants. Ask which sources fulfil their information needs and what type of work requires most information. Explain that information can take many forms, such as state-of-the-art reviews, bibliographies, indexes, abstract journals, technical journals, proceedings and reports of meetings, newsletters, trade publications, various categories of books, patents and technical specifications, personal communications from experts in the field, and use of consultants. Use the answers that the group gives you as the basis for the explanation of information needs at different stages of research (EXHIBIT 1).
Give an overview of the flow of information to a scientific and technical user. Information may be recorded in a publicly available document, or may exist only in someone's mind or notebook. Between information source and user there are the operations of the information service, such as dissemination - which is initiated by the information system - and searches - which can be initiated by the user. The information needs of scientists conducting basic research and those conducting applied research differ according to the nature and stage of the work.
Ask participants: 'What does this all mean?' Ask participants to describe their institution's information system and how it helps to tap existing knowledge. Observe that resource and other constraints create differences between information systems in developed and in developing countries. These shortcomings are being overcome through networking, and through international database systems, such as CARIS and AGRIS.
The keys to gain access to the global store of knowledge are:
· recruitment of appropriately skilled staff,· modest investments in the most relevant library materials (books, journals and equipment), and
· cooperation among institutions working in the same country or region.
Ask participants: 'Why should a research institute produce information?' Show EXHIBIT 2 and discuss why information has to be provided. In discussing the 'reporting to scientific community' objective, discuss the 'publish-or-perish' syndrome. For reporting to donors, it is not always necessary to have a special publication: standard publications could go a long way toward satisfying reporting requirements. Information has to flow to and from users. Therefore an effective communication linkage with the extension agency has to be built up. Next show EXHIBIT 3 and discuss usual expectations from an information service.
Show EXHIBIT 4 and discuss the three functions of an information specialist. First, management of the library, which includes the traditional library functions of acquisition, cataloguing, serials management, tracking down references, and retrieving items. The second function is that of an information service to projects, a function which should have a higher priority than library maintenance. Information services to projects provides help in project preparation and implementation. The third function is communication, especially in relation to reporting to the scientific community, to sponsors and to users. Emphasize that 'information specialist' is a general term covering many different activities and functions, from primary library functions to project and internal communications activities (EXHIBIT 5). An information specialist differs from a specialist librarian, placing more emphasis on access to information rather than acquisition and storing, and an information specialist has very much more of a service function: finding the information people need and presenting it in a usable form. Observe that an information professional uses principles and techniques of information management.
Note that the head of an information unit has to support managerial decision making by providing data, having in this way also a role in institution management. An agricultural scientist selected for this function would probably find it easy to establish peer relations with the clients.
Discuss the gatekeeper concept. A gatekeeper evaluates and synthesizes information coming from outside, and passes on useful information to other members of the team. This has both advantages and disadvantages.
Finally, discuss resource allocations for information systems. Observe that if researchers have no access to information they will be isolated and their effective output will be impaired. For as long as researchers feel the need for more and more relevant information, there is a case for considering larger fiscal allocation to information services. Thus the problem is one of finding the optimum balance between direct expenditure on research and direct expenditure on information.
|
THE FIVE STAGES OF RESEARCH.... · STATE-OF-THE-ART REVIEW |
|
...RESULT IN · REPORTS |
Reporting:
1. To the scientific community
· problems with foreign journals
· need for help
· alternatives (e.g., technical reports)
· 'publish-or-perish' syndrome
2. To the institution's sponsors
· annual reports
· specialized reports
· adequate infrastructure support for document preparation
3. For the application of results (e.g., for extension agents, farmers, etc.)
· information flows to and from extension
· staff with communications skills
· national language (s)
1. Need-specific and service-oriented
2. There are established procedures for acquiring and processing materials according to the real and projected needs of the user
3. Provision of as many services as possible, given the collection and input procedures
4. There is a mechanism for continual review and evaluation of the information service
Source: Atherton, P. 1977. Handbook for Information Systems and Services. Paris: UNESCO.
An information specialist uses principles and techniques of information management to:
1. Manage libraries.
2. Provide an information service to projects.
3. Fulfil communication functions.
|
· select materials · organize and supervise order processing for published materials · determine routing of incoming publications · informal selective dissemination of information · respond to requests for information · generate ideas for proposals · research and write proposals · network with similar and competing organizations · maintain informal and formal communication links with other information specialists both inside and outside the organization · carry out research in support of ongoing projects · provide information research and technical assistance · organize office publishing activities · stay abreast of the information field · consult (with private industry) on status of international information activities · maintain information, including cataloguing and classifying collections and special files · prepare and implement on-line searches |
|
Module 9- Session 1 |
STAGES OF RESEARCH AND COMMON INFORMATION SOURCES
|
STAGE OF RESEARCH |
INFORMATION SOURCES | ||
|
A. State-of-the-art review | |||
|
1. |
Keeping abreast of developments in one's own field |
1. |
Technical and trade journals, personal communications, newsletters |
|
2. |
Keeping abreast of developments in related or complementary fields |
2. |
In-house technical journals, conference announcements |
|
3. |
General reading |
3. |
SDI retrieval services, reviewing publisher's catalogues, newsletters, monographs, newspapers, etc. |
|
B. Idea generation | |||
|
1. |
Broadening areas of study |
1. |
Unpublished reports or trade journals |
|
2. |
Recognizing new scientific and technical advances: |
2. |
Trade journals, unpublished reports, monographs, informal communications, primary literature, abstracts and indexes, bibliographies, new product or technology announcements |
|
|
STAGE OF RESEARCH |
INFORMATION SOURCES | |
|
C. Project selection | |||
|
1. |
Determining the scope of a project |
1. |
Informal communications, trade journals, professional associations |
|
2. |
Determining project personnel |
2. |
Directories of consultants, resume files, contact files, informal communications, professional associations |
|
3. |
Determining project viability |
3. |
Communication with other research institutions and organizations in the field, communications with colleagues, professional associations, experts in the field, government agencies, industrial clients |
|
4. |
Justifying the project |
4. |
Marketing information, economic studies and technical materials from primary (surveys, etc.) and secondary (published data) sources, manufacturers, directories, user profiles |
|
5. |
Promoting the project |
5. |
Annual reports of foundations, grant indexes, informal communications, industrial clients, in-house marketing networks |
|
6. |
Preparing the proposal |
6. |
Past proposals, style manuals, guides to writing |
|
D. Project implementation | |||
|
1. |
Gathering data for specific information requests |
1. |
Literature surveys, equipment information (pilot plants, laboratory scale), specifications, informal sources, experts, professional associations, etc. |
|
2. |
Keeping current with developments in fields related to project |
2. |
Personal communications, technical reports, newsletters |
|
3. |
Controlling the budget |
3. |
Guides to budgetary and fiscal control, resources on management information systems |
|
E. Dissemination of research results | |||
|
1. |
Reporting results |
1. |
Technical writing guides, journal publication requirements |
|
2. |
Identifying channels for dissemination of research results |
2. |
Conference schedules, client rosters, publishing marketplace |
|
3. |
Contacting potential clients |
3. |
Marketing textbooks, sales manuals |
|
Module 9 - Session 1 |
SEARCHING THE LITERATURE: MAJOR VARIABLES
|
DEPTH OF SEARCH |
TYPE OF DOCUMENT |
ORGANIZATION OF KNOWLEDGE | |
|
· reason for inquiry (purpose to which data will be put) |
· bibliographies |
· various subject contexts of the | |
|
|
· publishing lists, |
same topic due to different | |
|
· degree of detail needed |
catalogues |
applications of ideas or things, | |
|
· specific fact versus subject area |
· dictionaries, glossaries, encyclopedias |
and separating effect of classification schemes | |
|
· subject-specific versus as |
|
· fringe subjects | |
|
much as possible |
· almanacs |
· analogous ideas or things | |
|
Possible source formats |
· handbooks, data books |
· classifications and the relation between general and specific | |
|
|
· books |
|
|
|
|
· periodicals |
· standard works |
· comprehensiveness of search |
|
|
· documents |
· state-of-the-art |
· numbers of sources involved |
|
|
· trade literature |
surveys, literature |
and scatter of information |
|
|
· patents |
reviews. Advances |
through them |
|
|
· microfilm |
in... series |
· type of abstract or index used: |
|
|
|
· symposia, |
includes subject covered or |
|
Scope of search |
workshop, |
title covered | |
|
|
· theory |
proceedings, etc. |
· publication delay |
|
|
· research practice, |
· textbooks |
· variations in terminology and |
|
|
development, production, |
· monographs |
arrangement of indexes |
|
|
materials |
· theses |
· authority |
|
|
· economics, commercial |
· directories: town, |
· topicality of literature |
|
|
use |
personal, trade |
· source: firms, research bodies, |
|
|
· operation, installation, |
· atlases, maps, |
government, private, societies, |
|
|
equipment, maintenance |
guides |
institutions, universities, |
|
|
· human resources |
· statistics |
colleges, individuals |
|
|
· organization and |
· tables |
commercial publishers (e.g., of |
|
|
management |
· abstracts |
trade journals) |
|
|
· social, ethical, public |
· contents lists |
· whether available locally or to |
|
|
relations aspects |
· articles |
be obtained from external |
|
|
· instruction, education |
· news items |
source |
|
|
(elementary, intermediate |
· advertisements, |
· type of library searched: |
|
|
or advanced) |
catalogues |
academic, public, industrial, |
|
|
· technical or popular |
|
research bodies, societies, |
|
|
presentation |
|
institutions |
|
|
· legal aspects |
|
|
|
|
· history |
|
|
Source: Atherton, P. 1977. Handbook for Information Systems and Services. Paris: UNESCO.
Production of information
Staff
Resource allocation and budgets
Research is the process by which we try to add to the store of existing knowledge. However, researchers must first know what is already in store. Previously recorded knowledge helps us choose the most promising topics for research projects; it gives us standards of comparison for judging the quality and significance of our work; it offers us a variety of methodologies and techniques from which we can select those that are most appropriate to our needs. If we fail to take advantage of what is already in the store of existing knowledge, we shall miss opportunities to make our work more effective; at worst, we may merely duplicate what has already been done elsewhere.
Existing knowledge can be tapped in various ways: one way, often very effective, is to consult scientists at other institutions. That is why scientists travel, attend conferences, call their colleagues on the telephone or participate in bulletin boards and discussion groups on the Internet. However, it is recognized that, while such contacts may give valuable leads, we must go to books, journals and reports when we need accurate information. In developing countries, scientists have fewer opportunities to travel and meet fewer visitors, so it is even more important that they have access to knowledge in printed form.
Here, too, developing countries face problems. While some books, journals, and reports can be obtained on exchange or purchased with local currency, many of the more useful items require hard currency. If the institution has a fixed budget in hard currency, these purchases are then in competition with other requirements, such as for equipment and travel. Although equipment purchases and travel can be considered one item at a time, subscribing to an important scientific journal usually represents an intention which is continued from year to year. But, next year, the price is likely to increase and some issues may get lost in the post. It is, perhaps, little wonder that, in developing countries, many research directors shrink from making these long-term commitments and, as a result, their libraries are often weak and lack the more important publications.
In contrast, in developed countries, many agricultural stations have at least one professional librarian or information scientist, up-to-date library collections, and the computer equipment that enables them to locate documents that are likely to contain information needed by the staff. Even if these facilities are not totally available on site, scientists know where to call to reach them. Libraries are linked through networks and have devised techniques for sharing resources. For clients, it makes little difference whether the information they need is in one library or has to be called from another library in the network. The libraries make extensive use of photocopying and use the telephone and electronic mail (E-mail) to communicate with each other. Increasingly, telefax is used to transfer information from one library to another.
At present, agricultural scientists in most developing countries are greatly disadvantaged in comparison with their colleagues in developed countries. Much has been done to narrow the 'development gap' in the education of agricultural scientists and in the provision of laboratories and equipment, but when measured in terms of scientific information available to researchers, the gap remains wide.
This disadvantage is seen most keenly by those scientists who have studied in developed countries. Having become accustomed to an effective information service while abroad, many have a sense of deprivation on returning home. Where local information services are weak, these scientists see themselves cut off from developments in their own disciplines, and a significant number seek to emigrate to countries where they can more readily advance their work and their careers.
The most senior scientists in developing countries may personally not feel the disadvantage to the same degree as their more junior colleagues. Senior scientists have more personal contacts and more opportunities to travel. Unfortunately, the harm is done at the level where creativity and innovation are most needed to ensure progress in research and development.
If agricultural research institutions are to become scientifically more self-reliant, they need to build up their own information units. They must have the means to reach into the global store of knowledge and to select what is most useful and relevant to them. Having control is quite different from being fed by services based in the industrialized countries, because even though such services may be inspired by goodwill, they select on the basis of an alien interpretation of the institution's needs.
Mechanisms have been developed to make it easier to know what work is under way at other institutions, and thus to encourage direct personal contacts (e.g., the international Current Agricultural Research Information System (CARIS), which is a freely accessible database describing research projects). Some of the larger developing countries, such as Brazil and India, have made great progress in building information services and networks to support their research institutions, and some of the more recent technologies are well adapted for use in poorly favoured locations. Research stations in industrialized countries have been served by on-line information retrieval systems, which require sophisticated computers and high quality telecommunication links; now, essentially, the same benefit is obtainable from compact disc read-only memories (CD-ROMs) wherever there is a supply of electricity stable enough to operate a personal computer. With the advent of the Internet the scope of international access to information has increased manyfold.
The key factors to allow entry to the global store of knowledge are: recruitment of appropriately skilled staff, modest investments in the most relevant library materials (books, journals and equipment) and cooperation among institutions working in the same country or region. Staff and budgets are considered later in this session, while 'information as an input to research' is addressed specifically in Session 2 of this module.
Reporting to the scientific community
Reporting to the institute's sponsors
Reporting for the application of results
A research institution has an obligation - whether moral or contractual - to report the results of its work, and to do so at several levels:
· to the scientific community at large, so that results can be evaluated and incorporated in the permanent store of scientific knowledge;· to the agency - usually governmental - that has provided funds for the institution and on whose goodwill the institution will depend for future funding (on occasion, some institutions may also need to report to a donor agency); and
· to the extension agents and farming practitioners who might employ the results to improve agricultural production.
Reporting is an essential component of the research process. Periodically, a scientist needs to look back over the work that has been done, identify significant results and draw appropriate conclusions. Only then can the scientist feel a sense of achievement and define the objectives of the next phase of work.
Once again, institutions in developing countries have more obstacles to overcome than those in industrialized countries, and particularly if the national language is not also an international language.
The problems are perhaps most evident when scientists seek to publish articles in internationally recognized journals. English is now the dominant language, and even scientists who are proficient in oral English may encounter immense problems in meeting the requirements of a journal's editor. Editors may be ready to correct minor mistakes, but their primary interest is in the scientific content, and they do not have time to study and rewrite passages whose meaning is obscure. Often a very good paper is rejected simply because the writing is opaque or because the author is unable to meet the journal's requirements for presentation (graphs, tables, references, etc.).
Another obstacle is that, while the editors and referees of international journals may be professionally interested in the agricultural problems of a developing country, their criteria for evaluating a paper may differ significantly from those of the author's institution. For the journal, what counts most is scientific novelty or originality. Work based on well known concepts may not be of much interest, even when these concepts have been applied in novel situations. Yet, in the research institution, the work might be seen as a major contribution, and there would be understandable resentment when a paper describing such work is rejected.
Scientists know, of course, that their long-term professional reputations depend to a large degree on their publications in reputable journals, usually defined as those journals that refer manuscripts for peer review by scientists who have already established reputations in the respective disciplines. It is in these journals that we build our store of accumulated knowledge, and an institution's reputation also depends largely on the papers that its staff have had published in peer-reviewed journals. When an institution encourages such publications, it is better able to recruit and retain the more qualified and more productive scientists. To foster the excellence motive an organization should:
· make it known that good publications will carry weight when a scientist is being considered for promotion;· ensure that scientists have enough time to prepare manuscripts, if necessary by reducing both the burden of administration and other reporting requirements; and
· provide effective support services (editing, typing, graphics, etc.).
Will such action tend to promote the 'publish-or-perish' syndrome which is said to afflict many academic institutions? This syndrome manifests itself when management takes account only of the number and not of the quality of publications. Where that is the case, the researcher is tempted to exploit a given piece of work to produce several minor papers rather than one major article giving a complete and consolidated account of the work.
However, it is reasonable to expect that, in institutions concerned with applied research, the director (or a scientist designated by the director) will review all manuscripts before approving them for publication. This gives the opportunity for the kind of counselling that should prevent the development of the publish-or-perish syndrome.
Much applied research does not easily lend itself to publication in journals. Session 3 of this module will discuss other means of scientific publication, including technical reports issued by the institution itself, newsletters and presentation of papers at conferences.
An institution has an obligation - morally if not contractually or by law - to report to the authorities or donors that provide support. Naturally, the director is likely to give top priority to the production of such reports. The key item is usually an overall annual report, but many more specialized documents may also be needed. Unless these requirements are well managed, they can consume a large part of the time of the scientific staff. Often, however, the requirements are negotiable, and one document may be able to serve more than one need. In general, the authorities are looking for an overall summary to serve various interests. When an institution offers quantity rather than quality in its reporting, the authorities are not necessarily impressed, but the institution's staff are heavily burdened.
Perhaps the need can best be met by assigning the bulk of this work to a scientist with writing skills. The person might be a deputy director, an assistant to the director, or the head of the institution's information unit. By concentrating the work on the desk of one individual, the institution can achieve considerable economy as text that has been written for one purpose can often, with minor adjustments, be re-employed to meet another purpose. By centralizing this work under the supervision of one senior staff member, it is easier to ensure that:
· an overall view is presented,
· the institution's policies are consistently expressed, and
· reports are not clogged with unnecessary detail.
Here again, the persons responsible for producing these reports need the support of a good infrastructure for typing, graphic arts and printing.
Depending on its constitution, a research institution may have direct obligations to provide extension services or may have links with organizations that carry this responsibility. In either case, agricultural research institutions need to cooperate with the agricultural community and must ensure that the collaboration provides an information flow in both directions, so that researchers are aware of what is happening on the farms and can ensure that their own work is of maximum relevance to the agricultural economy.
Obviously, if the institution has a direct responsibility for extension, it will have staff dedicated to this function. They will need support for writing and production of pamphlets and preparation of audiovisuals. Even if the main responsibility for extension is elsewhere, the institution will need some such capacity in order to deliver its knowledge to those who can interpret and apply it. In most cases, it is better not to load all this work on research scientists: not only because it takes time away from their research, but also because they may not have the appropriate communication skills. It is good when researchers can also act as teachers, and they must be encouraged to do so in training courses and seminars, but, in general, the institution is better served if it employs staff who, in close association with researchers, can be charged with the organization of training programmes, production of training materials and responsibility for interaction with extension services.
Again, if the national language is not also an international language, the institution may find that it needs to build twin capacities, one for writing and editing of papers addressed to the global scientific community, and a second for users in its national constituency.
When recruiting for the information function, and particularly when selecting the person to head it, the institution is confronted with a choice: should it look for a professional information specialist (for example, a communication scientist or a librarian) or an agricultural scientist? This is no new problem. It has been a subject of debate for perhaps a hundred years. One the one hand, most information professionals have had a good general education in the humanities as well as training in the management of information and in the various techniques employed for its organization and delivery. On the other hand, agricultural scientists know the subject, can more easily enter into a peer relationship with their clients and will better understand their needs, although most agricultural scientists will require additional training if they are to learn the principles and techniques of information management.
There is no universally applicable resolution of this dilemma. There are, for example, professional librarians who, without any formal training in science, have acquired considerable knowledge of the subject by reading, attending seminars, asking questions and discussing problems with their clients. An individual with an enquiring mind and who can relate well with clients will learn to recognize the specific pieces of information that will be useful to the staff.
In principle, an agricultural scientist ought to be even better able to see connections, to take initiatives in seeking out new information and, in effect, to be a genuine partner in the research process itself. This, however, will be true only if the agricultural scientist is well motivated and sees prospects for a future career in information work.
For the right person, information work provides an exciting challenge, because it involves contact with the director and with all aspects of the institution's programme. The person selected must be intelligent and articulate, and the function should never be assigned to someone who just happens to be available, perhaps having failed in research or another type of work.
In choosing the person to lead the information unit, the director should look for an individual who has the qualities necessary to be able to participate in the institution's programme and management councils. When new issues come up, the director can call on this person to present background information and to ensure that the senior staff are kept aware of what other institutions are doing in the same subject area. Indeed, one of the most important responsibilities of an information unit is to provide a personal service to the director, screening new information that comes to the institution, summarizing where appropriate, and drawing the director's attention to those items that may be significant. Such a service can be of immense value to the director but, if the job is to be done well, the director must have a close relationship with the information provider, specifying topics of special interest and reacting to the material that has been supplied (i.e., providing feedback). Clearly, the interaction is more likely to succeed if the director and the information provider have a good personal rapport built on a foundation of mutual respect.
An individual with the required qualities may not be difficult to find. Behaviourial studies in the 1960s revealed that, within a research team, individuals develop particular responsibilities on which others rely. One scientist may be the team's expert for experiment design and statistical methods, while another may advise on equipment and instrumentation.
Almost invariably, one of them becomes the team's expert in information activities. This fact is confirmed where libraries keep statistics about their users: one scientist in the team is a heavy user, while others are seen much less frequently. The one scientist is often called the 'information gatekeeper' for the team, and a gatekeeper shows up even in a team that has not consciously assigned this role to one of its members.
The gatekeeper evaluates and synthesizes information coming from outside and feeds what is useful to other members of the team. They, in turn, consult the gatekeeper before they go looking in the library or consulting other information sources. Gatekeepers, because they have a better understanding of the external environment, become responsible for drafting the team's reports and making presentations. They quite often feel that their own research is suffering because of the amount of time they spend in information analysis and communication, but most of them enjoy it!
Even a small research institution is likely to have one or more gatekeepers working informally among the scientific staff, and the director is well advised to identify them. Could one of them be interested in taking a more formal role and becoming the head of the information unit, perhaps combining this with reduced responsibility for a personal research project? Provided adequate status and salary are given, this is not a job to be despised, even by a mid-career PhD. Some short-term training in information management might be needed but, since gatekeepers often rise to the top of their professions, a well-motivated agricultural scientist should see this as a path to a senior position in research management or policy making.
Depending on the size of the institution, other information staff will also be needed. These may include agricultural scientists with appropriate skills, librarians, writers, editors, translators and audiovisual specialists. Many of the qualities required are those that are associated with the teaching profession. It is interesting to note that, in the great upsurge of information work that occurred in the United States after the Second World War, many of the new staff were recruited, not from the research community, but from former high school and college science teachers. What is needed, both for teaching and information work, are individuals who know how to seek out knowledge and how to impart it at the level of understanding of the recipient.
It is virtually impossible to find truly reliable figures for amounts that research institutions devote to the information function, mostly because there is considerable variation in their internal structures. If we consider only the amount spent directly on the library, it may conceal the fact that research teams include scientists (gatekeepers) and assistants who employ a large part of their time in obtaining information or delivering it to others.
All scientists spend some of their time in information work, and more so in those institutions that lack a good internal information service. In other words, the needs are inescapable and, if the institution is not organized to meet them efficiently, the researchers are obliged to fend for themselves.
In fast-moving areas, such as biotechnology, information may become the most expensive input to the research programme. Obvious information-related costs may be 20 to 30% of the budget, but the real total (including the time of staff budgeted under other heads) may be as much as 50%. In more traditional areas, the evident expenditure may be 5%, while the true total might be 25 to 30%. Unfortunately, in many developing-country institutions, the proportions are even more skewed, and a negligible expenditure on the structured information service is only partly compensated for by a heavy commitment of the time of the researchers.
Probably, proportional to its total budget, a developing-country institution ought to spend more on information than a similar institution in a developed country. Not just equipment but also important books and journals all cost as much or more in a developing country than in developed countries, but salaries are usually much lower. So, if the developing-country scientists are to be as well served as their more fortunate contemporaries, purchases must take a larger share of the total resources. It can be argued that this is not fair (and, indeed, it is another manifestation of global inequity) but, unfortunately, that is the present reality.
The problem can probably best be seen as a choice made at the margin: when resources are available, is it better for an institution to increase its research staff by one more scientist, or should it use the opportunity to build a better information service for existing staff and thereby enhance their effectiveness?
Each such choice must be made in the light of the situation within the particular institution. Obviously, at the extreme, if the researchers have no access to information, they will be totally isolated and their effective output will be virtually zero. So some access needs to be provided, and the problem becomes one of finding the optimum balance between direct expenditures on research and direct expenditures on information. Nevertheless, where the staff feel that they are out of touch with developments in their various disciplines, there is a case for considering a larger allocation for information services.
It would be foolish to adopt a certain fixed percentage and suggest that it should be appropriate for all institutions. Costs vary considerably in different parts of the developing world, and an institution with a broad programme will need a fuller information service than one with a highly focused programme. However, it is a cause for concern if the direct allocation for information services is less than 5% of the budget; 10 or 15% might not be too much.
Of course, the director may not be in complete control of the budget allocations, particularly where salaries are paid in national currencies but purchases require hard currency. In such situations, directors need to promote discussion at the level where resource allocations are determined. At national level, the issues may take on a new complexity: to what extent, for example, can a central agricultural publishing service or a national agricultural library set the level for needs at research stations in the provinces? If countries rely on centralization to ease the problem, institution directors need to be involved in monitoring the quality of the service received. In these cases, better service may become available only through investments in better communications (photocopying, transport, telephone and, where the telephone system is good, E-mail and telefax).
