Session guide: Information as an output of research
Reading note: Information as an output of research
|
DATE |
|
|
TIME |
|
|
FORMAT |
Plenary participatory lecture |
|
TRAINER |
|
OBJECTIVES
|
At the end of this session, participants should be familiar with: 1. The concept of information as an output of research. |
INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS
|
Exhibit 1 |
Information as an output of research |
|
Exhibit 2 |
Policies and plans |
|
Exhibit 3 |
Resources needed for publications |
|
Exhibit 4 |
Annual reports |
|
Exhibit 5 |
Journal articles |
|
Exhibit 6 |
Conference papers |
|
Exhibit 7 |
Institution reports |
|
Exhibit 8 |
Credits for publications |
|
Exhibit 9 |
Newsletters |
|
Exhibit 10 |
Extension material |
|
Exhibit 11 |
Distribution |
REQUIRED READING
|
Reading note: Information as an output of research. |
BACKGROUND READING
|
None. |
SPECIAL EQUIPMENT AND AIDS
|
Overhead projector and chalkboard |
Policies and plans
Resources needed for publications
Annual reports
Journal articles
Conference papers
Institution reports
Credits for publications
Newsletters
Extension material
Distribution
Show EXHIBIT 1 and initiate the discussion by asking what are the outputs of research. The discussion should then be oriented towards the intangible outputs of research - i.e., knowledge - disseminated through consultations, training and publications. Discuss various forms of publications. Every organization has to evolve a policy and plans for what will be printed and in what form, keeping in view its objectives (EXHIBIT 2). Publications require facilities (EXHIBIT 3) and have to be supported by resources. In-house editing, composing, graphic arts and printing facilities have to be arranged. For covers, a house style should be adopted for easy recognition. Policies are also required with respect to various forms of publication. EXHIBIT 4 raises the question of whether an annual report should be comprehensive or short and lively.
Similar questions arise with respect to other forms of publication. The participants are probably well aware of the advantages of journal articles (EXHIBIT 5) vis-à-vis conference papers (EXHIBIT 6). Research institutions could initiate their own series of reports, which then could also serve the purpose of pre-publications (EXHIBIT 7).
There is an established implicit value system in research organizations regarding credits for publications. While the general basis is a definite intellectual contribution, sometimes expected but probably unwarranted credit to the director of the institute or head of the division can create conflicts (EXHIBIT 8).
Research organizations may have an internal newsletter or participate in a network (EXHIBIT 9).
Irrespective of whether or not extension is an integral constituent of a research organization, it constitutes an outreach activity and has to be organized accordingly (EXHIBIT 10). Extension material can be produced in many forms, but it must be compatible with the users so as to successfully disseminate the research findings when they are ready for diffusion.
Every research organization must organize an effective distribution system for its publications. The focus should be on prompt distribution at the lowest effective cost (EXHIBIT 11).
Information as an output of research
|
MECHANISM |
Institute needs mechanism to address issues |
|
ORIGINAL RESEARCH |
When to use: |
|
ANNUAL REPORT |
· Target audience? |
|
SPONSORS AND DONORS |
· Who writes? |
|
EXTENSION |
· Interface with research |
· TECHNICAL WRITING
- for annual reports
- reports to sponsors and donors
- extension materials
· EDITING
- avoid unnecessary delay by compromising on perfection
· TRANSLATING
· COMPOSING
· ILLUSTRATING
- graphic arts for tables, figures, page layout, etc.
- clarity and consistency
- avoid overdressing
· PRINTING
· COVER DESIGN
- house style
· DISTRIBUTING
|
COMPREHENSIVE OR SHORT AND LIVELY |
Comprehensive report can be a management tool, but is it the best available?
Comprehensive can be considered definitive, but journal articles are better for reporting research results.
Short and lively is better for sponsors and stakeholders, including relevant ministers and senior officials.
Whichever is chosen, it should include key data in tabulated form: staffing, finances, projects, publications, etc.
Choosing the right journal:
Ö Submitted article subjected to peer review?
Ö Articles noted by abstracting services?
Ö Only short delay before publication?
Ö Journal reasonably priced and so accessible to developing countries?
Ö Pre-prints for collaborators, sponsors and donors?
|
EFFECT · Professional stimulation |
|
LIMITATIONS Not as good as journal articles for definitive publication because: · No or minimal peer review |
|
Matter unsuited to journal publication |
|
Suitable for publication of: |
|
Internal review process |
|
Pre-publications |
|
Editing adjusted to target readership |
|
FOR · Substantive intellectual contribution |
|
FORM · Scientific credit |
|
RESPONSIBILITY · First-named author takes overall responsibility and answers criticism |
|
CREDIT TO DIRECTOR · Director makes an intellectual contribution to all research, but takes credit only if personally involved in the project |
|
Typical of research networks Features · Not a medium for formal research reports House newsletters · Supplementary to annual reports |
|
Form · Pamphlets |
|
Compatibility with · Farmers' - values · Social structure |
|
Caution · Development of a product requires: - consultation · If one product fails, it jeopardizes acceptance of subsequent products |
|
Maximize: · Effective distribution Mailing list: · Computerize |
Policy making and planning
Developing essential resources
Annual reports
Journal articles
Papers for conferences
Scientific and technical reports
Who gets the credit?
Newsletters
Extension material
Extending the reach of publications
A research institution receives funding so that it may address problems that are considered important for the national agricultural economy. To respond to this responsibility, the institution must deliver the products of its work with the greatest possible speed and effect.
The products are both tangible and intangible. Tangible products may include improved cultivars and more effective technologies; intangible products are new knowledge and know-how. Intangible products are delivered through consultations, training, demonstrations and publications.
An institution's reputation and its future funding could depend to a large degree on the significance, quality and reach of the information that it provides to the scientific community, sponsors and user agencies.
Information products could include articles for scientific journals, papers for conferences, the annual report, specialized technical reports published by the institution itself, pamphlets and perhaps audiovisuals.
To achieve an effective publication programme, an institution needs to have access to a minimum set of key resources. Depending on the location and its position in the national research structure, it may be able to call on particular capacities - such as for printing - that are available in the private sector or in central facilities. However, for the present discussion, we are assuming that the institution needs to be largely self-reliant.
First, there is need to establish a publications policy and set up a process to plan and review publication activities. This should not be seen as an attempt to impose rigidity. The policy and plan should allow scope for the initiatives of individual scientists, because most of the publication opportunities arise as a consequence of their work. However, management should seek to achieve maximum impact from the effort devoted to the preparation of publications.
The policy and plan should address issues such as:
· preferred mechanisms for the publication of original research: when to use journal articles, conference papers or specialized technical reports;· content and style of the annual report, considering its purpose and to whom it is addressed;
· managing the demands on scientists, assessing what reports must be written (such as for sponsors, donors, etc.), and how these requirements can be met without writing multiple accounts of the same work;
· defining the interface between research and extension: i.e., what extension materials the institution should produce and to whom they are to be delivered;
· language policies, considering which types of publication should be produced in the national language and which in an international language; and
· managing the support effort, involving deciding what capacities the institution needs for writing, editing, translating, composing, illustrating, printing and distributing its publications.
Even if the institution is required to conform to policies and plans determined at a higher level, it should formulate its own position so that the director can reflect this in discussions with appropriate authorities.
Although most research reports are prepared by the scientific staff, an institute needs a capacity for editing these texts and for the more explanatory type of technical writing (annual reports; reports to governors, officials and donors; extension materials; etc.). Depending on the size of the institution, this does not mean that the information unit must necessarily include persons titled Editor, Technical Writer, etc. A large institution would be well advised to have such staff, but, in a small institute, these functions could be combined with others. What is important is that the director should identify the human resources that can be applied for writing and editing and be sure that they are sufficient.
Any piece of writing can be improved by intelligent editing. Reports that are clear and concise are far more likely to be read, and to have an impact, than those that are long and obscure. Despite common misconceptions, turgid prose is not more scientific. Indeed the best science articles are as easy to read, and as interesting, as a good newspaper story. An editor needs to have a general background in the subject but, being more distant than the author, can more easily spot passages that are obscure, and can then suggest how to clarify them. Every publication going out should be reviewed from an editor's perspective.
That is not to say that the institute should adopt a perfectionist policy. Editing also costs money and, once a document is reasonably clear, further work is of diminishing benefit. Timeliness is also important and when the author has finished the first version of an article the process of editing should not be allowed to delay it for more than, at most, a few weeks. Someone must exercise judgment and apply a limited editing resource where it will have the most useful result. A document that will be read by only a few specialists does not justify the same treatment as one intended for a large audience.
Typing, especially foreign-language typing, is a serious bottleneck in many research institutions. Everything must be typed once but, where possible, every effort should be made to avoid retyping of the same material (especially where typists lack proficiency and every retyping introduces new errors). Today, microcomputers are among the least expensive pieces of research equipment, and every institution needs to have them. When that has been achieved, the scientists are also likely to have acquired keyboard skills (and, if not, they would welcome the training). The same word-processing package should be installed on every machine and all staff encouraged to write with the keyboard. Once the initial trepidation is overcome, writers enjoy exploiting the word processor to revise and re-arrange their texts. Then, when the work goes to an editor, it can be delivered on diskette and, after the editor's contribution has been incorporated, a clean output can be returned to the author for checking. If the institution has one high-quality printer, it could be reserved for printing the final version.
Few developing country institutions have adequate skills in graphic arts. This is why they are often unable to meet the requirements of scientific journals for graphs, tables and charts, and why their technical reports seem unsightly. Consistency is very important, and both authors and editors should pay considerable attention to the labelling and titling of illustrations and to making sure that these are complete and unambiguous.
If the preparation of illustrations is left to scientists and their technicians, it can be difficult to raise the standards. A technician who draws up graphs and charts only as an occasional job is not likely to develop appropriate skill and accumulate experience. It is better to have one studio producing all the illustrations that are to be published. To staff the studio, the institution may be able to identify one of its technicians who has demonstrated talent and interest and can be given further training, and then re-assigned to this function.
Costly new technologies are not recommended for a small institution. Even with existing technologies, much can be done to improve the layout and hence the readability of publications. It is largely a question of giving adequate attention to the possibilities for neat, clear presentation and of acquiring the skills to do so. For example, a practised technician will be able to choose the most suitable dimensions for graphs, tables, charts and photographs, and to place them in appropriate relation to the text. However, it is important to distinguish between what is needed for a clear straightforward presentation (always desirable) and any effort to dress up a publication with tricks like the blocking of histograms (adding a redundant third dimension) and tinting the background. Superfluous art is not advised and can be counterproductive, partly because it is effective only when it is done very well, partly because it often requires high quality paper and printing to be properly appreciated, but mainly because it gives the impression that the institution believes it needs to sell itself and is not sufficiently confident of the intrinsic, scientific merit of its work. In text, a justified right-hand margin (left-hand in Arabic) can appear pretentious, especially if it is achieved by a process that leaves visible, and hence disconcerting, gaps in many of the lines. Unjustified margins are perfectly acceptable in technical reports.
Distribution policies will be discussed later in this session. If any report is worth publishing, it merits reproduction in at least a hundred copies, and perhaps several hundred. If the institution carries document preparation to the stage of camera-ready copy, printing can best be done by photo-offset or by use of one of the more modern, heavy-duty photocopiers. A large institution might have its own print shop for printing and binding, but increasingly today there are adequately equipped commercial facilities, even in the provincial cities, of most countries. In using such facilities, however, the institution may need to monitor closely the work and ensure that the supplier meets the specifications for quality and consistency in printing, binding and trimming.
A final word on appearance: even though the style should be unpretentious, there is considerable benefit to be gained from identifying publications as items in a series and in reinforcing this concept by adopting a standard cover design, colour and format. In this way, the publications become instantly recognizable, even when seen across a room or from the other side of a desk. This recognition is an effective reminder of the existence of the institution and its contributions.
In colonial times, an institution was usually required to produce a comprehensive annual report. This provided a detailed account of progress for each ongoing research activity and of the results that it had achieved. Many institutions promulgated the practice into the era of independence, and some directors sincerely believe that the preparation of this type of annual report is a necessary management tool. However, it is doubtful whether it is a document whose use justifies the often very substantial effort required for its production. It is true that if reproduced in quantity it can be placed in libraries and archives and be cited as the definitive record of the institution's work, but there are many disadvantages as well:
· the writing of contributions for a comprehensive annual report takes up a lot of scientists' time and, having done this, they are less likely to prepare separate technical reports and articles for journals;· ensuring consistency and balance among the contributions to a comprehensive annual report can keep an editor busy for many weeks, thus also diverting a resource that might be otherwise employed;
· the time of writing is dictated by the calendar rather than by the natural rhythm of research, so that comprehensive annual reports are cluttered with fragmentary accounts of unfinished work. These can also be misleading because, until the work is finished, the researcher may not appreciate their true significance;
· readers may have to find the relevant sections of several annual reports if they want to get a full story on, say, a multi-season experiment (and they can do so only if they have access to a library that has the reports in uninterrupted sequence); and
· the comprehensive annual report is too bulky and too detailed for the reader who wants to obtain an overall understanding of the institution and its work. For such a reader, and they may include important decision-makers, what is more important is the research strategy, notable achievements and the information needed to understand how the institution operates, namely the staff, its structure, relations with other institutions, finances, etc.
Another option is to produce a relatively short and lively annual report that focuses on the state of the institution itself rather than on the details of each research project. This would cover the developments of the last year, changes or improvements in research strategies, and the capacity to achieve its goals. Such a report might be read by the Minister of Agriculture in the back seat of a limousine and is likely to have more impact with all of the institute's stakeholders.
The annual report is a document of record, so even a shorter one needs to include lists of publications and a series of paragraphs outlining the scope, objectives and status of each research project. Such information makes the report useful to the scientific community, but not in the sense of providing clues that can be pursued by personal contact or by requesting the appropriate publications.
Scientists must write because, like everyone else, they are accountable to those who provide their salaries and the resources allocated for their work. Usually, they are required to prepare plans and budgets for the activities that they propose to undertake. They will again be required to write reports when their projects are concluded. Do research managers also need formally written annual reports while the work is in progress? For many scientists, formal writing is not easy, and excessive demands for reporting can detract from the progress of the research itself. Probably managers have other means to keep their staff on track but, even if they must insist on written accounts, these could be informal and need not be enshrined in the annual report. Alternative mechanisms for definitive publication of research results are discussed in the following sections.
Session 1 of this module discussed the importance of publishing articles in independent scientific journals, and the value of such publications for the reputations of authors and of the institution itself. It also identified some of the obstacles that facing developing country scientists wishing to publish in the same journals as their more fortunate contemporaries. One approach is to find journals that are reputable and also hospitable.
Unfortunately, relatively few agricultural science journals are published in the Third World. There is no advantage in selecting a journal whose standards are lax. The primary conditions that the journal has to satisfy to be considered of high standard are embodied in the questions below. If the answers are positive, then the journal in question is a reputable one.
· Does the journal refer all manuscripts for peer review by independent referees? The dialogue between the author and a referee can be very profitable particularly, for example, when a paper from a crop-oriented institution is reviewed by a discipline-oriented referee.· Is the journal noticed by major abstracting and indexing services, such as those of CAB International and Biological Abstracts? A paper that is not noticed by these services may escape the attention of much of the scientific community.
· Does the journal publish papers without undue delay? If the average lag between submission and appearance is more than a year, the paper may be out of date before it appears.
· Is the journal accessible in the countries where the work might be relevant? A journal with a high subscription price will not be found in many Third World libraries.
One example of a useful journal is Turrialba, published by the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA), San Jose, Costa Rica. It enjoys a good scientific reputation, accepts papers in English, French and Spanish, and is widely distributed in Latin America. Another is the Arab Journal of Plant Protection, which publishes in Arabic and English. Some developing countries have national agricultural science journals, and those that pass the above criteria provide good opportunities for national researchers. It is in the interest of the institution and its staff to identify a few suitable journals and then develop good relations with their editors. These issues will be discussed in Session 4 of this module.
However, inevitably, there is some delay between the submission of a paper and its final appearance, and this militates against the institution's goal of delivering its results as quickly as possible. What is written for a journal is the ultimate, and should be the best, description of a piece of work that may have started several years before. At least for a priority target audience, means should be found to short-circuit unnecessary further delay.
Since journals require very clean typescripts, a high quality version will have been prepared by the institute, and it can be reproduced locally by photo-offset or photocopier. These extra copies can be identified as pre-prints and should carry a title page which names the journal to which the paper has been submitted, as well as a statement cautioning readers not to cite the paper until it has been accepted. Pre-prints speed up communication with key collaborators in other institutions and may obviate the need for other forms of reporting to sponsors and donors. Note, however, that such pre-prints should be produced in only small number - less than fifty copies - in order to avoid the article being considered as 'published' and therefore unacceptable to a journal publishing only work 'not previously published.'
Conferences enable scientists to meet colleagues with similar interests, to exchange ideas, to discuss the advancement of knowledge in their subject and its applications, and to plan future cooperation. Personal contacts established at conferences may endure for many years as the partners consult by correspondence and exchange news about their professional activities. Intellectual stimulation is indeed the principal benefit but, nowadays, an invitation to participate is often linked with a requirement to present a paper. In many cases, such papers are then published as conference proceedings.
Generally, a conference paper is a poor substitute for an equivalent journal article. It will be mere accident if the timing of the conference happens to coincide with the completion of the author's work and the mature interpretation of its results. Conference papers are not subject to the peer review that is provided by reputable scientific journals, although there may be some screening of papers to be included in the proceedings as opposed to the pre-prints, which are published 'as is,' i.e., exactly as delivered by the author and receive no editorial attention. Conference proceedings are seen to be more ephemeral than journals, and they are not as well distributed or as well conserved.
An institution having a travel budget can permit its scientists to visit other institutions and attend conferences. In these fortunate circumstances, the travel programme can be set to provide the maximum and most appropriate professional stimulation. It need not - and indeed probably should not - be made contingent on the preparation of conference papers. However, an institution that has little or no travel budget does not have the same freedom of choice and, to stay abreast of developments, it must accept most invitations, even when the provision of travel costs is made conditional on the delivery of papers. The preparation of such papers requires considerable effort on the part of the authors, and not necessarily at the most appropriate time in the development of their research. They accept this additional burden in exchange for the opportunity to refresh their ideas and make new professional contacts.
Having invested resources in the preparation of a conference paper, the institution should ensure that it is used to maximum effect. Even if the proceedings are to be published, this may not happen for a year or more after the actual conference. As with journal articles, the institution can reproduce pre-prints and distribute them to interested stakeholders and to partners in other institutes.
Not all research lends itself to publication as journal articles, and yet it needs to be documented and be made available to the institution's stakeholders and the scientific community. This is particularly so for work that produces voluminous data sets: few journals are interested in tabulations that run to hundreds of pages!
Much agricultural research involves studies of interactions with the environment and leads to compilations detailing the performance of different genotypes, but the results can be interpreted only if the environment is fully described. Hence, institutions also need to publish accounts of the soils in which their experiments are conducted, as well as detailed data on the weather and hydrological conditions in each season. All such compilations, with appropriate commentaries, can best be produced as technical reports and be published by the institution itself. As previously suggested, these reports should form part of a series with an easily recognizable house identity.
However, once a series of technical publications is in place, there is a temptation to use it for the results of all original research. It avoids peer review and the delays inherent in refereed journals. That temptation should be resisted, because peer review adds refinement and credibility. The delay in publication can be circumvented if necessary by distributing a limited number of pre-prints of journal articles to key recipients.
Institutions may be required to produce progress reports for management purposes or to meet the needs of donors and partner institutions. Writing burdens of this kind should be kept to a minimum. There are circumstances, of course, when they are unavoidable. A donor-supported project, for example, may call for the institution to deliver a substantive scientific report. If this is produced in only a few copies, it is still likely to be cited by the recipient and the institution will have difficulty in responding to requests for further copies. Better, therefore, that the report be reproduced as part of the institution's series of technical publications and made available to all.
Similarly, if members of the staff combine their research with studies for higher academic degrees, then their theses represent a considerable investment of resource. With the consent of the university, each thesis could also be reproduced and incorporated in the publication series.
It may be useful to set up an internal review procedure to assess the significance and scientific validity of proposed technical publications, but the institution should not become overly zealous in pursuit of a uniform style. There is a limit to the amount of editorial effort available and justifiable, and the first priority will be for items such as the annual report and for articles to be submitted to journals. Technical reports intended for specialized audiences should not be held waiting for an editorial effort that, because of higher-priority work, may never become available.
Publications earn professional credit for the scientists whose names appear as authors. Publications count when scientists are considered for employment or promotion. Hence, the designation of authors is a serious matter, and institutions need to have an unambiguous policy to avoid dissension and jealousies among the staff.
For papers in scientific journals, the time-honoured practice is to name as authors all those who made a significant intellectual contribution, the first-named author being the one who takes overall responsibility and will respond to any subsequent criticisms. Technical staff are included as authors if they have also made intellectual contributions, such as to the design of the methodology or to the interpretation of the results. Those who have assisted, but not in the fully intellectual sense, are acknowledged in the text.
The same formula can be applied to conference papers and to scientific and technical reports. What is most important is to be consistent in the application of the policy, and especially so in any naming of the director. It can be truly said that, having been responsible for the definition of the entire research programme, the director has made an intellectual contribution to everything that results. However, for the sake of the morale of the staff, the director would be wise to relinquish any right to authorship of the institute's research papers, except of course in a particular case where the director was involved personally and significantly in the conduct of the research itself.
Staff members of the institute may be participants in one or more research networks and, if so, they will be called upon to contribute items to the network newsletters. If an institution is itself coordinating a network, it will probably become responsible for producing that network's newsletter.
Such a responsibility need not become unduly burdensome. What is important is to limit the content to genuine news and not allow the newsletter to become a vehicle for the publication of research papers (which properly belong to scientific journals or technical reports). It is also important to maintain a sharp focus on the research topics of the network and resist the temptation to use the newsletter for more general items about the work of the institution or developments in other fields. The published items should be concise and, typically, can involve announcements of developments in the network, new research projects, appointments and promotions of participating researchers, recent and upcoming meetings, and important new publications.
Thus restricted in subject scope and to genuine news, the newsletter need not be a weighty or expensive product. For a specialized topic, the content could normally be covered on one large sheet of paper folded to make four pages. Offset printing from plates reproduced photographically from typewritten pages is usually more than adequate: most of the news will be superseded in the next issue, so any one issue has a short useful life. However, the word 'news' implies that the information is recent, and it cannot be recent if the newsletter appears only once or twice a year. A four-page newsletter issued quarterly is likely to be far more interesting than one of eight pages that has waited six months; most of the material in an annual newsletter will already be stale.
Should an institution have a house newsletter to tell its stakeholders about its work, new projects, events, achievements, staff changes and financial developments? This, of course, is the main function of the annual report, but, depending on the size of the institution, the director may feel that the stakeholders need a more frequent supply of information. If so, two or three issues could be published at fixed intervals between the appearance of successive annual reports.
Different research institutions have markedly different responsibilities for extension. Some are directly involved and have extension agents on staff, while many work through agencies that have been specially charged with the extension function. In either case, the institution must tailor its products (pamphlets, audiovisuals, etc.) to the particular needs of the intended audience. Key concepts here are 'consultation' and 'testing.'
If a researcher were given sole responsibility for preparing a pamphlet, it is not likely that it would be a success with farmers. Researchers and farmers have very different vocabularies and each has a separate knowledge system. Recommendations that are incompatible with the farmers' knowledge system, or not expressed in the farmers' vocabulary, are not likely to be adopted.
Researchers and extension agents have somewhat closer knowledge systems, but, here too, there can be important differences. So, even if the institution is preparing material for extension agents rather than for farmers, there is need for prior consultation.
Before anything is produced, the staff should meet representatives of the intended audience (farmers or extension agents) and define objectives to which both parties can agree. If, for example, the production is to be a pamphlet setting out the advantages of a new practice, the writers must know what the existing practices are and give reasons why the change would benefit the persons involved. The pamphlet must be written in a language that the audience understands and be consonant with its values and socio-economic conditions.
Once drafted, the product should be tested with a sample audience: firstly to see whether it is understood and, secondly, to see whether the content is acceptable. If there is any possibility that it will be rejected or ignored, the institution should be very careful, because more than the present product is then at risk. The failure of one product diminishes the credibility of the process, and makes the task even more difficult next time.
Also, once a product has been out for a year or so, the institution should follow up to see whether it has had an effect. If the product has not had the effect that was sought, the institution must find out the reason for the failure. Such a study could throw new light on the knowledge or value system of the intended audience and lessen the risk the next time.
When the cost of the research itself or of the time devoted to the preparation of a report is considered, the additional cost of reproducing and mailing an extra 100 copies is minimal. Yet, if those 100 copies are well placed, the action can significantly enhance the credit of the institution and speed the application of its recommendations.
Managing a list of addresses is simple on a PC. Each address is flagged with codes to indicate the function and the subject interest of the addressee. When a new publication is ready for distribution, the appropriate combination of codes is chosen, and the addresses matching this combination are automatically printed as mailing labels.
The address list should include:
· key scientists for the major topics that figure in the institution's research programme. Using the codes, the institution sends only those publications that match each scientist's subject interest;· key officials in the Ministry of Agriculture or its equivalent in the local system, the office of the FAO national representative, public and private institutions concerned with agricultural development, farm-credit organizations, publishers of agricultural magazines, professional associations of agricultural engineers, agricultural schools and colleges, etc. Using the codes, the institution sends to these recipients mainly its publications of general interest, plus lists of the more scientific publications, which the institution can then supply in response to a specific request; and
· agricultural libraries in the country, key agricultural libraries in neighbouring countries, libraries of regional agricultural organizations, and the library of FAO. Libraries receive either all publications or a selection, as defined in exchange agreements, and implemented through the tagging of the database with appropriate codes.
All publications should also be sent to the national AGRIS Centre, so that they can be recorded in the database and be announced in the various products of the system. The institution should assist the national AGRIS centre by, for example, including short abstracts in its publications (the abstracts could then be incorporated in the AGRIS records). The institution should similarly cooperate with the national CARIS centre to ensure that its ongoing research projects are described in the international database.
To make its work known even more widely, publications can be sent to CAB International and to producers of other bibliographic services.
Journal articles will be picked up for AGRIS and CABI by other mechanisms, but automatic mailing systems can be used to send pre-prints and reprints of these articles to appropriate key scientists.
