Many thanks Valeria for the focused summary. In point 4- Prioritizing what needs to be shared, isn't it possible that we emphasize sharing of best practices and success stories to encourage sharing of experience (methodology, data, information, and spirits) rather than data or information only.

Regards
Sallam

Dear colleagues. I might take again to some ideas concerning the re-thinking on how to encourage information sharing and create shared values. In addition to the already raised obstacles to information sharing and interoperability, such as lack of clear policy and investment plans, lack of incentives, time constraint, cultural heritage, lack of relevant knowledge packed products, etc. in my experience, information technologists and information experts' community are moving very much faster than research and development community, especially researchers and extensionists in developing countries, as too many terminologies, data formats and information platforms are introduced and increasing miss much between national, regional and international information systems. This situation  make it difficult to create shared culture and harmony as well as mutual trust in step by step improvement of information structuring and information sharing. So, by taking this in mind, we should think of mechanisms, and ways of reducing this gap.  Creating a learning processes, integration and synergy that allow all stakeholders to contribute is important.     

I totaly Agree with IAMO's statement that establishing a network for sharing information seems to be most promising if it includes the different communication forms. this could be considered as incentive that encourage participation in information sharing and could enforce more win-win information sharing.

Sorry for repeating this as I wanted to bring this reply here. My name is Sallam working in technology Dessemination Department with Research Authority in Yemen.

I see that previous contributions have raised many issues of which many go beyond information sharing, but need to be reflected into future trends that help improve information documentation and information sharing. Some issues like another continent … another dream, lack of knowledge on computers and web 2.0, "my interest first", cultural heritage, lack of knowledge packed products that are in the interest of farmers, lack of incentives among researchers, especially in many of the developing countries, lack of clear culture sharing, how to document and make visible outputs, and other many issues that could remain as obstacles affecting information sharing.

I go back again to the persistent gap between the efforts of producing knowledge that are in the minds of researchers or in technical reports or even in scientific articles and the efforts of integrating this knowledge into simple and visible outputs that are of the interest of farmers, especially poor farmers. Many researchers in many countries think that their end product is in publishing their research results in scientific journal where they gain scientific recognition and job promotion.

It would be wise if we think of ways of motivating researchers to pay efforts in making visible outputs and success stories in formats that are in the interest of farmers rather than the sole interest of the scientific community. I can give a story from my experience, as I tried to pull out my work experience during the past 20 years into two success stories, one of these stories was published as a study, not as a scientific article although it was reviewed. The another story was published by GFAR in a competitive work. Also I tried to prepare many small booklets and leaflets that are useful for farmers as they are supported by results from marketing surveys and marketing information system. The issue is when I introduced all my work for scientific promotion, all were rejected as they are not published in scientific journals including the one published by GFAR/AARINENA.

Now, the issue is how we can think of suggestions that could help facilitate better recognition of research efforts and contribute to breaking the vicious circle in the integration of scientific and indigenous knowledge as well as the mechanisms that facilitate more participatory and farmer-centered approaches leading to suitable formats of publishing and sharing information.

I see that previous contributions have raised many issues of which many go beyond information sharing, but need to be reflected into future trends that help improve information documentation and information sharing. Some issues like another continent … another dream, lack of knowledge on computers and web 2.0, "my interest first", cultural heritage, lack of knowledge packed products that are in the interest of farmers, lack of incentives among researchers, especially in many of the developing countries, lack of clear culture sharing, how to document and make visible outputs, and other many issues that could remain as obstacles affecting information sharing.

I go back again to the persistent gap between the efforts of producing knowledge that are in the minds of researchers or in technical reports or even in scientific articles and the efforts of integrating this knowledge into simple and visible outputs that are of the interest of farmers, especially poor farmers. Many researchers in many countries think that their end product is in publishing their research results in scientific journal where they gain scientific recognition and job promotion.

It would be wise if we think of ways of motivating researchers to pay efforts in making visible outputs and success stories in formats that are in the interest of farmers rather than the sole interest of the scientific community. I can give a story from my experience, as I tried to pull out my work experience during the past 20 years into two success stories, one of these stories was published as a study, not as a scientific article although it was reviewed. The another story was published by GFAR in a competitive work. Also I tried to prepare many small booklets and leaflets that are useful for farmers as they are supported by results from marketing surveys and marketing information system. The issue is when I introduced all my work for scientific promotion, all were rejected as they are not published in scientific journals including the one published by GFAR/AARINENA.

Now, the issue is how we can think of suggestions that could help facilitate better recognition of research efforts and contribute to breaking the vicious circle in the integration of scientific and indigenous knowledge as well as the mechanisms that facilitate more participatory and farmer-centered approaches leading to suitable formats of publishing and sharing information.

I agree that the fear of sharing datasets is an obstacle. But the quality and relevance of data and information is another problem. What always come to my mind, which also was emphasized in the 2010 meetings with the prepared Road Map , is the relevance of the research work to poor farmers. This off course should be reflected into the information to be shared. The problem which I feel important is how to ensure that the published research information has considered the needs of poor farmers and approved by farmers and other partners within the innovation system. This would remain as a missing link in the whole process, especially in many of the developing countries, even if emphasis is to be made in the future in the shifting of the research into more people-centered. Now, is it wise to think of "what are the proper mechanisms/standards that could help articulate, document and publish quality and relevant information or research outcomes?". Or How can ICTs enable a more pluralistic, networked approach to information sharing? The outcomes of the discussions could be some agreed guidelines to be useful to NARS and Regional Foras for further improvements in this regard.

I agree that the fear of sharing datasets is an obstacle. But the quality and relevance of data and information is another problem. What always come to my mind, which also was emphasized in the 2010 meetings with the prepared Road Map , is the relevance of the research work to poor farmers. This off course should be reflected into the information to be shared. The problem which I feel important is how to ensure that the published research information has considered the needs of poor farmers and approved by farmers and other partners within the innovation system. This would remain as a missing link in the whole process, especially in many of the developing countries, even if emphasis is to be made in the future in the shifting of the research into more people-centered. Now, is it wise to think of "what are the proper mechanisms/standards that could help articulate, document and publish quality and relevant information or research outcomes?". Or How can ICTs enable a more pluralistic, networked approach to information sharing? The outcomes of the discussions could be some agreed guidelines to be useful to NARS and Regional Foras for further improvements in this regard.

I agree that the fear of sharing datasets is an obstacle. But the quality and relevance of data and information is another problem. What always come to my mind, which also was emphasized in the 2010 meetings with the prepared Road Map , is the relevance of the research work to poor farmers. This off course should be reflected into the information to be shared. The problem which I feel important is how to ensure that the published research information has considered the needs of poor farmers and approved by farmers and other partners within the innovation system. This would remain as a missing link in the whole process, especially in many of the developing countries, even if emphasis is to be made in the future in the shifting of the research into more people-centered. Now, is it wise to think of "what are the proper mechanisms/standards that could help articulate, document and publish quality and relevant information or research outcomes?". Or How can ICTs enable a more pluralistic, networked approach to information sharing? The outcomes of the discussions could be some agreed guidelines to be useful to NARS and Regional Foras for further improvements in this regard.