German-African research co-operation: practices, problems and policies

"This paper provides some insights into the policies, practices and problems of German-African co-operation in research projects conducted in Africa. Differences in interests, knowledge domains and competences, in economic, social and political situations, a lack of awareness thereof, power imbalances and a lack of management skills can severely impede a fruitful co-operation. These factors are compounded by institutional constraints in the German academic sector. Germany seems to be conspicuously absent as a participant in international debates and (development) policies of research co-operation between countries of the North and the South. Research funding policies are at great variance with the complex realities particularly in African countries. A critical analysis of policies and practices of research co-operation elsewhere could contribute to a revision of some of the current policies of research funding organizations in Germany." (author's abstract)"Dieser Artikel gibt einige Einsichten in die Politiken, die Praxis und Probleme der deutsch-afrikanischen Zusammenarbeit bei Forschungsprojekten in Afrika. Eine fruchtbare Zusammenarbeit kann durch mangelndes Bewusstsein der unterschiedlichen Interessen, Wissensgebiete und Kompetenzen auf ökonomischem, sozialen und politischem Gebiet sowie durch ein Machtungleichgewicht und fehlendes Managementgeschick erheblich behindert werden. Diese Faktoren sind mit institutionellen Einschränkungen des deutschen akademischen Bereiches verbunden. Deutschland hält sich offenbar deutlich als Teilnehmer internationaler Debatten und einer (Entwicklungs)politik der Forschungskooperation zwischen dem Norden und dem Süden zurück. Forschungsförderung variiert angesichts der komplexen Realität vor allem in afrikanischen Staaten sehr stark. Eine kritische Analyse der Politik und Praxis der Forschungszusammenarbeit andernorts könnte zu einem Überdenken der gegenwärtigen Politik der Forschungsförderung in Deutschland führen." (Autorenreferat

‘Follow the Innovation’ – The Second Year of a Joint Experimentation and Learning Approach to Transdisciplinary Research in Uzbekistan

In 2008, the BMBF-funded, interdisciplinary research project 'Economic and Ecological Restructuring of Land- and Water Use in the Region Khorezm (Uzbekistan) initiated a participatory approach to innovation development and diffusion with local stakeholders. Since mid 2008, four selected agricultural project innovations are jointly tested by teams of researchers, local farmers and water managers under real-life settings. While the activities during the first year focussed on induced learning by scientists, the second year's emphasis was on the identification of and integration with the appropriate stakeholders and the conducting of jointly designed and implemented experiments to test, validate, and if needed, adapt the selected innovation packages. This paper documents these and focuses on the sub-processes within each team, how the team members understood and approached stakeholder collaboration, how they operationalised their scientific thinking into practical steps, and what impacts these processes had in terms of improving or validating the innovations

An Optimization Model for Technology Adoption of Marginalized Smallholders: Theoretical Support for Matching Technological and Institutional Innovations

The rural poor are often marginalized and restricted from access to markets, public services and information, mainly due to poor connections to transport and communication infrastructure. Despite these unfavorable conditions, agricultural technology investments are believed to unleash unused human and natural capital potentials and alleviate poverty by productivity growth in agriculture. Based on the concept of marginality we develop a theoretical model which shows that these expectations for productivity growth are conditional on human and natural capital stocks and transaction costs. Our model categorizes the rural farm households below the poverty line into four segments according to labor and land endowments. Policy recommendations for segment and location specific investments are provided. Theoretical findings indicate that adjusting rural infrastructure and institutions to reduce transaction costs is a more preferable investment strategy than adjusting agricultural technologies to marginalized production conditions

Methodological Review and Revision of the Global Hunger Index

The Global Hunger Index (GHI) is a multidimensional measure of hunger that considers three dimensions: (1) inadequate dietary energy supply, (2) child undernutrition, and (3) child mortality. The initial version of the index included the following three, equally weighted, non-standardized (i.e. unscaled) indicators that are expressed in percent: the proportion of the population that is calorie deficient (FAO's prevalence of undernourishment); the prevalence of underweight in children under five; and the under-five mortality rate. Several decisions regarding the original formulation of the GHI are reconsidered in light of recent discussions in the nutrition community and suggestions by other researchers, namely the choice of the prevalence of child underweight for the child undernutrition dimension, the use of the under-five mortality rate from all causes for the child mortality dimension, and the decision not to standardize the component indicators prior to aggregation. Based on an exploration of the literature, data availability and comparability across countries, and correlation analyses with indicators of micronutrient deficiencies, the index is revised as follows: (1) The child underweight indicator is replaced with child stunting and child wasting; (2) The weight of one third for the child undernutrition dimension is shared equally between the two new indicators; and (3) The component indicators of the index are standardized prior to aggregation, using fixed thresholds set above the maximum values observed in the data set. The under-five mortality rate from all causes is retained, because estimating under-five mortality attributable to nutritional deficiencies would be very costly and make the production of the GHI dependent on statistics about cause-specific mortality rates by country and year that are published irregularly, while the expected benefits are limited

Institutional Environments for Enabling Agricultural Technology Innovations: The Role of Land Rights in Ethiopia, Ghana, India and Bangladesh

Land rights are essential assets for improving the livelihoods of the rural poor. This literature based paper shed light to some land rights issues that are crucial for the effectiveness and sustainability of implementing technological innovations in marginalized rural areas of Ethiopia, Ghana, India and Bangladesh. By analysing country specific land right regimes, this paper aims to understand what institutional conditions might constitute barriers to the effective implementation of technological innovations and how they might be overcome. Land rights issues considered in this paper include public and private ownership of land in Ethiopia, customary and statutory law in Ghana, and gender equality and land rights in India and Bangladesh. A better understanding of institutional barriers for the effective implementation of technological innovations is a precondition for complementing technological with enabling institutional innovations and for improving priority setting, targeting and sequencing in the implementation of productivity increasing development measures

Between Hope and Hype: Traditional Knowledge(s) Held by Marginal Communities

Traditional Knowledge (TK) systems have always been integral to the survival and adaptation of human societies. Yet, they enjoy a fairly recent recognition and popularization by scientists, the media, politicians, corporates and the wider public. In this paper we present a typology of key driving forces behind the popularization of TK held by marginal communities: an equality preference motive, a value motive, a compliance motive, a scarcity motive and a strategic motive. Secondly, through the use of a simple model, we discuss the hype's impact on marginal communities. Moreover, we critically assess the outcome of a number of policy instruments that intend, in part, to protect traditional knowledge bases of such communities. Our analysis primarily draws upon secondary literature; policy documents and case studies within economics, the social sciences, conservation biology and legal studies. We argue that whilst the public and institutional hype around TK may have resulted in its prioritization within international conventions and frameworks, its institutionalization may have adversely impacted marginalized communities, and in particular contexts, unintentionally led to the creation of 'new' marginals. We purport that the traditional innovation incentive motive does not hold for protecting TK within a private property regime. Instead we identify a conservation incentive motive and a distribution motive that justify deriving policy instruments that focus on TK to protect marginal communities