Grounding agricultural research in resource-poor farmers' needs: a comparative analysis of diagnostic studies in Ghana and Benin

Eight researchers from Ghana and Benin, with different backgrounds but all co-operating within the Convergence of Sciences project, conducted diagnostic studies as a first step of their research aimed at developing technologies together with resource-poor farmers. The purpose of including diagnostic studies was to increase the likelihood that the resulting technologies would be grounded in the needs and opportunities of these farmers. To better understand the potential of diagnostic studies for improving the contribution of agricultural research to farmers’ livelihoods, a comparative study was conducted of the diagnostic studies carried out by the eight researchers. This research on agricultural research was participatory in that its results were arrived at in consultation with the eight researchers. The comparison revealed that diagnostic studies identified and established forums of stakeholders, especially of farmers, who were to play key roles in the co-construction of knowledge during the field experimental phase that followed the diagnostic studies. The diagnostic studies gave farmers a say in the design and conduct of the experimental phase which allowed them to influence the research process in the direction of developing and testing technologies that work in their circumstances and that satisfy their needs and priorities. In addition, the diagnostic studies have led to transparent choices with respect to the selection of sites, farmers and experiments. Furthermore, the conditions for negotiation were created. Finally, the diagnostic studies played a crucial role in making the partners within the Convergence of Sciences project aware of the importance of contextual framework conditions in determining the relevance of the project

Proper genomic profiling of (BRCA1-mutated) basal-like breast carcinomas requires prior removal of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes

BRCA1-mutated breast carcinomas may have distinct biological features, suggesting the involvement of specific oncogenic pathways in tumor development. The identification of genomic aberrations characteristic for BRCA1-mutated breast carcinomas could lead to a better understanding of BRCA1-associated oncogenic events and could prove valuable in clinical testing for BRCA1-involvement in patients. Methods: For this purpose, genomic and gene expression profiles of basal-like BRCA1-mutated breast tumors (n=27) were compared with basal-like familial BRCAX (non-. BRCA1/. 2/. CHEK2*1100delC) tumors (n=14) in a familial cohort of 120 breast carcinomas. Results: Genome wide copy number profiles of the BRCA1-mutated breast carcinomas in our data appeared heterogeneous. Gene expression analyses identifi

Application of a risk-management framework for integration of stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in clinical trials

Stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) are a potential predictive biomarker for immunotherapy response in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). To incorporate sTILs into clinical trials and diagnostics, reliable assessment is essential. In this review, we propose a new concept, namely the implementation of a risk-management framework that enables the use of sTILs as a stratification factor in clinical trials. We present the design of a biomarker risk-mitigation workflow that can be applied to any biomarker incorporation in clinical trials. We demonstrate the implementation of this concept using sTILs as an integral biomarker in a single-center phase II immunotherapy trial for metastatic TNBC (TONIC trial, NCT02499367), using this workflow to mitigate risks of suboptimal inclusion of sTILs in this specific trial. In this review, we demonstrate that a web-based scoring platform can mitigate potential risk factors when including sTILs in clinical trials, and we argue that this framework can be applied for any future biomarker-driven clinical trial setting

Research on agricultural research : towards a pathway for client-oriented research in West Africa

The contribution of agricultural research to improving resource-poor farmers' livelihoods has remained sub-optimal. Explanations for this lack of impact are diverse and many approaches were proposed over time to address them, amongst others: transfer of technology to teach farmers the 'right technologies'; designing technological packages (high yielding varieties, fertilisers and pesticides), and facilitating access to input and credit; adapting to farmers' conditions through farming systems research and on-farm research; and participation of farmers in planning and evaluation. All these approaches did however not improve the situation inWest Africaas drastically as was hoped for. In the late 1990's, therefore, it was recognised that researchers alone cannot grasp the complexity and dynamics of the local situation and the need arose for researchers to join forces with farmers to explore and design viable innovations. The reason for the failure of agricultural research was sought in the methodology used. Alongside numerous approaches such as the facilitation of learning, Participatory Technology Development andFarmerFieldSchoolsemerged.The Convergence of Sciences (CoS) Programme squarely fits within this movement and builds on the achievements of these approaches.These approaches as well as the background of this study are extensively discussed in chapters 1 and 2 of this dissertation.We conducted ametaresearch on the pathway(s) of science thatCoSfollowed. Eight PhD researchers fromGhanaandBeninconducted in their respective countries research on integrated pest management, weed management, soil fertility and crop diversity with resource-poor farmers aimed at improving the livelihoods of the farmers. The PhD researchers used a social and biological science perspective and were supervised by supervisors from both the social and biological disciplines, both from West Africa and theNetherlands. The comparison of the field experiences formed the basis of ourmetaresearch on theCoSprogramme. The details of the methodology and the background of the PhD research programmes are explored in chapter 3. Before studyingCoS, in order to hone our approach and methodology, and to develop our conceptual framework with respect to the pathways for science, we first looked at two completed research programmes inWest Africawhich aimed at joining forces with farmers to explore and design viable innovations.In chapter 4 we discuss a cowpeaFarmerFieldSchoolproject implemented inNorthern Ghana. Whereas Farmer Field Schools are conceived to facilitate farmer learning, the researchers involved in the project had other objectives, namely increased adoption of improved cowpea varieties and better pest management practices. As a result, the curriculum was adapted to the researchers' objectives to push techniques and technologies that 'work'. In this example the method used -FarmerFieldSchool-was transformed into an instrument to transfer technologies. The case studied taught us that an approach, which has been proved successful, can be co-opted for other purposes.In chapter 5 we studied a project aimed at ameliorating the livelihoods of resource-poor farmers in centralTogothrough soil fertility improvement. The project engaged in extension activities for diffusion of technologies that 'worked' according to the scientists and experimentation to look at options for as yet unsolved problems. However, the pre-analytical choices made -the unavoidable choices made before engaging in project or research activities- hindered the development of dyadic relationships among farmers and researchers. Farmers were not involved in discussing the pre-analytical choices and as a result the project was not grounded in their needs and expectations. Scientists had a tendency to evaluate a technology based on whether it 'works', while the resource-poor farmers would use many other criteria (with a social, economical or institutional nature), based on what is acceptable to them. The project helped to increase yields and productivity, but did not assist in developing or identifying marketing channels and therefore left the farmers with surpluses they could not sell. The study showed us that it is not enough to develop systems that 'work'. Farm innovation need to be grounded in farmers' needs, be acceptable to them, allow for scaling up and to be embedded in macro-level opportunities.    After studying the two completed projects, we improved the initial conceptual framework (developed in chapters 1 and 2) for an alternative pathway of science in an intermezzo chapter, based on a further analysis of the work of previous PhD researchers (Tekelenburg and van Schoubroeck). The framework proposes seven research functions that science has to address if it intends to improve resource-poor farmers' livelihoods. The functions are expected to generate the following outcomes: explanation and understanding of (causal) relationships, effective solutions to problems, optimisation of the local situation, satisfaction of local needs and aspirations, scaling up, opportunities identified and space for change established.To improve the impact of agricultural research and develop an alternative pathway of science as a dyadic relationship between farmers and researchers,CoSconsidered the following principles important:Democratisation of science through converging scientific and farmers' knowledge.Innovation comprising a mix of technical, economical, social, and institutional elements and therefore requiring an effective encounter of social and biological science.The CoS pathway(s) of science followed four steps, discussed in chapters 6 and 7:Pre-analytical choices were made with regard to, for example, the countries in which the studies would be conducted and the scientific disciplines involved. An attempt was made to keep the choices to a minimum, leaving as many degrees of freedom as possible for farmers and researchers to determine their priority needs and research agendas. In hindsight, even more choices could have included farmers' visions in order to enhance the likelihood that research would eventually benefit them. Donor requirements and time and funding constraints hampered such a procedure.Technographic Studies were conducted by senior CoS scientists inWest Africato determine promising innovation domains on a macro-level to assure that realistic opportunities within existing framework conditions would be addressed by the PhD researchers. In retrospect, the studies could have delivered more by making other (pre-analytical) choices, e.g., not (exclusively) a crop focus, and tapping from other existing approaches.Diagnostic Studies zoomed in on the village level and aimed at grounding the experiments in the needs and opportunities of the farmers. The Diagnostic Studies inGhanaandBenindiffered in a number of ways mainly due to experiences with a project previously undertaken and with many of the same stakeholders. It remained important, throughout the whole research sequence, to keep a diagnostic perspective, as the situation inWest Africais very dynamic. Experimenting with farmers represented a mix of laboratory, on-station, and on-farm applied research. Co-research accorded with the principles for Participatory Technology Development. The experiments deliberately included a combination of hardware (the technology), software (the idea) and orgware (organisational and institutional arrangements) to constitute viable innovations.In chapter 6 we discuss how the CoS PhD researchers fromGhanaandBenin, with their different backgrounds, conducted diagnostic studies as a first step of their research aimed at developing technologies together with farmers. Ourmetaresearch was conducted in a participatory manner and based on consultations with the researchers. The comparison revealed that diagnostic studies identified and established forums of stakeholders, especially of farmers, who were to play key roles in the co-construction of knowledge during the field experimental phase that followed the diagnostic studies. The diagnostic studies gave farmers a say in the design and conduct of the experimental phase. In addition, the diagnostic studies have led to transparent choices with respect to the selection of sites, farmers and experiments. Furthermore, the conditions for negotiation were created. Finally, the diagnostic studies played a crucial role in making the partners within the Convergence of Sciences programme aware of the importance of contextual framework conditions in determining the relevance of the project.Chapter 7 is based on the analysis of the work at eight pilot learning sites in the Convergence of Sciences (CoS) programme. Each site featured research fordevelopment with resource-poor farmers and other stakeholders. On the basis of literature review, we first built a perspective on the mix of research outcomes that seems necessary for agricultural research to be demand-driven and client-oriented. This perspective then served as the framework for analysis of the work at the learning sites. Adapted and consolidated on the basis of this empirical work, the framework represents a set of preliminary ideas for designing an effective pathway for agricultural science. The analysis shows thatCoShas, in a number of diverse contexts and with respect to different crops, demonstrated that it is possible to establish vibrant multi-stakeholder learning coalitions at the local and programme levels. It is further possible to identify promising opportunities that can be effectively addressed by agricultural research, if that research is multi-disciplinary, refrains from making constraining pre-analytical choices, pays attention to institutional aspects, and uses procedures that ensure that research is not only supply, but also demand-driven.In conclusion, the Convergence of Sciences Programme proposes an alternative pathway of science to enhance the likelihood that resource-poor farmers' livelihoods will improve. However, the PhD researchers had not finalised their analysis at the time of writing of this dissertation and therefore a final verdict of how the research impacted on the livelihoods of the farmers involved remains to be given and also many questions remain unanswered with regard to scaling up and institutionalising such an approach. The dissertation shows, nevertheless, that the preliminary results are promising and that relevant opportunities for farmers can be identified. Of special interest has been the development in theCoSproject of an approach that both looks at the technological and institutional components. Not all eight CoS researchers have been equally effective in experimenting with institutional framework conditions. However, theCoSexperience shows that it is possible

Lessons from an experiential learning process: the case of cowpea farmer field schools in Ghana

The Farmer Field School (FFS) is a form of adult education using experiential learning methods, aimed at building farmers' decision-making capacity and expertise. The National Research Institute in West Africa conducted FFS in cowpea cultivation and we use this experience to analyse the implementation of the FFS approach. How does it work in practice? The curriculum deployed is compared to the 'principles' for FFS curricula. We assessed the impact of the FFS on the implementation process of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) practices in farmers' crop management. The appreciation of different stakeholders is also recorded. The analysis shows that the FFS was used as a tool to transfer messages, rather than to foster experiential learning among farmers. The article seeks to analyse the reasons for this shift in objectives and concludes that the way in which the FFS approach was applied in the case of the cowpea project did not allow optimal benefits to be derived from IPM practices