Research evaluation and priority assessment at the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-arid Tropics (ICRISAT): continuing cycles of learning to improve impacts.

Abstract

AbstractThis chapter documents the research priority assessment methods used at the International Crop Research Institute for the Semi-arid Tropics (ICRISAT). Research evaluation and priority assessment have evolved to provide continuous cycles of learning to improve impacts. Prior to 1992, research priorities were established based on consultative meetings with ICRISAT and National Agricultural Research Systems (NARS) scientists to identify key productivity constraints and propose research themes and approaches to address them. For its 1994-1998 Medium-term Plan (MTP) cycle, ICRISAT undertook a quantitative priority-setting exercise using clear criteria for establishing choices among competing research activities. This drew on scientists' empirical and intuitive knowledge base. Research themes identified were impact-oriented, projecting clear milestones against which progress can be measured and evaluated ex post. This identification formed an integral part of the research evaluation process and facilitated revising priorities in the light of such experiences. Following the quantitative priority assessment exercise, ICRISAT pursued extensive discussions with partners in the MTP 1998-2000 cycle and broad targets were identified to capture the areas of research and the nature of the benefits they intended to deliver. Hence, four targets were articulated by ICRISAT including prosperity, diversity, environment and inclusiveness. Due to time and cost constraints, simple scoring methods were used to rank identified constraints through a broader consultation between ICRISAT and all partners in the research and development (R&D) continuum. The target of inclusiveness included participatory methods that facilitate the participation of stakeholders and allow them to express their preferences. Scoring methods were used to rank priorities in the subsequent three-year MTP cycles. In addition, ICRISAT enhanced priority assessment through institutionalization, building up a structured database serving as a benchmark of reference for future research evaluation, including qualitative impact indicators, using the results from numerous diffusion, adoption and impact assessment studies in setting priorities and mainstreaming poverty considerations. In recent years, CGIAR system priorities provided a framework in which to cast ICRISAT priorities. Strengths and limitations of the different methods are highlighted.