INFORMATION SYSTEMS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF AGRI-FOOD RESEARCH: AN OVERVIEW ON CURRENT RESEARCH INFORMATION SYSTEMS

Transcription

1 INFORMATION SYSTEMS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT OF AGRI-FOOD RESEARCH: AN OVERVIEW ON CURRENT RESEARCH INFORMATION SYSTEMS C. SALA Osservatorio sulla ricerca agricola IBV CNR. Milano, Italy sala@ibv.mi.cnr.it R. STEFANINI Istituto Sperimentale per la Cerealicoltura. Roma, Italy. stefanini@cerealicoltura.it ABSTRACT The goal of the paper is to analyse the role of existing research information systems with particular reference to the following functions: improve international co-ordination and cooperation; transparent research financing; better linkages between research and innovation. In particular the different structures and contents of a sample of agricultural research projects databases is analysed and compared. The Common European Research Information Format (CERIF) is adopted as a base for comparing the selected information systems. The analysis shows a low degree of similarity between the sampled databases compared with the CERIF format. The data elements concerning project inputs (funding and quantity of personnel involved), record updating, and research results are the less covered topics. Keywords: project databases, agricultural research, innovation, information INTRODUCTION Research Information System Definition Current Research Information Systems (CRIS) have a long history and a tradition in agriculture. UNESCO defined them as a standardised group of scientific, technical, organisational, administrative information and data which define research projects at any stage. In the middle eighties, the predictable evolution of these information systems exceeded this definition integrating the data on the activities of research institutes, archives on experts and researchers, information on ongoing research and the final results to the traditional listing of projects. The main goals of the research information systems of the kind mentioned above are: the development of scientific relationships (planning of research projects, scientific collaboration and co-operation); the identification of the trends and the dynamics in the research field (its policy, financing, new areas); national and international co-ordination and planning (to facilitate coordination and agreements); more transparent public research financing; the exploration of the linkages between research and innovation, providing information on research results, expertise and human, structural resources. 627

2 Many experiences form the international outline of agricultural research databases, some of them are characterised by a long tradition (like CRIS-USDA, CARIS-FAO), and have been in use since the seventies, while some others are more interdisciplinary in scope (such as BIOREP - Permanent Inventory of Biotechnology Research Project). The raw data sources for CRIS are the R&D Information held by funding agencies and other information providers. These are held for the particular purposes of the agencies and the particular clients of the information providers. They are heterogeneous and unconnected; usually the potential for international information exchange is not being exploited. Individual research organisations have developed one or more systems to collect information about research activities, employees, physical and financial resources. This information can be used either for administrative purposes or for the management of research activities. Only a fraction of this information is usually disseminated outside the organisation (Wansink, 1990). During the past decades the need for more central co-ordination and planning has stimulated the agricultural research organisations to establish an internal information system for the support of the R&D management operations. One of the logical by-products of such systems is that they easily can provide classified information. Some national agricultural organisations are already on the Internet with their database on ongoing research. Another by-product of the establishment of internal information systems is that the national organisations have set up several specific classification systems and data formats, suited to meet their own needs, but often non comparable each other. Usually the National organisations dislikes responding to requests for delivering input in other systems which use a different format. A new role for research information systems Nowadays in Europe National research policies and Union policy overlap without forming a coherent whole. In order to promote a better organisation of research in the Union the Commission launched a set of actions aiming to create a real European research area (CEC, 2000). Among the recommended actions we can found the reciprocal opening-up of national research programmes, better use of the potential offered by electronic networks, networking of centres of excellence. A new Information System is needed for the exchange of information on national agricultural research policy and programmes among the Commission, the Member States, and the research organisations. It seems very important that EU could benefit from information on current R&D strategies in each Member State to avoid duplication of actions, excessive fragmentation of programmes and funding, etc. The goal of our study is to analyse the current status and role of already existing CRIS with particular reference to following functions: research co-ordination and co-operation at European level, transparent research financing; better linkages between research and innovation. A SURVEY ON AGRICULTURAL CRIS Cerif format CERIF is the Common European Research Information Format, which has been developed in 1988 by a European Working Group on Research Databases, as a common useable format for databases containing information on current research projects. The CERIF research documentation standard was adopted by a Commission Recommendation, concerning the 628

3 harmonisation within the Community of research and technological development databases (CEC, 1991). The aim of this standard format was to permit the exchange of records with information on research projects between the different Members States of the European Community; and to serve as the basis for the format for networking research databases. The CERIF 1991 standard is mainly oriented towards the integration of data for information at the project summary level. We have compared the contents of various Agricultural databases against the CERIF proposed format. CERIF classify the essential and optional data elements of the standard format into six main categories: database administration (update date, record integrity); project registration (control code; languages used for the description of the projects); project content (title and abstracts in original language and translation in other languages, main investigator, other researchers involved, start and end date, intermediate results, special facilities, collaborations); contact information (name of Institutes involved, Address, Phone, fax, , etc.); research project identification and Information retrieval (free and controlled keywords, classification code and relative description); project capacity or critical mass (financial support, funding body, number of researcher in equivalent full time, name or research programme in which the project is connected). CERIF 1991 was limited to research projects information. The new proposed standard CERIF 2000 will extend the original CERIF scope of projects to cover the following additional research information types: organizations, persons, products, patents and publications and other results of research projects, expertise, equipment and facilities. For the selection of these main types of research information, the CERIF 2000 data model also defines more specifically the data entities and their attributes (CERIF working group, 1999). The sample The survey have been based on a sample of databases on research projects (see table 1). We considered: the CRIS on research and experimentation on agriculture and forestry concerning whole nations or research organisations of national importance (for instance USDA, INRA); the databases created by the co-operation of different states or dealing with international research networks; some information systems on multidisciplinary subjects but partially dealing with agricultural R&D (BIOREP, CORDIS). We have considered also the AGREP (Permanent Inventory of Agricultural Research Project) information system on agricultural research projects founded by EU member countries, managed by the Commission in relation with national centres, even if it is now de facto abolished. AGREP certainly exerted a positive influence on the establishment of research information in several European countries and on the contact between the national experts. The last edition of AGREP is already distributed on the Internet. The list showed in table 1 does not concern all the information systems available on line. As a matter of fact, the information sources on research are augmenting rapidly, above all through the new possibility offered by the WWW (World Wide Web). The information sources for research projects consist of set of organised data (such as databases), or can be made of a 629

4 mixture of partially and totally organised information (databases, WWW pages or as simple lists in text shape). The sample includes a wide range of information systems that are important references both nationally and internationally. The information format described by CERIF manual has been compared to those typical of the considered databases, verifying the percentage of informative elements present in CERIF and contained in the proposed formats. A comparative technique with a substantial and not a formal point of view has been adopted, that is to say the existence of the information has been verified besides the required format or the division of the data elements in different sub-fields. The methodology we adopted is similar to the one ESTO (the European Observatory of Science and Technology) used in two passed studies (Maghiros and Ramos, 1995; ESTO, 1996). Tab.1 - Databases of research projects in the field of agricultural science and related fields Acronym Field Geographical Coverage Number of Projects AGRAR Agriculture Germany 5600 AGREP Agriculture EU AGRONET-MTT Agriculture Finland 850 ARRIP Agriculture Australia - N. Zealand 5200 BIOREP Biotechnology EU 4500 CARIS Agriculture Developing countries CORDIS RTD- PROJECTS Multidisciplinary EU CRIS-SWEDEN Multidisciplinary Sweden 1350 CRIS-USDA Agriculture USA CZARIS Agriculture Czech Republic 344 DANDOK Multidisciplinary Denmark ETFRN Forestry Developing countries 500 FOCUS Agriculture UK 4000 ICAR Agriculture Canada 3800 IDRIS Agriculture Developing countries 9180 INRA-COMPACT Agriculture France 1500 IPTRID Irrigation International 400 ONREP Multidisciplinary Taiwan PICPOR Agriculture, etc. Portugal 2000 SAR Agriculture Switzerland 700 SIS Forestry, agric. Developing countries 9180 SPAAR - SIS Agriculture Africa 5400 UFORDAT Environ., Agric. Germany, Austria, CH Source: DRIS (Directory of Research Information Systems) RESULTS The results of the survey seem to point out a scarce use of the standard format proposed by the European Commission. If the final result of the index, which points out the presence of informative CERIF elements in the considered databases, is analysed, only one database system overpasses the 80%, while many systems reach medium or low levels. The arithmetical media of the sample just overpasses 45%. 630

5 The index of the presence of CERIF elements in the community system CORDIS is surprisingly low, and ranges on the 56%. This databases gathers information on the research projects funded through research and technological development programs in the European Community, but its WWW version gives only few information on the finance and human resources in connection with the projects, while CERIF format is very detailed on the same subjects. In Tab.2, the indicator for the presence of CERIF frames of the main informative categories of the considered databases is desegregated. The group of elements of the capacity or critical mass of the project (that is the information on the financing and the dimension of the project considering the costs and the needed technical-scientific personnel), scores the lowest concordance level with CERIF (18,8%). As a matter of fact, only AGREP, FOCUS, SPAAR-SIS and CRIS-SWEDEN give detailed information on these subjects. Also the data on the administration of the database and of the project are scarcely represented in the formats and it is particularly surprising to remark the lack of systematic data on the updating of the single record, which is a fundamental information to evaluate the quality of the supplied information. Tab. 2 Data elements described in CERIF format present in the sample of CRIS Data elements % of CERIF field present in the CRIS sample Database administration and project registration 33.8 Research project content 60.9 Research Institute identification and other contact information 75.4 Project identification and classification 33.8 Capacity and critical mass (funding establishment and personnel) 18.8 In complex 46.4 The percentage of project identification and classification elements of this group of information is shown in Tab.2 (33,8%) and it is so low because of the complete missing of keywords and of classification indexes in some databases. From this point of view, it is interesting to point out the progressive diffusion of controlled keywords from the thesaurus AGROVOC and of classification systems very structured and linked to the research policies and management. Many of the CRIS which have been analysed seem to have better built and finalised classification systems than those proposed by CERIF manual, since it has a multidisciplinary approach and is scarcely useful and interesting for the description of agricultural research activities. A wider homogeneity between CERIF and the informative structure of the considered databases, emerged from the basic details of the project description, that is the addresses of the Institutes and the description of the main subjects. Nearly in every case, the descriptions of the projects are very punctual, sometimes even structured in different fields (such as the goals, the implied methodologies, the description of the ongoing results, the publication issued). The most missing information is on the collaboration and co-operation with other Institutes. 631

6 CONCLUSION The structure of the documents, as it emerges from the considered CRIS, is very variable. The information on the financial aspect and the needed technical and scientific activity are very lacking, from this point of view the CRIS of the sample seem not to make more transparent the public systems of research financing. Generally, the information on the research results is lacking or very synthetic, with some exceptions such as CRIS-UDSA and ICAR-CANADA. Consequently it seems that the importance given to the function of technological transfer is nearly secondary. The CERIF 1991 format does not seem very diffused. The development of a real European CRIS on Agricultural Research Policy and Programmes able to connect National and European Union policy could be based on new technical efforts, such as the implementation of new standard (i.e. CERIF, 2000) or the capability to manage decentralised information systems, but it is also a problem of political nature. REFERENCES CEC (1991) Raccomandazione della Commissione concernente l armonizzazione delle basi di dati all interno della Comunità nei settori della ricerca e dello sviluppo tecnologico CERIF, C(91) 565 Def., Bruxelles. CEC (2000) Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Towards a European research area, Com (2000) 6, Bruxelles. CERIF working group (1999). Cerif 2000 guidelines: Final report of the Cerif revision working group Co-ordinated by DGXIII - D.4, European Commission On line report, < ESTO (1996) EFTA Countries R&D Project Information Sources, European Science and Technology Observatory Report. Maghiros, I.N., Ramos, A. (1995) Q2: A tool providing uniform accesss to European R&D project databases, Current Research Information System in Europe a Step further, CNR- SIAM, Milano, pp Wansink, G. (1990) Information for national agricultural managers and policy makers, EURAGRI Meeting Discussion paper, Amsterdam. 632