Meeting 20 July 2004
Paper RA2.2: elaboration of case studies
1. The purpose of the case studies is to answer the third and fourth key questions of the workstream (“how well do these mechanisms work?” and “what have been the implications of the above for research and development?” - see annex) in more depth for selected areas of research where particular perceptions about research agendas are often cited or of special interest to the Commission.
2. At the last research agendas meeting on 18 May 2004, members agreed that the four topics suggested (plant breeding, soil science, cross-disciplinary research, and developing countries' research – see annex) should be pursued, although it would not be possible to run then all simultaneously and they would have to be prioritised once scoped. It was also suggested that a set of common questions for all case studies should be developed, linked to the four key questions for the workstream as a whole
Annex:
i) Research Agendas workstream key questions
1. What are the key drivers behind agricultural biotechnology research agendas and how are they balanced?
2. What mechanisms exist to ensure public attitudes and aspirations and Government policy priorities are taken into account when research agendas are set?
3. How well do these mechanisms work?
4. What have been the implications of the above for research and development?
a. Plant Breeding
There are perceptions about the effect of a shift from publicly funded to privately funded crop research, including the neglect of “orphan crops” of low commercial significance but possible great benefit to society.
There have been some major exercises in public and stakeholder engagement related to this area. Aside from GM Nation?, a joint BBSRC/Science Museum consensus conference on plant biotechnology took place as early as 1994. The conclusions of a BBSRC consultation on Future Directions in crop science, to inform priorities over the next 10-20 years, have recently been published.
A case study in this area would therefore first seek to consider how research in plant breeding is structured and what effects the work undertaken, and second to consider how such formal public and stakeholder engagement exercises or other methods of gauging public views have actually informed or influenced research agendas.
b. Soil Science
This is a crucial area of research, but the complaint that there has been a decline in soil science research is heard regularly. When questioned on this at the AEBC meeting on 5 May, Professor Ian Crute (Rothamsted Research) felt that there had been a decline in funding in absolute terms, but only in proportion to the rest of agricultural research. ‘Traditional’ techniques and methods were being used less, but were being replaced with others. Some members felt that the key question was not whether there has been a decline, but whether what was being done now was adequate.
This study would ask how high-level research drivers have been interpreted and have affected/are affecting soil science, allowing consideration of whether there is evidence that it is significantly under-supported, and/or whether some areas of the subject are being supported to the neglect of others.
c. Cross-Disciplinary Research
To achieve sustainability in agriculture will require a cross-disciplinary approach, and this should be taken into account in setting research agendas geared towards sustainability. Attempts are being made to encourage cross-disciplinary research into agriculture, land use and rural affairs. For example, the Rural Economy and Land Use Programme (RELU) is a joint ESRC, BBSRC and NERC programme with £20m funding over three years. An ESRC-funded transdisciplinary seminar series on approaches to sustainable farmland management is taking place throughout 2004.
A possible case study on cross-disciplinary working would look at the mechanisms used for co-ordinating agendas between the various research funding bodies, as well as specific initiatives like RELU and how their priorities were arrived at. It would also need to consider the effects of the cultural and methodological divide between scientists of different disciplines, including social scientists.
d. Research for Developing Countries
The Research Agendas workstream will focus on UK funded research, but including any research relating to the needs of developing countries (e.g. DFID’s research). The Nuffield Council for Bioethics has recommended that Governments should fund a major expansion of GM-related research into tropical and sub-tropical staple foods, suitable for the needs of small-scale farmers. Guests at the AEBC meeting on 5 May felt that, after a move away from agricultural research for developing countries in the 1980s, developing countries were again high on the political agenda. Resources were beginning to be targeted to this area, although still only representing a small proportion of total funding. Some Commission members have expressed a special interest in examining research for developing countries, and this could be done through a case study. This study could therefore ask how research drivers have affected/are affecting the targeting of research funding towards developing countries’ needs.
