Disciplines, institutions, and organizations: impact assessments in context
Raina, R.S.
Disciplines, institutions, and organizations: impact assessments in context - Mexico, DF (Mexico) CIMMYT : 2003 - p. 93 - Printed
Impact assessment is designed to inform decision- makers and relevant stakeholders in national agricultural research systems and international agricultural research centers about the impacts of agricultural technologies, research programs or policies. This paper contends that impact assessment research is located within the uneasy relationship between agricultural and social sciences. This relationship is determined by disciplinary constructs (theoretical and empirical remits) of the social sciences and the institutions (rules of the game) and organizations (structures governed by these rules/ norms) of agricultural science. Social sciences, especially the economics and sociology used in impact assessment studies, embody this instrumentalism within the agricultural sciences.||The first section discusses how this instrumentalism is operationalized within the institutions and organizations of agricultural research. Agricultural sciences use the social sciences: (a) as a substitute for extension, or the transfer of technology; (b) for statistical verification of experimental results, an economic viability certificate before the release of technology; and (c) for conditional priority setting, evaluation, and policy formulation. Within national systems and international centers, we are now witnessing the 'anomalous expansion' of rigorous academic work on impact assessment. However, the institutional and organizational context of this research has remained grounded in instrumentalism. This isolation of impact assessment studies from the institutional and organizational reality of agricultural science, and of agricultural and social sciences from the ecological, economic, social and cultural realities of the world (which adopts or utilizes the knowledge/ technology) can be traced back to the clear distinction made in instrumentalism between reality and morality.||The second section discusses this isolation, which is evident in the information base and methodologies used for impact assessment. Literature discussing the emergence of 'manual mentality' and the over- preoccupation with methods (for impact assessment and/ or research management) points to this increasing isolation. Instutionally and organizationally, the social sciences used for impact assessment are tuned to looking for consequence indicators alone. How can we use indicators of requirements, relationships, and monitoring? Will the epistemological and disciplinary constraints of the social sciences within national systems and international centers permit the use of these indicators, which draw from systems concepts and democratic values? These indicators help impact assessments " ...demonstrate how research leads to technology and technology leads to development."||Our commitment to an evaluation culture (Trochim 1992) is discussed in the next section. How will scientific credibility (as in economics) and accountability or democratic processes be features of the desired evaluation culture when they contradict each other at a fundamental epistemological level in the social sciences? It is important to challenge disciplinary constructs and develop interdisciplinary frameworks and institutions to facilitate the evaluation culture. This paper will also present analysis of evaluation methodologies and disciplinary handicaps from agricultural research systems in three leading democracies: India, the USA, and Sweden. To make an impact, impact assessment studies must be cognizant of disciplinary and institutional contexts.
English
970-648-104-4
Agricultural policies
Agricultural situation
Economic behaviour
Economic environment
Public sector
Research projects
Social policies
Technology
Research institutions
CIMMYT
338.91 / WAT
Disciplines, institutions, and organizations: impact assessments in context - Mexico, DF (Mexico) CIMMYT : 2003 - p. 93 - Printed
Impact assessment is designed to inform decision- makers and relevant stakeholders in national agricultural research systems and international agricultural research centers about the impacts of agricultural technologies, research programs or policies. This paper contends that impact assessment research is located within the uneasy relationship between agricultural and social sciences. This relationship is determined by disciplinary constructs (theoretical and empirical remits) of the social sciences and the institutions (rules of the game) and organizations (structures governed by these rules/ norms) of agricultural science. Social sciences, especially the economics and sociology used in impact assessment studies, embody this instrumentalism within the agricultural sciences.||The first section discusses how this instrumentalism is operationalized within the institutions and organizations of agricultural research. Agricultural sciences use the social sciences: (a) as a substitute for extension, or the transfer of technology; (b) for statistical verification of experimental results, an economic viability certificate before the release of technology; and (c) for conditional priority setting, evaluation, and policy formulation. Within national systems and international centers, we are now witnessing the 'anomalous expansion' of rigorous academic work on impact assessment. However, the institutional and organizational context of this research has remained grounded in instrumentalism. This isolation of impact assessment studies from the institutional and organizational reality of agricultural science, and of agricultural and social sciences from the ecological, economic, social and cultural realities of the world (which adopts or utilizes the knowledge/ technology) can be traced back to the clear distinction made in instrumentalism between reality and morality.||The second section discusses this isolation, which is evident in the information base and methodologies used for impact assessment. Literature discussing the emergence of 'manual mentality' and the over- preoccupation with methods (for impact assessment and/ or research management) points to this increasing isolation. Instutionally and organizationally, the social sciences used for impact assessment are tuned to looking for consequence indicators alone. How can we use indicators of requirements, relationships, and monitoring? Will the epistemological and disciplinary constraints of the social sciences within national systems and international centers permit the use of these indicators, which draw from systems concepts and democratic values? These indicators help impact assessments " ...demonstrate how research leads to technology and technology leads to development."||Our commitment to an evaluation culture (Trochim 1992) is discussed in the next section. How will scientific credibility (as in economics) and accountability or democratic processes be features of the desired evaluation culture when they contradict each other at a fundamental epistemological level in the social sciences? It is important to challenge disciplinary constructs and develop interdisciplinary frameworks and institutions to facilitate the evaluation culture. This paper will also present analysis of evaluation methodologies and disciplinary handicaps from agricultural research systems in three leading democracies: India, the USA, and Sweden. To make an impact, impact assessment studies must be cognizant of disciplinary and institutional contexts.
English
970-648-104-4
Agricultural policies
Agricultural situation
Economic behaviour
Economic environment
Public sector
Research projects
Social policies
Technology
Research institutions
CIMMYT
338.91 / WAT