You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
Southeast Asia made considerable progress in building and strengthening its agricultural R&D capacity during 2000–2017. All of the region’s countries reported higher numbers of agricultural researchers, improvements in their average qualification levels, and higher shares of women participating in agricultural R&D. In contrast, regional agricultural research spending remained stagnant, despite considerable growth in agricultural output over time. As a result, Southeast Asia’s agricultural research intensity—that is, agricultural research spending as a share of agricultural GDP—steadily declined from 0.50 percent in 2000 to just 0.33 percent in 2017. Although the extent of underinve...
Agricultural R&D capacity in Laos has risen steadily over time, but R&D expenditures have exhibited an erratic trend in recent years. In 2017, the country invested only 0.26 percent of its AgGDP in agricultural research.
PNG’s agricultural research expenditure declined steadily during 2013–2017 as the combined result of reductions in both donor and government funding. In 2017, PNG invested just 0.31 percent of its AgGDP in agricultural research. In contrast to spending, agricultural researcher numbers rose progressively during 2013–2017 to reach 146 FTEs in total. The country’s research agencies lack the critical mass of highly qualified researchers and accompanying infrastructure needed to address the multidisciplinary challenges facing the agricultural sector. Many critical research areas remain overlooked.
Agricultural research investment in Thailand rose gradually during 2013–2017, largely driven by increased spending by the country’s livestock, forestry, and rice departments.
Indonesian agricultural R&D spending declined steadily in the decade leading to 2017 (in inflation-adjusted terms). The country’s agricultural research spending as a share of AgGDP also fell substantially, from 0.48 percent in 2004 to just 0.17 percent in 2017. This ratio is among the lowest in Southeast Asia.
Despite a considerable increase in agricultural research spending in recent years, Myanmar is still seriously underinvesting. At just 0.06 percent in 2017, the country’s agricultural research intensity ratio (that is, spending as a share of AgGDP) is one of the lowest in the world. The number of agricultural researchers has grown steadily over time, as has the average qualification level of researchers. The majority of researchers are crop scientists, however, leaving other important areas (notably livestock and fisheries) severely underresearched. ADS was launched in 2018 to address many of the challenges that Myanmar’s national agricultural research system is facing, including severe underinvestment, organizational fragmentation, limited geographic dispersion of research, neglected research domains, and an ineffective extension system.
Agricultural research spending in Vietnam has increased steadily since 2000. Nonetheless, as of 2017, Vietnam only invested 0.20 percent of its AgGDP in agricultural research, which is insufficient to address the multitude of challenges the agricultural sector is facing. The country has made considerable progress in building its agricultural research capacity. Average degree levels of scientists have improved markedly over time. Recent growth in agricultural research spending and staffing is likely to be reversed in the coming years because the Vietnamese government plans to reduce public research staffing and take steps to stimulate private research and funding.
Malaysia’s total agricultural research spending remained stagnant in the decade leading to 2017, averaging around 0.9 to 1.0 billion ringgit per year (in constant 2011 prices).
Despite a considerable increase in agricultural research spending in recent years, Cambodia is still grossly underinvesting. At just 0.22 percent in 2017, the country’s agricultural research intensity ratio (that is, spending as a share of AgGDP) is very low.
The new millennium has witnessed profound changes to the way donor countries are approaching international development – with the emphasis now on collaborative, people-centred development. This timely book explores how research and research culture need to adapt to mesh with this new reality.