SECTION II

Setting and Implementing Priorities

Integrating biotechnology with national agricultural research must take into account the
scarcity of resources available to research organizations. Preparing a strategy for
biotechnology provides a starting point for developing research agendas.
The first step in preparing a strategy, and part of the decision-making framework
introduced in chapter one, is defining the priorities of a country or institute in developing its
capacity in biotechnology. Priority setting helps decision makers plan research and allocate
scarce resources. As part of the decision-making process, formal and systematic priority
setting requires a method suitable for the specific decision problem. The first chapter in this
section (Methods for Priority Setting in Agricultural Biotechnology Research) reviews
the most common formal priority setting methods in agricultural research and the factors
influencing the choice. A necessary input for priority setting is collecting, processing, and
analyzing information on the mobilization and use of resources and the institutional setting
of the agricultural research system.
The case study presented in chapter 5 (Setting Research Priorities for the Chilean
Biotechnology Program) concludes that participation and the unique features of
biotechnology research have to be addressed explicitly in priority setting. The main special
characteristics of biotechnology research are substantial uncertainty, lack of data, public
acceptance, high investments, integration to conventional research, and legal regulations.
The case study presented in chapter 6 (Managing Biotechnology in AARD,
Indonesia: Priorities, Funding, and Implementation) addresses the issue of implementing
the results of a priority setting exercise. Among the issues to be considered are the
identification of priority projects, the development of human resources, the provision of
facilities and equipment, and the identification of appropriate collaborators.
The choice of a priority setting method depends on the nature of the decision that has
to be made and on factors such as the degree of detail in the analysis, the availability of
skills and resources, and the participants or clients understanding of the process. There is
a priori no right or wrong method. However, as explained in chapter 4 and further
confirmed in chapter 5, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) has proven to be a powerful
decision-support tool for setting priorities for agricultural biotechnology research.
Obtaining information in advance is a critical input for any priority setting exercise. In
the case of biotechnology, this information must compare advantages and performances
among organizations undertaking agricultural biotechnology research. The case study from
Chile highlights the importance of gathering information which takes into account unique
features of biotechnology, including limited institutional experience and scanty data on
potential impacts. Lack of critical information can mean that substantial uncertainty results
from a priority-setting process. To address this uncertainty, the authors select a
methodology allowing for broad participation that improves the quality of information
38

SECTION II Setting and Implementing Priorities

39

available for the priority setting process, and accounts for the chance of success both in
terms of research and adoption by the end users. Other features to consider are public
acceptance, changing legal frameworks, risks to biodiversity, and the importance of
enhancing scientific capacity. The Chilean case also brings out the need for different
stakeholder groups to participate to obtain relevant information for the priority setting
exercise and to increase ownership of the results.
The Indonesia case demonstrates how setting priorities becomes the first step in
establishing a strategy for biotechnology research. The results of a priority-setting exercise
can only be implemented if they match available resources and take into account human
resources and financial sustainability. Finally, a legal and institutional framework has to be
established to provide an environment that is conducive to innovative research to support
national development goals.

Recommendations
The main recommendations for research managers in this section are summarized as
follows:
Undertake priority setting as an integral part of the strategic planning process.
Begin with an analysis of what is already being done in agricultural biotechnology
and which resources are used.
Determine the questions that need to be answered and then choose an appropriate
priority setting method. AHP has been found to be a flexible approach that can
incorporate the unique management concerns of biotechnology research.
In the course of the priority setting exercise, focus on particularly biotechnologyrelated issues such as intellectual property, uncertainty, and public acceptance.
Design participatory processes, ensuring end user and beneficiary participation, for
priority setting that maximize the two-way flow of information, improve the quality
of decision making, and ensure a commitment to implementation.
Plan and reserve resources to implement priority setting results.