Embrapa’s International Action focus on MKTPlace 02 to 28 February 2014.
-
Upload
reynold-copeland -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of Embrapa’s International Action focus on MKTPlace 02 to 28 February 2014.
Missions
•Eastern Africa:– 02 to 15 February, 4 countries:
• Ethiopia – Addis Abeba; Tanzania – Dar es Salaam; Kenya – Nairobi; Uganda – Entebbe e Kampala.
•Western Africa:– 15 to 28 February, 4 countries:
• Ghana – Accra; Nigeria – Abuja; Benin – Cotonou e Mali – Bamako.
Mission objective and scope• Scope: special Project – “Strengthening of Embrapa's
Internationalization”;
• Objective: raise information, opinions and perceptions of R&D, gov. and IDA institutions in scientific exchange and technical cooperation with Embrapa.
!! – It was neither an individual evaluation of the projects, nor a collection of demands for future
cooperation projects.
Activities
•53 meetings, 6 per country approximately
•22 individual interviews from 30 MKTPlace projects
MKTPlace - Application of DNA-markers for development of drought tolerant potato germplasm – KARI - Kenya
Activity: Embrapa Model system for drought tolerance study
Activity: Construction of hydroponic system for drought tolerance study
Activity: DNA Extraction from potato leaves
Utilization of Hydraulic Ram Pumps for promoting small scale
irrigation
MKTPlace Projects
NARO - UgandaNARO - Uganda
Enhancing rice and maize production by small-holders using bacteria-plant extract biopesticide
MKTPlace Projects
Université des sciences, des techniques et des technologies de Bamako - Mali
Some personal views
•“Marketplace develops projects that fill gaps of major problems.”
•“Small projects are really effective”;
•“It is a partnership more than resources only”
Highlights
• In general, achievement of the expected results• Scientific quality and Embrapa's experience;
• Partnership with Embrapa makes it easier to obtain funds from other organisms/institutions/agencies;
• Peer to peer cooperation;
• Networking closing the gap between african research institutions and Embrapa; and
• Brazilian technology is adaptable to local realities.
Points for Improvement• Language barrier;
• Delay to send genetic material;
• Little dissemination the project knowledge is just among the researchers and the team at the institution;
• Difficulty to find Brazilian partners through the MKTPlace website;
• Project duration is too short;
• Complex pre-proposal selection process
Suggestions• A final workshop to articulate and facilitate the
elaboration of new projects;
• Associate field visits with the Fora and increase staff visits;
• Improve communication of the results within institutions in the countries;
• Improve the 'matchmaking' mechanism;
• Provide documents in other languages, including african ones automatic translation software
Thank you!
Maya TakagiResearcher
Secretariat for International Affairs
Adriana BuenoInternational Cooperation Analyst
Secretariat for International Affairs