Report on
Discussion Forum on Information Services in the Asia-Pacific
and
AGRIS/CARIS in the 21st Century
an Asia-Pacific Regional Consultation

Edited by Michael Ibach and Yvonne Byron

DISCUSSION FORUM ON INFORMATION SERVICES

IN THE ASIA-PACIFIC

Becky Skidmore

ASEAN Forest Tree Seed Centre Project, Ottawa, Canada

[Back to OccPaper Top Page]

List of Acronyms

[Chapter 1]
Introduction

[Chapter 2]
Forestry Information Initiatives

[Chapter 3]
Collaboration

[Chapter 4]
The Survey

[Chapter 5]
The Discussion Forum

[Chapter 6]
Final Action Plans

[Chapter 7]
Keynote Papers

[Chapter 8]
Conclusions

[References]

[Appendix 1]
Survey Questionnaire

[Appendix 2]
Forestry Information Services in the Asia-Pacific Region

[Appendix 3]
The Future for Scientific Publishing and Information in the Asia-Pacific Region

[Appendix 4]
Information Services at IUFRO

[Appendix 5]
Sources of Forestry Information

[Appendix 6]
List of Participants

THE DISCUSSION FORUM

The Discussion Forum (DF) on Forestry Information Services in the Asia-Pacific was hosted by CIFOR as a 4-day meeting at the end of October 1996 in Bogor, Indonesia. CABI, AIFM, AFTSC and CIFOR provided financial support. Twenty-seven people attended the DF and included a diverse group of information professionals, information providers, donors, users and senior management personnel. In all, 16 organisations representing 12 countries, including most ASEAN countries, India, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Vietnam, China, Laos, Korea and Western Samoa, were present (See Appendix 6). Also present were representatives from AFTSC, AIFM, CABI, CIFOR, IUFRO, FORSPA and USAID.

The Discussion Forum had three objectives:

  • to analyse the needs and opportunities identified in the survey (Session 1);
  • to establish priorities for action among those needs and opportunities (Session 2); and
  • to develop and initiate a co-ordinated response to the high priority needs and opportunities (Session 3).

Session 4 was devoted to the presentation of these action plans by working group members. The final session included a keynote paper by CAB International and a demonstration of their proposed forestry compendium.

Despite an initial awkwardness in bringing together such a diverse group of people from a variety of cultures, the working group sessions offered an opportunity for people to interact more directly and express their ideas.

Session 1:
Definition of needs and opportunities

Following a thought-provoking address by CIFOR's Francis Ng on the future of scientific publishing and information in the Asia-Pacific (see Appendix 3), working groups discussed the list of needs and opportunities which were developed from the earlier mail survey. Each working group was to comment on, revise or re-word each need as necessary, as well as identify additional needs not included in the list.

A revised and expanded list of needs was developed by the three working groups under the four broad areas of Management, Human Resources, Networking and Physical Resources.

Management

Need for:

1. Adequate funding and efficient management of funds for information units
2. An information strategy at institutional and national levels
3. Integration of all information functions within the organisation, supported by an information management system (e.g., library, publishing, distribution, IT)
4. Information systems for research management within organisations
5. Attention to intellectual property rights (including copyright) with regard to the sharing and use of scientific information
6. Recognition of the value of information and information managers/providers by decision makers, in addition to monetary and policy support
7. Linking incentives with publishing output of researchers

Human resources

Need for:

8. Training of researchers and managers in literature synthesis and scientific writing
9. Training of library/information staff, users, producers (e.g., editors, publishers) in appropriate information skills, providing in-country training where possible
10. Increased awareness of relevant literature (local, grey, international)
11. Development of reading/information habits of educational institutions (based on economic realities and policies of individual countries)
12. Pro-active service orientation (strategies, workplans) of information units
13. Recognition of the dynamic future of information

Networking

Need for:

14. Reliable telecommunication capabilities between institutions and regionally
15. A formalised regional network of forestry and forestry-related libraries (key persons, institutions, databases)
16. Improved access, distribution, utilisation and exchange of available forestry-related information, with appropriate feedback mechanisms on use
17. Inter-disciplinary co-operation in research and information systems

Physical resources

Need for:

18. Compatible exchange mechanisms amongst libraries (information exchange protocols)
19. Effective library equipment, resources and software
20. Access to full-text resources (hard copy/document delivery, full-text databases)

All participants recognised the overlap amongst many of the expressed needs and there was a general perception that addressing one need may in fact address many of the others. This was particularly true of the needs expressed in the management category where participants constantly stressed the importance of obtaining managerial support at both the institutional and national level to create an efficient and effective information system. With managerial support, necessary funds for equipment, training and resources would logically follow, leading to an improved ability to manage and utilise information. This need for managerial support is echoed throughout the literature. Mwinyimbegu (1993) comments on the "managerial poverty" of developing countries. Similarly, Zhang et al. (1996) state that many managerial posts in China are still occupied by individuals with insufficient background in information management, although they are optimistic with an increasing presence of senior scientists or outstanding young scientists in these positions. It is interesting to note, however, in the context of the Discussion Forum, that some participants did feel that sufficient management support already existed in their organisations. The representatives from India and Korea, in particular, felt their information activities were both well-funded and supported by senior management, although there was general uncertainty in all the groups as to what actually constitutes optimum, or even adequate, support.

Central to the managerial issue is the importance of setting in place a national information policy . Such a policy would lead to strategies whereby information activities would exist to contribute to national socio-economic goals. References were made to the Chinese government's policy, "Cha Xin", which requires a compulsory literature search covering the preceding ten years when establishing or evaluating all provincial and national research projects. This policy has led to increased use of information in the research process, reduced duplication of research efforts and has contributed significantly to the heightened appreciation and profile of libraries within organisations (Zhang et al. 1996). In the Philippines, where there is no information policy, Broadbent (1992) bluntly states "a national information policy is essential" if future economic growth is to proceed.

The issue of human resources was perceived as being related to management issues, particularly with regard to the need for pro-active service strategies on the part of information managers. Improved marketing of information services, formalised workplans and strategies would ensure information units a viable place within their organisations. Not only do information managers have to convince senior management of the value of information but they must further their marketing efforts to ensure that information services and resources are well utilised by research personnel. Senior managers and policy makers who may themselves acknowledge the importance of information in the research process will not provide continued financial support if information managers do not attract and maintain the appropriate customer base.

Networking was also important to all participants. Many countries represented at the Discussion Forum have under-developed or unreliable telecommunication capabilities, making efficient exchange of information almost impossible. Singapore's excellent telecommunication infrastructure has been instrumental in the country's socio-economic growth and has provided the basis for a national information system connecting computers in homes, schools and offices (Weng and Sabaratnam 1996). An efficient telecommunications infrastructure would enable forestry institutions to develop co-operative networks with other like-minded institutions and organisations. Resources, expertise and services could be shared to the benefit of all. The lack of development of forestry networks thus far can be partially attributed to the unreliable infrastructure, bureaucracies and costs of existing communication systems.

Discussion of physical resources was a natural follow-on from funding and management support. All participants recognised the need for improved information (e.g., monographs, journals, CD-ROMs) and IT (computer hardware and software) resources. Again, with secured financial and political support from senior management, physical resources should improve.

Session 2:
Prioritising needs and opportunities

Using the list of needs prepared in session 1, working group participants were asked to rate each need in terms of having the greatest positive impact on the region's information services (i.e., the highest priority). Secondly, they were asked to consider the various inputs (e.g., human and financial resources, management participation, time) required to address each need and rate it according to the likelihood for success in addressing that need. The combination of these two values would lead to identifying those needs which were perceived as having both a high impact and high likelihood for success. Rating was on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being the highest value. The needs having the highest combined value would be those for which action plans were to be developed in Session 3. Results for each of the three working groups are shown in Table 1.

As expected, the values expressing priority or importance assigned to a particular need were consistently higher than the values expressing the perceived likelihood for success in addressing that same need. The difference between the two values was particularly evident in the management category. Both the need for adequate funds and efficient management of funds and the need for decision makers to recognise the value of information and information managers/ providers scored very high in terms of priority but low in terms of likelihood for success. Large differences were also evident in the networking category, whereas the differences between the two figures in both the human and physical resources categories were less extreme.

The six needs identified as requiring action plans were:

  • Information strategy at institutional and national levels
  • Training of library/information staff, users and producers in appropriate information skills
  • Pro-active service orientation (strategies, workplans) of information units
  • Formalised regional network of forestry and forestry-related libraries/information units
  • Improved access, distribution, utilisation and exchange of available forestry-related information
  • Effective library equipment, resources and software

Session 3:
Development of Action Plans for
high-priority Needs and Opportunities

Each working group was asked to work out detailed action plans for addressing two of the six needs identified in Session 2. Outputs were to include a definition of the problem, goals and objectives of an action plan, and a specific action plan outlining persons or agencies responsible, time frame and any associated costs. It was recognised that the various action plans developed and presented by the three working groups would vary considerably from group to group. All groups requested extra time to discuss and develop their proposed plans. The resulting plans, presented in Table 2, provide an excellent starting point for determining actual, achievable plans to which the Discussion Forum participants could agree.