Institution |
Laboratories |
Libraries |
Field Stations |
Computers |
Sharing of resources |
Other Observations |
1. SUA |
Four. All in good condition & fairly well equipped |
One central for university. More literature within faculty. Well
equipped |
Five. Two without supporting infrastructure. |
Seventeen faculty computers. Have e-mail facilities. |
Library, labs, & computers are shared across faculties and with
other institutions |
Buildings & other facilities are good physical condition. |
2. TAFORI |
Limited lab. facilities. Poorly equipped |
Limited library facilities. Poorly equipped. |
Seven centres. All with poor supporting facilities. Only three centres
have equipment |
Three with nine more expected. No e-mail facilities |
Slight sharing with other institutions |
Physical state of buildings & equipment at centres is very bad. No
radio call facilities with centres. Backlog of unanalysed data for over 20 years |
3. NTSP |
Four. All in good condition and equipped |
One small library at headquarters |
Three zones, each with a lab. for seed testing |
Twelve. Each zone has one. No e-mail facilities |
Occasionally share resources with other institutions |
Buildings and other facilities in good physical condition |
4. IRA |
One remote sensing lab., a printing section and other facilities. All
well equipped |
One central for university. One within the Institute. Well equipped |
None |
About 15 within the Institute. Has e-mail facilities |
Library, labs and computers are shared across faculties and with other
Institutions |
Physical state of all facilities is good |
5. UZIM |
Several, adequate and in good state |
One of the best in the region |
None |
About 80% of scientists have computers. There are computer labs for
students. Has e-mail facilities |
Sharing among university faculties only |
Good physical state of facilities |
6. ZIMFC |
One well equipped and another poorly equipped at headquarters |
Well equipped library |
Three, eac with a lab. & supporting infrastructure |
Has an interactive network with field stations |
Shares resources with other institutions, especially labs. |
Good physical condition of facilities |
7. ZAMBIA |
Three poorly equipped labs. |
Two ill equipped libraries. Not receiving journals since 1988 |
Three, and are poory equipped |
Five. No e-mail facilities |
Benefits from other institutions |
Good physical condition of buildings but not equipment |
8. UZAM |
Good lab. facilities |
Fairly well equipped library |
None |
None |
Shares facilities with other faculties in the university |
Buildings and equipment in good physical condition |
9. FRIM |
Four and fairly well equipped & in good physical condition |
A good library |
Seven |
Ten. No e-mail facilities |
Loans and shares resources with ICRAF and university |
Good physical condition of buildings and equipment |
10. CEF |
Three labs, two in poor condition |
None |
One, currently being refurbished |
Two. Has e-mail through university |
No sharing reported |
The Centre will move to another location with new buildings for staff
and labs |
11. UEM |
Three labs, two of which are poorly equipped |
Shares library with rest faculty. Well equipped |
One, with adequate supporting facilities |
Nine. Has e-mail |
Shares resources with rest of faculty and the Forestry Research Centre |
Buildings and equipment in a satisfactory condition |
12. USUTU |
Inadequate, mostly externally sourced |
Moderate facilities, has good external links, for example with ICFR |
None |
Good computer facility |
Benefits from others in terms of library and lab. facilities |
Buildings and equipment are in good condition |
13. FAB |
|
|
|
|
No sharing of resources reported |
Housed in rented buildings |
14. VELD |
Poorly developed |
None |
None, but has a good nursery |
Few. No e-mail |
Benefits from sharing of facilities like labs with other institutions |
Housed in rented buildings. |
15. FORESTEK |
Good and equipped |
Good. Have access to CD-ROM |
Has several field bases with supporting infrastructure |
Every scientist has a computer and on LAN. Has e-mail facilities |
Shares on contractual basis its resources |
Good physical condition of buildings and equipment |
16. ICFR |
Several well equipped labs. |
Has a very well resourced library |
Has nurseries. Has two regional offices |
Has a very powerful LAN with 54 terminals |
Industry uses ICFR's resources and ICFR uses industry's labs. |
Good physical condition of buildings and equipment |
17. U. STELL |
Well equipped labs. though some with fairly old equipment |
Very good library facilities |
None |
Very well equipped and a LAN exists. Has e-mail facilities |
Shares resources with other institutions |
Buildings and equipment are in good condition |
18. NAMIBIA |
None |
Poor |
Has field trials in fairly good condition |
Good. Has e-mail facilities |
No sharing reported |
|
19. LESOTHO |
Poor |
Fairly good |
In fairly good condition |
Poor |
Limited sharing of resources |
Buildings in good condition |