gcard_logo_21_5 FinalThe ICT-KM Program is supporting the GCARD process, starting with the e-consultations that should contribute a great deal in enhancing the development value of research.

Organized by GFAR, the Global Conference on Agricultural Research for Development (GCARD) is more than just a Conference – it’s a multi-year process of learning and continuous updating of the global agricultural research for development (AR4D) system. The aim is to create new ways of working together to enhance the development value of research. GCARD will be an open and inclusive process for consultation and change, which will aim to reshape agricultural research and innovation, improve resources for research, and increase its development impact.
The GCARD 2010 will result in an action plan and framework to improve agricultural research and innovation globally.

Through CIAT’s Simone Staiger-Rivas, the ICT-KM Program provides the coordination of the e-consultation process as well as support in their facilitation.

Get involved by subscribing to the regional e-consultations of your choice, following the GCARD blog or tweets.

Listen to an interview of Nancy White with Simone Staiger on the GCARD process

More about the e-consultations

Photo credit: Harry Nesbitt/2000 IRRI (Creative Commons)

Photo credit:H.Nesbitt/2000 IRRI (Creative Commons)

In 2008, the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) launched a Change Initiative to identify how best to adapt to anticipated global changes and challenges.

The reforms will help to strengthen the CGIAR by establishing a results-oriented research agenda .

As part of this process, the CGIAR, in consultation with its partners, is presently seeking feedback on what can be done, through research and innovations, to reduce poverty and hunger, improve human health and nutrition, and enhance ecosystem resilience.

The Chair of the CGIAR Strategy Committee now invites all frontline researchers (including those in universities, national agricultural research and extension systems, farmer organizations, private sector and NGOs) to take part in a survey developed to identify agricultural research opportunities, offering large scale development impact.

The survey is available online until August 20, 2009.

At the conclusion of the survey process, the CGIAR Strategy Committee will synthesize and make the overall results available as part of its reporting.

Donate 30 minutes of your time to help shape the future of international agricultural research for development!

The latest newsletter of GFAR features an article about the ICT-KM Program’s Knowledge Sharing in Research project and its Pilot Projects. See links and article below.

See: GFAR Newsletter

See: article on KSinR project and Pilots

The CGIAR: learning how to improve its research effectiveness and impact through knowledge sharing

The CGIAR Centres and Programs together with their many partners, are creating a wealth of knowledge that is aimed at helping to increase productivity within agriculture and improve livelihoods of people, primarily in developing countries. While all players are doing much to ensure that this knowledge is widely shared and applied, certain obstacles to the uptake, use and impact of this wealth of knowledge continue to exist. One of the missing elements between knowledge generation and the application of such knowledge is knowledge sharing. Knowledge sharing involves learning from stakeholders what knowledge gaps exist and what is needed to close these gaps; increasing collaboration and interaction of all actors throughout knowledge generation processes; and finding more effective ways of delivering knowledge in a manner appropriate to the particular target groups whose decision-making and actions we seek to influence and support. This requires better understanding and support of new knowledge systems, knowledge sharing approaches, and innovation mechanisms.
To address this, the CGIAR through its system-wide program on Information Communication Technology and Knowledge Management (ICT-KM) initiated a two-year project starting in 2007 entitled ‘Improving the effectiveness of the CGIAR through knowledge sharing’ with a major component focused on Knowledge Sharing in Research (KSinR). The goal of the KSinR Project is to help improve the effectiveness and impact of CGIAR research through providing options and lessons around good practices of knowledge sharing in research.
KSinR’s main learning vehicle is six on-going CGIAR research projects which are using knowledge sharing approaches integrated into various stages of the research process, representing a new way of doing research aimed at greater impact. This includes the use of a multi-stakeholder framework for conducting research as being tried by IWMI through its use of the Learning Alliance approach in the ‘Wastewater , Agriculture and Sanitation for Poverty alleviation’ (WASPA) project aimed at improving coordination amongst stakeholders and getting research into use. This project is also developing a process mentoring method to monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of the Learning Alliance approach. The ICARDA Farmers’ Conference project is providing lessons on mechanisms for sharing knowledge with and learning from farmers to help with better design and carrying out of plant breeding research. The CIFOR Pilot is exploring better ways to share research priority assessment methodologies and the experiences around using them, as this is an important tool in figuring out those areas and types of research which can provide the greatest impact. The IWMI Wastewater project is testing various dissemination methods to improve uptake and use of research results.
This includes use of radio programs, training videos, contribution to curricula, and flip charts with printed messages and visuals to get across good practices in using wastewater.
Similarly the IRRI-lead Pilot is also exploring innovative dissemination methods through the development of the Laos Rice Knowledge Bank (LRKB) as a mechanism to make research accessible for extension agents to use with farmers.
Information packets based on research identified by a variety of stakeholders are being developed in appropriate formats to be included in the LRKB. The WorldFish Centre Pilot Project is also trying out participatory monitoring and evaluation, as well as impact assessment methodologies with the aim of learning together with stakeholders throughout the research process, and gaining their perspective on progress and impact.
Synthesis of the results across KSinR and all of its Pilot Projects and other activities will be documented in a variety of media including the KS website (www.ks-cgiar.org), the KSinR blog, and through the development of practical how-to documents to be made widely available and presented at upcoming CGIAR and other fora.

Contact person:
Nadia Manning-Thomas, KSinR Project Leader, n.manning@cgiar.org
IWMI Nile Basin and East Africa office, ILRI Campus, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

The new GFAR website is officially online!

Visit www.egfar.org to discover how easy it is to be a part of shaping the future of agricultural research for development. gfar-new-website

The web space features the new look of GFAR, while building on its role as a Global Forum for all those who care about the future of agriculture.

As a member of “e-GFAR”, you will be able to participate in Forum debates, post news items and also submit reports, papers and other information regarding ARD on the open site.

Also remember not to miss out in taking advantage of GFAR’s extensive document repository, which features over 1,000 publications from GFAR and it’s Regional Fora dealing with important areas of focus such as both new and learned methods of research, innovation, regional research priorities and more.

This week I read in the GFAR e-news about a new initiative by Ashoka. It is a program built on the idea of social innovation where everyone has the opportunity to influence change by sharing their ideas with the world through Ashoka’s use of “collaborative competitions”.

Submissions for ideas are accepted until May 13th. Read more at Changemakers-cultivating innovations

Few would deny that in the 21st Century, biotechnology and materials science have replaced plant breeding and soil science as the frontier areas of agricultural research. What is not really clear is how the application of computers and new ICTs are becoming centre stage in transforming agricultural science, research and technology generation.

High capacity computing power and use of ICTs in bioinformatics and managing massive databases have already demonstrated their effectiveness in generating new, more relevant and useful crop varieties in very short periods of time and at less cost. This will be critical in meeting the challenges of climate change. Modelling and simulation of crop performances, economic impacts and effects of weather and climate, use of geographical information systems and knowledge based systems are making vast contributions to making agriculture at various levels precise, predictable and proficient and more risk-averse. Embedded sensors, networks and ICTs are making farming less arduous and economical.

During the Science Forum 2009, a workshop will be organized to provide a venue to discuss how to exploit the potential of computing and ICTs in agricultural science, research and technology generation especially in the context of technologically less developed countries and for the benefit of millions of resource poor farmers and producers. The workshop will seek to identify the global priorities in research in use of ICT in agricultural science and technology generation and needs for technologically less developed countries to make full use of ICTs in harnessing agriculture science for their development and progress.

A call for proposal for posters to be presented during the Science Forum has been launched. The posters aim to present how Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs) are enabling agricultural science to be a social endeavor by communities rather something done in laboratories by professional scientists.

The Global Forum for Agricultural Research (GFAR) recently released its newsletter. Please find attached the February 2009 Issue of the GFAR Newsletter. The web edition will be available soon at  http://www.egfar.org/egfar/website/new/newsletters

The Knowledge Sharing in Research project was featured in this newsletter in an article entitled: “The CGIAR: learning how to improve its research effectiveness and impact through knowledge sharing”ksinr-in-gfar-newsletter

the fishbowl session (photo by Petr Kosina)

the fishbowl session (photo by Petr Kosina)

This is a post following up on the Knowledge Management, Education and Learning Workshop held in Maputo 4 and 5 December 2008. (You can read more about this workshop by selecting the tag KELMaputo.)

A few weeks after our workshop in Maputo I have found some time and mental diskspace to finish loose threads. The following is a short summary of the notes of the session we used to hear back from the three groups, also known as ‘the Fishbowl session‘.

Notes of the Fishbowl session Maputo workshop, 5 December

In the group on learning with communities the ‘model’ for the new -or not really that new?- reality for agricultural knowledge or information was discussed. The networked model is becoming more eminent in an increasingly connected world, like in Steve Songs presentation. What is the role of research in the new networked reality? How does it link to the changes within CGIAR?

Several implications were touched. Not seeing CG as central, but the whole as a network of equals, is one of the ‘new’ perspectives. How to keep track of interventions and of their success?

The following emerged from the discussions as good things to be doing:

  • Allowing the use of process indicators instead of only focussing on result or product indicators. The idea is: if the process is right, there is probably somewhere, sometime, a result. Much easier to ‘measure’ the quality of the process than insisting on always measuring the result. (Plus you avoid the problem of attribution. (The question: is the result measured thanks to the process).
  • Instead of zooming in to the problems, use asset based thinking. Collecting success stories within and around CGIAR is important; there are many and they set good examples.
  • Partnerships are considered crucial. What are ways to build equal partnerships?

Universities in Africa, as discussed by a group on formal education, are very diverse, in all possible aspects. They need support to enter the 21century, how can we support them? They, too, are part of the networked model: how can they deal with it?

Except for the changes to adapt to shifting times, curricular changes (or renewal of curricula) are needed. What opportunities do the new connections, the social web,  offer here? Can we think of e-curricula? Also: how do we increase the capacity on Knowledge Management itself, is that by doing it or additionally by offering KM curriculum?

And finally for the group focussing on Knowledge Management. Within CGIAR, How to really embed KM?
Parallels between institutes, departments and key programs were explored.
A broad range of topics was touched in these discussions, networking occurred and several personal commitments were made.

Personal reflection
I think the workshop showed how it all hangs together: the networked model for Agricultural Knowledge, in which farmer communities, the value chains, Research, formal education and joint learning all have their place. The workshop clearly showed how this picture is changing; becoming more “networked” with the increasing connections and digital tracks we are all leaving.

Ajit Maru, co-initiator of the workshop, explains what to him is the core of the change in a comment on this blog:

Ajit Maru Says:
December 17, 2008 at 11:31 am

The core issue in Steve’s presentation was about “conversation” in a community.

To me, it is not only conversation that is important but “continuous conversation” within a community that is even more important. We can have a conversation in a community but when it is continued over time instead of it being one-off it enables blossoming of different perspectives on an issue that leads to a far more deeper understanding of the issue. (his comment is much longer, read on here..)

This, together with the changes upcoming in CGIAR, gave us a context in which there was LOTS to jointly explore: how to be effective, how to link, how to deal with partners inside and outside CGIAR, how to keep track, how to share our successes and failures? Who to liaise with, what are possible alliances? And, maybe most of all: Where am I in the new picture, where are you? What do the changes, both wider societal and within CGIAR, mean to me? How is my institute, my department, my group of colleagues reacting to the changes? and how is yours?

The maps are changing. Explorations on a continuously changing map are not easy. Some of us may feel we achieved little, as there is little concrete result. But still it feels like we worked hard: at getting to grips with new challenges ahead, brainstorming on what to do about them, networking for possible alliances. I for me have decided to do as suggested, and to focus on process and not immediately on result…. maybe it is early to set our marks. To me, the workshop seemed like a beginning: where to put our marks next? What are some common principles for the future? How and with whom can we join our forces for the future? I trust this blog will be one of the meeting places where we can follow the ongoings of this process. What will the 2009 episodes bring?

The ICT-KM Program of the Consultative Groups on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), the Global Forum on Agricultural Research (GFAR) and the Commonwealth of Learning (COL) and YPARD (Young Professionals’ Platform for Agricultural Research for Development),  along with other partners organized a workshop to discuss priorities and develop an agenda for action through global collaboration in improving agricultural knowledge management, education and learning on 4 and 5 December 2008 at Maputo during the CGIAR AGM08.

The day and a half meeting was documented through social reporting with help of consultant Josien Kapma.
Social reporting is where a group of participants at an event interactively and jointly contribute to some form of reporting, in text, photos, images or video. The resulting “social report” is made accessible, usually online, as soon as possible, sometimes as a half-product. This allows others to join in, to extend, to adjust or remix.”

We started Day 1 with two key notes.

Steve Song, of Shuttleworth Foundation (formerly of Canada’s International Development Research Centre, where he led the ICT programs for Africa), was the first workshop presenter.
The increasing density of connections in the world changes the way we work, the way we think in a fundamental and qualitative way. I will talk about why that is true and what impact that may have on people and organizations. “

Professor Ekwamu Adipala was our next guest speaker. He coordinates the Regional Universities Forum for Capacity Building in Agriculture in Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, Uganda and Zimbabwe
The main thrust is that for Africa to participate in a global knowledge economy it must have a critical mass of well trained human capital and that is grossly lacking. The need remains on good professional discipline and depth, but more critically, on cross-cutting professional skills that allow the professionals to adapt to opportunities. “

After the two presentations, the 40 or so participants had conversations in groups about what they had heard and prepared questions to the speakers that were then addressed in plenary.

We ended the morning session with a Chat-Show to listen to more experiences of partners in the areas of KM, education and learning. Chat show host Peter Ballantyne used the  connectedness concept that Steve proposed in the morning to gather participant’s experiences.
The single one most important thing, according to the chat show guests: Collaboration between African University, non-African University and CGIAR, each sticking to its area; Explore ICTs to build self-directed learning; Unlock CG knowledge; ICTs for meaningful conversation with partners; Curriculum reform and mentoring;  Introduce new ICT’s, e.g the “voice web” to radio”.

In the afternoon, we broke out into three groups in order to allow participants to address in depth the issues they care about. One group worked on formal education, another group addressed the issue of rural learning communities and a third group explored possible entry points fro the CGIAR to work on KM strategies.

 Our social reporter gathered some feedback from participants after Day1: https://ictkm.wordpress.com/2008/12/15/impressions-of-the-first-day-km-education-and-learning-workshop-maputo/

On day two we used a Fishbowl dynamic to share interactively the discussions from the different working groups, for many the highlight of the event.

We ended the workshop going around the circle of participants and their take-aways.

Workshop photo gallery: http://www.flickr.com/groups/910900@N24/pool/ Thanks to Petr Kosina for his great shots.

In the context of this workshop GFAR invited us to submit organizational profiles in order to allow GFAR to do some assessment work. Participant organizations were asked to share their needs and priorities with regards to Agricultural Knowledge Sharing, Education and Learning. Concrete suggestions for action were also part of the form.

See the profiles:


(photo credit: bikeracer)

On the second and last day of our Maputo workshop we wanted to to hear back from the groups. We used the fishbowl technique: the group listens in as three participants (sitting in the middle of the circle: in the fishbowl) question each other about what was discussed in their groups. Anyone can move to the middle. Read more about this and other methodologies in the KS toolkit.

Although at first somewhat uneasy, later on the Fishbowl worked really well to have a more conversational, more open and more participative summary and digest of the group work.

Here are some notes on the Fishbowl session: notes-on-fishbowl-session-maputo.

Here are some notes of the last session of the KM group, about capacity building: capacity-building-and-km-exploring-commonalities.

UPDATE 31 December: another post on this session is here

Nadia capturing participants expectations

Nadia capturing participants' expectations

During introductions the first morning

During introductions the first morning

After grouping the post-its

After grouping the post-its

zooming in

zooming in

On the first day of the workshop participants thought about their expectations for the workshop -and shared them. Nadia captured what people said on post-it notes and slightly grouped them. This was the result. See more pictures here.


New opportunities
Meaningful conversations

How to attract investment

Needs of all actors present
Institutional mandates

Collaboration and Synergies
Work with others
Build community
Develop partnerships
Links with other orgs
Partnerships in Africa
Private sector and intermediaries

KS and Learning and Change
Understand KS better
Effective KS
Learn about KM from other organizations
Support culture of learning and KS
Learn innovation tools of ICT-KM
Learn concepts
Learning Models
Current thinking on ICT-KM in CGIAR
Learn about ICT-KM Program
How KS can be implemented in the CG?

How to make use of strategic opportunities?
Role of ICT-KM in change?
New thinking in communication?
KM approach for CG

Get busy in the same direction
Honest and realistic practical actions
Moving this forward

Outreach / Uptake
Learn on how to get messages out
Explore barriers to reaching target groups
How to talk to all at the same time
What beyond publications in journals
How to get research into use?
Getting info of CG out
Ways to explain what we do

Capacity Building
Use of ICTs for Capacity Building
Link ICT-KM with cap. Building

Universities to have two way links to KS
Understand how K products be used in education

New models for farmer learning
ICT-KM to work with farmers – new developments
Farmer knowledge

At the end of the workshop as a kind of evaluation participants were asked to comment on the workshop. This is what they said.


Increased confidence in our group. (opinions, rich discussions)
Good sense about the KM community
Happy to seeing space / role for YPARD
Happy to see other methods. Chat show did not really work, fish bowl was great. Too much technology focus with first presentation. Output through WP -brilliant.
2 sides of the coin. technology and new young generation. positive about bringing universities to KM community.
Content versus IT. Information is not Knowledge.
Welcoming idea of CLO. More structuralized collaboration between KM and capacity building.
Strengthening relationships. ILAC & ICT-KM helping each other in the change process on complementary issues
Great idea to merge Agric Ed. &KM connection with change process. work systematically together.
So much overlapping  & combined interests
A lot of necessary conversations. Need to think about scaling up process how to respond broader / bigger issues
Reminded about what he left behind when moving from a large organisation to a smaller.
Hoping little but more profound talks on KM strategy
Separate groups wouldn’t have benefitted from the outside views. Moving towards the cross polination of perspectives
Great diversity (org & geographically) a lot of new ideas. Interesting example of social reporting.

At several occassions during the KM, E & L Workshop in Maputo, we split up in three groups: Knowledge Management (mostly from a CGIAR perspective), communicating and learning with rural communities, and Education (how to reform African universities).
In each group, notes were taken by “reporters”. Herewith we share some of these notes.

Group on Agricultural Education

Identifying needs in Agricultural Education. Focus: Public Institutions
Action oriented approach: What opportunities for collaboration?

Key Questions to help in Action Planning
-How to ensure knowledge generated is part of Knowledge sharing web?
-How do we capture the needs/demands/ of the beneficiaries?
-how do we capture the information and resources that can address the needs of the beneficiaries.

Check institutions with best practices in KM to adopt.
1. Conduct regular particpatory needs analysis to identify learning needs
setting objectives

curriculum development

    Promote cost sharing among stakeholders.

2. Review and identify policies ^policy frameworks, institutional systems, resources and structures neede to perform university fuctions optimally.
Involve CG centres & research institutes to ensure quality in research to gain adequate competencies by the learners.

3. Review teaching and learning practices to meet expected learning outcomes.

4. Review the KM systems of instittions in order to identiffy best practices to customise to our environment. Develop criteria for our best practices.
Roles and responsabilities of partners
Follow up of decisions taken: what mechanisms. timelines. Validation.

Wrap – Up session Agricultural Education

Needs assessment
Verify what already has been done
Who is dong what to satisfy the needs
What more needs to be done at global and regional levels
What mechanisms should be used
Inventory of learning resources in agriculture
Coordination of capacity development and education in the CGIAR, FAO etc
Exchange of staff and students to support learning on ICT / e-learning
Intermediary products (print and electronic) of CGIAR and other organizations made available to shape and contribute to agricultural education
Need to develop an investment agenda by the universities.


Group on Rural Communities (by Petr Kosina)

Group on Rural Communities (by Petr Kosina)

Communication with rural communities

How old model relates to new technologies.
How can experiences be exchanged with communities

community has to be directly involved in the process
private sector is involved through telephony and ICT providers, farmers themselves,
the privatization of agric knowledge (generated by public institutes) has made tremendous impact on the lives of poor people. eg no tillage

Organizations need to change their values, structure. Part of their evaluation should include what they contribute to the communities’ progress and development.

* Reward system
* Accountability
* Monitor knowledge flow

See more notes on the first session here.

KM group (by Petr Kosina)

KM group (by Petr Kosina)

Knowledge Management group

strategy for CG, particularly in the face of changes coming up

what is KM within CG. where does it stop? at the organizational boundaries of CG?

next step: determining what scope will be addressed, in this group
what principles can be expected
something concrete for future action

Q: Are the problems faced by CG also faced by others? we would be wanting to give generic recommendations.
did you consider

how to deal with parters and collaborations
boundary spanning in a potentially new CG model
with other centers and other actors


transparent decision-making
accessible and available research
applicable and applied research results
people’s ideas count
connect people

Enrica- Promote the triple A framework
Enrica- Offer support to centres to apply Triple A
ILAC- collaborative research assessment
CIP- parnership research
AVIDC- Web2.0 to develop vegtable inormtion for Africa
CIAT- communication strategy
CIP- digital inentory project
Online training for Web2.0 tools
Institutionalise CC
Green Ink- free strategy feedback
2009, Share 10 Success stories and external success/failure stories and Front Office

Priorities in Community Learning
(what do we want to be doing tomorrow)

Ideas of Activities –> position paper for the consortium
Provide feedback to other groups
Use opportunity to talk among capacity building and KM

See also Enrica’s post on this session.

some snapshots of the day, by Petr Kosina, click for more

some snapshots of the day, by Petr Kosina, click for more

I asked a couple of participants to give their impressions of the first day in a few words.

Warwick: intriguing, questioning, epiphanic.

Simon: Lively, relaxing, enjoyable. I had fun! I did not wish once to be on the beach instead.

Monica: Discussions were passionate. Sense of uncertainty: Who will be doing this, who will pick this up? But glad I was here.

Bala: Rich learning experience, inspirational. But a bit lost between the two agendas in one workshop: 1) education and learning and 2) KM. Will we go in one direction for further action, or in two?

snapshots of the day, by Petr Kosina, click for more

snapshots of the day, by Petr Kosina, click for more

Joanna: Cross-fertilization. Interesting mix of people. Valuable.

Harry: Good ideas but lack of integrating (what will you do tomorrow?)

Nadia: stimulating to talk to other people with same goals. Some direction to common goals. Manage to find agreement on goals.

Chat Show (photo credit Petr Kosina)

Chat Show (photo credit Petr Kosina)

Chat show

Host: Peter Ballantyne.


  • Enrica Porcari CGIAR,
  • Krishna Alluri Commonwealth of Learning,
  • Rodger Obubo CTA,
  • Ramani Balasubramanian YPARD,
  • Ralph von Kaufmann FARA.

Enrica Porcari (CGIAR):
Connections take time. Effective use of technology to connect people beyond and within the CGIAR. We need to celebrate success stories. Adopt new ways and give access. Not only number of articles in scientific joournals should be measure for success

Enrica’s personal story of how new tools are effective: I wanted to have a leaflet printed, the budget was not sufficient. I left a Facebook note: “looking for a cheap printer” and half an hour later got a offer for 10% of the original offer! I saved 3000 USD in a few minutes work. So: can you imagine what the potential is for innovations, for research?

Krishna Alluri (COL):
How to make the best use of ICTs. The desire to learn in communities. CG has no demand based approach. Self-directed learning: enabling people and communities to organize their own learning. Changes we are talking about happen at different level. how do we integrate all that. We are a small player: the central approach are partnerships. we have to enable the partners to do what it is they want to do. these are the foundations for the development of a number of programs.

Rodger Obubo (CTA):
We are dealing with 78 ACP countries. we want to affect the actual work place. we look at what farmers do differently after being trained.
CTA is bridging connections. Training based on needs assessment. Communication between trainers and trainees before, during and after the actual course.

Ralph von Kaufmann (FARA):
FARA is also a bridge. Information and knowledge. Info alone is not useful. How to make people knowledge able. Africa is fastest growing market for mobile telephony in the world. Remote access training resources
Ethiopia will be opening 13 new universities, but still, if compared to eg Poland, they have few universities. Universities will have to become learning institutions.

Ramani Balasubramanian (YPARD):
Do not force students on a curriculum, instead take into consideration what they are looking for. “the same 30 yr old overhead projector file will not do the job”
Include young people in agenda setting for the future.

The single one most important thing, according to the chat show guests.

• Collaboration between African University, non-African University and CGIAR, each sticking to its area.
• Explore ICTs to build self-directed learning.
• Unlock CG knowledge ICTs for meaning ful conversation with partners
• Curriculum reform and mentoring.
• Introduce new ICT’s, e.g the “voice web” to radio

Summary: This should give a sense of the agenda of these organizations, what they can do, maybe what they cannot do. Ajit circulated a questionnaire on the wiki. Please respond and ask your network to do the same. At GFAR we are starting to map. What is being done and who is doing what.