Research partnerships - potential unfulfilled

Two parallel lines, it's said, are destined never to meet. Public sector and private sector research organizations, which have much to offer each other in terms of complementarity, and even synergy, seem to represent the two parallels. Research and development (R&D) is urgently needed in most agriculture-dependent countries, but funding is invariably lacking. An obvious remedy would be for public and private research to pool expertise, share resources and work towards a common goal that would be of national and institutional benefit. Why then are such joint endeavours relatively rare? A Briefing Paper* from ISNAR (recently absorbed into IFPRI) reports a case study in Costa Rica, which analysed how private agribusinesses perceive public research organisations and universities, and why there is an on-going failure for the two groups to collaborate in research partnerships.

In industry and commerce partnerships are common, particularly where two firms have complementary assets or skills; for instance vertical integration can offer a match where one company has access to raw materials, another has strengths in processing and a third controls distribution channels. Similar companies, which are potential competitors, also sometimes decide to collaborate instead and, by pooling resources and expertise, they become a much more serious contender in the market. It is noteworthy that such collaborative ventures occur more frequently when the economy is growing rapidly, new products and services are in demand and innovation is rewarded. It seems, however, that not only are private companies in less industrialised countries less inclined to form partnerships such as these, the majority are highly sceptical of the benefits of working in partnership with public sector research institutions. The reasons are not difficult to identify.

Why the reluctance to collaborate?
The complications that can arise from dealing with the government bureaucracy in most public sector research organisations are a major inhibiting factor for the private sector. They are also concerned about lack of confidentiality of results, which may pass to competitors. And there is no denying that private and public sector have different 'cultures' or ethos. Finally, private companies may well wonder whether their potential partners understand and work 'in the real world', a world where decisions are taken without delay, lines of management are clearly defined, and where budgets are adhered to.

The public sector organisations, for their part, may have justifiable concerns that private companies are concerned primarily, if not only, by profit, whereas their mandate is to deliver research results that bring social as well as economic benefits to the agricultural sector at large.

Yet it has been argued that, despite having different objectives, public and private sectors share common interests, and innovations produced in collaboration can have benefits for both. The so-called 'common interest space' is the environment in which public-private research partnerships can evolve. The minimum requirements for partnerships being: a common interest space; active partners; interdependent and complementary contributions of the partners; an open horizontal relationship of a cooperative nature; autonomy of each partner and mutual trust.

Regrettably, in most developing countries, many private companies appear to lack both the intellectual and financial capacity to develop and adopt innovations. Because of many perceived political and economic risks, there is under-investment in R&D, unless returns can be guaranteed in the short term. And yet, the authors of this Briefing Paper write, "(Private) companies may rely entirely on the public sector's attempts to import or generate innovations. By forming partnerships with the public sector, private firms can gain access to knowledge and innovations that can allow them to maximize their profits. Furthermore, such partnerships allow firms to direct the R&D process in such a way that the innovations produced more closely fit their needs."

Why Costa Rica?
Costa Rica was chosen for this case study - funded by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Co-operation (BMZ) - because the country has undergone accelerated agricultural development in recent decades, maintaining and even expanding in many international markets despite increased competition. Costa Rica is the world's second producer of bananas, an important producer of coffee and palm oil, and produces high value fruit and vegetables. Since both public and private sectors have engaged in substantial R&D, it was considered valuable to determine how much of the economic development might be attributed to collaborative research in the development of innovations.

In summary it seems that the public and private sector need to reappraise their attitudes and recognise the mutual benefits that can result from their collaboration. To take the public sector first, the results of the surveys quoted in the ISNAR Briefing Paper suggest that the public sector must make a greater effort to respond to the demands of the private sector, and, in order to become a more attractive prospective partner, the public sector must offer a competent research service which is both reliable and confidential. On their part, private companies should bear in mind the importance of R&D to the success of their businesses. It seems, the Briefing Paper's authors conclude that, "In Latin America, many companies tend to search for ad hoc solutions to problems rather than to invest in long-term strategies that might enable them and their associated farming communities to gain a strategic position in particular markets."

*ISNAR Briefing Paper 67 "Private-Sector Perceptions of Public Agricultural Research: A Case Study in Costa Rica" by Frank Hartwich, Daniel Blank, and Matthias van Oppen. Available at www.isnar.cgiar.org/index1.htm