This document discusses two initiatives in Ghana and Zambia aimed at developing integrated agricultural research information systems: the Ghana Agricultural Information Network System (GAINS) and the Zambia Agricultural Research for Development Information Network (ZAR4DIN). It describes how these initiatives adopted policies, content management practices, and information sharing approaches recommended by the Coherence in Information for Agricultural Research for Development (CIARD) initiative to make agricultural research outputs more accessible. Specifically, it discusses the standards, tools, and arrangements used to manage and share information between research institutions and national portals in each country.

1. Agricultural Information Networks in Zambia (ZAR4DIN) and Ghana
(GAINS)
Valeria Pesce
Information Management Specialist
Global Forum on Agricultural Research
GFAR Secretariat
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Rome, Italy
Email: valeria.pesce@fao.org
Dr. Justin Chisenga
Knowledge and Information Management Officer
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Regional Office for Africa
Accra, Ghana
Email: justin.chisenga@fao.org
Joel Sam
Director
Institute for Scientific and Technological Information
Council for Scientific and Industrial Research
Accra, Ghana
Email: egy28@yahoo.co.uk
Davy Simumba
Principal Biometrician
Zambia Agriculture Research Institute
Mount Makulu Central Research Station
Chilanga, Zambia
Email: simumba08085@alumni.itc.nl
Abstract
In many developing countries, much of the output of Agricultural Research for
Development (AR4D) is in the form of grey literature and rarely gets distributed outside
the research organizations. Many agricultural organizations face constraints relating to
1

2. institutional capacities, human capacities and inadequate infrastructure. This paper
illustrates how working towards adopting appropriate institutional policies, content
management methodologies, and information sharing approaches that follow the
“Pathways to Research Uptake” proposed by the Coherence in Information for
Agricultural Research for Development (CIARD) initiative, could contribute to the
development and strengthening of integrated agricultural research information systems
in the countries. The focus of the paper is on two cases: the Ghana Agricultural
Information Network System (GAINS) and the Zambia Agricultural Research for
Development Information Network (ZAR4DIN). More in detail, the paper looks at the
information management standards adopted, the tools used to manage and share
information resources and the arrangements for information flow between institutional
data providers and the national portal in Ghana and Zambia.
Keywords: information systems, information networks, institutional repositories,
information management tools, research outputs, Ghana, Zambia
1. Background
Agricultural Research for Development (AR4D) and the knowledge generated from such
research are essential catalysts for accelerating agricultural production development in
a country. Efficient provision of access to relevant and timely AR4D information to
research scientists contributes to quality research through which a country is able to
select appropriate technologies, which if applied can help productivity, and thus
contribute to the overall growth of the country’s economy.
In many developing countries, much of the AR4D output is in the form of grey literature
and rarely gets distributed outside the research organizations. Although, today many
opportunities are provided by the new information and communication technologies
(ICTs), to make the outputs of AR4D visible outside the owner institution, many
agricultural organizations in developing countries face constraints such as:
lack of resources and information and communication management policies and
strategies (institutional capacities); and
lack of awareness of the opportunities presented by modern ICTs and of standards and
methods to make information more accessible (human capacities).
These issues of lack of institutional capacities, human capacities and little awareness of
standards and technologies to make information accessible are the rationale behind the
principles set forward by the CIARD initiative1, which aims at making agricultural
research information publicly available and accessible to all.
In particular, experts working under CIARD have developed a set of “Pathways to
Research Uptake”2. The Pathways illustrate and recommend institutional policies,
content management methodologies and information sharing approaches that help
make research outputs visible and more accessible. This paper illustrates how the
Ghana Agricultural Information Network System (GAINS) and the Zambia Agricultural
2

3. Research for Development Information Network (ZAR4DIN) projects adopted some of
the recommended “paths” and contributed to the development of an integrated
agricultural information system in the respective countries.
1.1Ghana Agricultural Information Network System
In Ghana, the need to disseminate agricultural information to all the major stakeholders
in the sector led to the establishment of the Ghana Agricultural Information Network
System (GAINS) in 1991. GAINS comprises a network of libraries that include all the
agricultural based research institutes of the Council for Scientific and Industrial
Research (CSIR), the faculties of agriculture of the publicly funded universities, the
Ministry of Food and Agriculture (MOFA), and the Biotechnology and Nuclear
Agricultural Research Institute, with a Coordinating centre at the CSIR-Institute for
Scientific and Technological Information (INSTI). A first portal was built in 2003, but in
2008 it was agreed to improve on the provision of online access to agricultural sciences
and technology (AS&T) information generated in Ghana through the re-design of the
GAINS portal, which was completed in 2010 under the Ghana AGRIS Pilot Project
(GAPP). The GAINS member institutions on the GAPP were the CSIR-INSTI, the Cocoa
Research Institute of Ghana (CRIG), the CSIR Forestry Research Institute of Ghana
(FORIG), the CSIR Food Research Institute (FRI), the CSIR Animal Research Institute
(ARI), the Ministry of Food and Agriculture Information Resource Centre (MOFAIR), and
the College of Agriculture Education (Ashanti-Mampong) of the University of Education,
Winneba.
1.2 Zambia Agricultural Research for Development Information Network
The Zambia Agricultural Research for Development Information Network (ZAR4DIN)
project was launched in January 2010. The main goal of the ZAR4DIN project was to
develop a national network of institutions and individuals involved in AR4D information
generation, management, dissemination and exchange in order to facilitate access to
AR4D information, including metadata and full-text documents, through interlinked
institutional repositories accessible through a national AR4D portal. The pilot institutions
on the project have been the Zambian Agricultural Research Institute (ZARI), the
National Institute for Scientific and Industrial Research (NISIR) and the National
Agricultural Information Services (NAIS) of the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives.
What the GAPP and ZAR4DIN have in common is that they both aimed at: a) creating
(or strengthening) a network of research institutions and information managers in their
respective countries; b) enabling research institutions to manage their research outputs
appropriately; c) making research outputs owned by individual institutions accessible
through a national portal and through international bibliographic databases.
3

4. 2. Institutional networks and information architecture
2.1 Institutional policies: towards open access
The GAINS implemented a series of strategies aimed at gaining support for its activities
towards opening access to agricultural research information and digitization initiatives.
These included:
 Introducing the CIARD Manifesto and Values to the Committee of Directors of the
CSIR research institutes in February 2009. The bulk of GAINS member
institutions are CSIR agricultural-based research institutes.
 Institutional seminars on opening access to public domain agricultural
scientific and technical information in three pilot institutions at which
participantsincluded research scientists and management. The objectives of the
seminars were to discuss issues relating to open access initiatives in Ghana, to
review global initiatives such as CIARD Initiative, and to discuss ways to improve
visibility, accessibility, quality, and impact of agricultural sciences and technology
information in Ghana.
 A workshop on Open Access for representatives of the pilot institutions to
create awareness on the concept of public domain literature and open
access publishing.
 A seminar on Copyright Management and Institutional Repositories to
sensitize information technology specialists, librarians, information
managers, research managers and research scientists on copyright
issues that may affect provision of access to information resources in an
institutional repository and introduce them to SHERPA-RoMEO facilities
and Creative Commons Licensing system;
 However, while the CSIR Committee of Directors appreciated the CIARD
initiative, formal support for CIARD manifesto and values are yet to be declared
at the institutional level. Plans are underway to visit the institutes to discuss what
is expected of them when they participate in the CIARD initiative.
On a positive note, MOFAIR, all the institutions participating in the GAPP project
developed institutional policies and strategies for information and communication
management (ICM). These were developed through a series of write-shops hosted by
the institutions. The write-shop approach ensured that a lot more people were involved
in the process and staff in the institutions drafted and finalized the policy and strategy
documents. Overall, the policies support the management and dissemination of
information in digital formats.
GAINS, as a network, also developed its information and communication
management/technology (ICM/T) policies and strategies, which are more favourable to
opening access to agricultural sciences and technical information generated in Ghana.
These include strategies to:
4

5.  develop mechanisms for collection of agriculture information in electronic format;
 develop institutional repositories of metadata and full-text documents of
agricultural information resources;
 support national, regional, and international initiatives aimed at opening up
access to agricultural information resources
The launching of the GAINS ICM/T policy and strategy document by the CSIR Director-
General during the national conference on “Knowledge Sharing in the Agriculture and
Rural Development Sector in Ghana”, in February 2009, showed the commitment of the
CSIR senior management to the initiatives on managing and disseminating of
information in digital formats, and its preparedness to support the initiatives. The CSIR
senior management further confirmed its commitment when it adopted a proposal
presented by the Director of CSIR-INSTI on its digitization initiatives during a meeting of
CSIR Directors in 2010 for implementation in the rest of the CSIR institutes.
In Zambia, the results of a survey on the views of research scientists regarding open
access showed that that 82.5% of the respondents supported the “basic principle of
open-access” and the notion of providing open-access to publications of scientific
research outputs in scholarly journals by agricultural research scientists in the country3.
ZAR4DIN worked on consolidating this support in the pilot institutions, especially at
NISIR and ZARI. In this regard:
 ZAR4DIN stakeholders at the project’s inception meeting, in January 2010,
proposed guidelines for promoting open access and agreed that ZAR4DIN
member institutions should endeavour to collect and preserve outputs of AR4D in
digital format.
 A seminar on “Opening Access to Science and Technology Research” was
organized at ZARI for research scientists and research officers.
 Senior managers in ZAR4DIN member institutions participated in a seminar on
information management and knowledge sharing policies and strategies.
 NISIR and ZARI held seminars to review their ICM/T policies and related
strategies to establish how they relate to national policies and strategies and how
they facilitate and promote access to and dissemination of agricultural research
information and knowledge generated by the institutions.
ZARI senior management also expressed interest in developing appropriate ICM/T
policies and strategies to facilitate management of digital information resources in the
institution. The ZAR4DIN also adopted policies to maximize the visibility, citation, usage
and impact of research outputs by maximizing online access to it for all users and
researchers worldwide and to ensure that all peer-reviewed research outputs including
journal articles, except those protected under copyright arrangements, are to be self-
archived in the institutional e-repositories. ZAR4DIN member institutions signed a
memorandum of understanding (MoU) which, among others, allow harvesting of
metadata from ZAR4DIN by service providers using Open Access Initiative-Metadata
Harvesting Protocol (OAI-MHP) to enhance wider exposure and dissemination of AR4D
content from Zambia.
5

6. 2.2 Digitization and Institutional Repositories
To increase the availability, accessibility and applicability of research outputs, the
CIARD initiative, among others, recommends to institutions to ensure that their research
outputs are available digitally, and to develop institutional or thematic repositories of the
outputs as open archives. In this regard, all the participating institutions in GAINS’
GAPP project and ZAR4DIN developed institutional repositories, which now are largely
accessed internally due to several challenges that are discussed in Section 3 of this
paper. Tables 1 and 2 below provide statistics regarding the contents of the institutional
repositories.
Table 1: GAPP - Metadata and Full-text Documents in Institutional Repositories
January 2012
Institution Metadata Full-Text Documents
CSIR-ARI 328 170
CSIR-FRI 291 291
CSIR-INSTI 1178 1152
CAGRIC 589 587
CSIR-FORIG 503 503
CRIG 158 145
MOFAIR 520 40
Table 3: ZAR4DIN - Metadata and Full-text Documents in Institutional Repositories
January 2012
Institution Metadata Full-Text Documents
ZARI1 850 100
NISIR 420 420
NAIS 120 45
The ZAR4DIN Portal (http://zar4din.org) provides access to about 900 metadata
records and 102 documents harvested mainly from ZARI and NISIR repositories while
the GAINS Portal (http://gains-instigh.org) provides access to about 1158 metadata
records and 1136 full-text documents.
2.2 Information architecture, standards and tools
The technical architecture of the networks was deliberately conceived to be flexible and
the focus was on exchange standards and interoperability rather than on the
homogeneous use of specific tools.
1
Scanning of documents at ZARI moved faster than the creation of metadata
6

7. The information architecture comprises the information management practices adopted
(metadata model, authority data for indexing, exchange standards) and the information
flows (from the institutional repository to a national portal and to international
bibliographic databases). In many of these aspects the approach reflected good
practices recommended in the already mentioned CIARD Pathways.
For example, in the Pathway on developing a repository for digital content, the adoption
of widely used metadata standards is recommended, together with standard
vocabularies for subject indexing and standard protocols for making records harvestable
by other systems. The information management practices adopted in the GAINS and
ZAR4DIN projects follow these recommendations: the national portals expose records
both as XML files using the AGRIS Application Profile and through an OAI-PMH4
interface also using the AGRIS Application Profile; subject indexing is done using
AGROVOC terms and internal authority files support the controlled management of
authors, journals, publishers and conferences.
The reason for adopting standards is the intention of sharing institutional research
outputs with others and making them accessible through other search engines. The use
of the above mentioned standards indeed helped to make the records created in the
institutions participating in the two projects more visible and accessible. The XML
exports from the institutional repositories are harvested into the respective national
portals (http://gains-instigh.org and http://zar4din.org) which act as one-stop shops for
all the research outputs managed by the participating institutions in the country;
besides, both the XML exports and the OAI-PMH interface allow to add the records
coming from the institutions and/or from the national portals to the AGRIS database5, an
international bibliographic database giving access to more than 2,500,000 bibliographic
records from agricultural research centers.
Once again, this reflects the indications of two Pathways, one illustrating how to build
added value services that query across platforms and one recommending that research
outputs be disseminated by being included in international collections and databases
like AGRIS.
The adoption of metadata standards, controlled vocabularies and metadata harvesting
protocols was made possible by the adoption of suitable information management tools.
The importance of the choice of the right tools became clear during the project, not at
the beginning: neither project prescribed the use of a specific tool.
In Zambia, in the first phase, while ZARI and NAIS installed the AgriDrupal6 software
tool as repository management system in their institution and started cataloguing and
managing their resources exploiting the cataloguing and indexing features of the tool
(standard bibliographic metadata set; internal authority lists for authors, journals and
conferences; integration of the AGROVOC7 thesaurus); NISIR catalogued their first
batch of documents using Microsoft Access (which resulted in a few issues regarding
the consistency and syntax of data, considering which NISIR decided to migrate all
records to an AgriDrupal installation). Although the output formats from AgriDrupal (XML
7

8. files compliant with the AGRIS Application Profile 8) and from Access were different, the
use of a similar metadata set allowed to import the three sets of metadata records into
the ZAR4DIN national portal (http://zar4din.org), thus giving access to information
resources from the three institutions through one web-based portal.
In Ghana, the bibliographical records to be integrated in the portal come mostly from
Institutional repositories created with the WebAGRIS9 software, which produces XML
files compliant with the AGRIS Application Profile that the GAINS portal (http://gains-
instigh.org) can import. At the moment, the portal gives access to records coming from
CSIR-INSTI. The portal will also give access to four searchable online metadata
databases (AGRIEX, GHASAB, GHAGRI and THESIS) containing records from
member institutions.
The flexible import functionalities of the GAINS and the ZAR4DIN portals (also built on
the AgriDrupal software) allow for periodical incremental import / harvesting of records
from the current participating Institutions and for the addition of new data providers,
being easily adjustable to different output formats, provided that the basic metadata
requirements are met.
3. Challenges and Conclusions
Both projects, GAPP and ZAR4DIN, faced a number of institutional and technical
challenges, highlighted below, that had an impact on the implementation of the projects
and achieving the envisaged outputs.
3.2 Institutional Challenges
Low Commitment of Pilot Institutional Heads
While under ZAR4DIN the top heads of the pilot institutions formed the Project
Management Committee, under GAPP, apart from the CAGRIC, FRI and INSTI,
participation of Heads of the pilot institutions in either the Institutional
Management Committees or the national level Project Management Committee
was not very encouraging, despite considerable awareness of the project that
had been created among them. This had the effect of slowing down work for
those institutions especially in relation to making key institutional decisions
affecting the project.
Lack of Institutional ICT/M Policy and Workflows
Although the two projects envisaged revision or developing ICM/T policies that
would facilitate managing and dissemination of information in digital formats, the
absence of institutional policies and strategies for information sharing and
exchange within the institutions, and lack of investments in information activities
made it difficult for projects activities to proceed smoothly. The major generators
8

9. of information in the institutions are research scientists and they keep most of
what they produce.
The absence of clear ICM workflows that could establish the point at which
digital documents could be captured for the repositories had an impact on
populating the institutional repositories with full-text documents. It also in away
contributed to the researchers’ refusal to contribute content to the repositories.
The above being the case, key project activities therefore concentrated more on
internal activities of developing ICM workflows, and developing ICM policies and
strategies than on creating and strengthening linkages and collaboration
between the stakeholders.
Inadequately trained human resources
The projects required that the key operators at the institutional level possess the
requisite skills for electronic information management. Unfortunately, in both
cases, electronic repository concept was initially a novelty and in some
institutions the key staff lacked the mindset for such an activity. A lot of time had
to be spent on developing capacities in managing electronic documents and
managing WebAGRIS and AgriDrupal installations. In some institutions, staff
available could not master the technical skills required to manage WebAGRIS
and this had an a negative impact on the work of those tasked to create
metadata.
Absence of Clear IPR/Copyright Guidelines
The absence of clear institutional copyright guidelines made it difficult for most
people working on the institutional repositories to decide on what information
resources generated by the institution could go into the repositories.
3.2 Technical Challenges
The main technical challenges, as was expected, were in the integration of data in the
national portals.
Although most of the records came from software tools (like WebAGRIS and
AgriDrupal) that produce standard outputs that can be easily imported and integrated
into other platforms, the issue in some cases was not the metadata model but the actual
data: the different syntax and encoding of the data in the same metadata element
created unwanted duplicates and mismatches in the national search engines. Also, the
non-consistent use of AGROVOC terms limited the potential added value of a common
search engine across several repositories.
9

10. These difficulties were bigger of course in the case of records coming from a software
tool (Microsoft Access) that does not provide, out of the box, functionalities for authority
control and term suggestion from an external vocabulary.
This does not mean that all institutions in a network should use the same information
management tool: the seamless integration of records coming from WebAGRIS and
from AgriDrupal proved that if tools implement a standard metadata model and can
export in one or more metadata formats, integrating them in other systems that have
some flexible import/harvest functionalities is not difficult.
The availability of experienced and dedicated cataloguers also made a difference in this
respect: most institutions in Ghana had experienced cataloguers dedicated to the job,
which resulted in very rich bibliographic records, while in some other institutions the
time that the cataloguers could devote to the project was limited and many of them also
had to help with the digitization of the printed material, which didn’t allow them to
specialize in their task.
Notes
1
See the CIARD Manifesto at http://www.ciard.net/ciard-manifesto
2
http://www.ciard.net/pathways
3
Chisenga, J. & Simumba, D. 2009. Open access publishing: views of researchers in public
agricultural research institutions in Zambia. Agricultural Information Worldwide, 2(3): 113-119.
4
http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/openarchivesprotocol.html
5
http://agris.fao.org
6
AgriDrupal is both a “suite of solutions” for agricultural information management and
dissemination, built on the Drupal Content Management System, and the community of practice
around these solutions: http://aims.fao.org/tools/agridrupal
7
AGROVOC is the world’s most comprehensive multilingual agricultural vocabulary:
http://aims.fao.org/standards/agrovoc/about
8
http://www.fao.org/docrep/008/ae909e/ae909e00.htm
9
WebAGRIS is a system for distributed data input, management and dissemination of metadata
on information objects: http://aims.fao.org/tools/webagris-2
10