The challenge of HIV/AIDS: Where does agroforestry fit in? - World ...

Chapter 5: Confronting land degradation in Africa49response to risks posed by weather, market,food and feed needs, energy and land usepolicies, etc. This paints a potentially chaoticpicture resulting from dynamic evolutionover time. The evolutionary biologist,Stephen Jay Gould, has made an eloquentplea for scientists to appreciate the importanceof historical analysis as an integraltool in the biological sciences (Gould2000). In particular, he points to the importanceof understanding the degree to whichpresent conditions are contingent on eventsthat occurred in the past. Whilst his argumentsare largely concerned with the processesof biological evolution, they surelyalso apply to the development of ecologicalsystems over time, particularly those influencedby agriculture.The recognition of site specificity at the plotlevel has led to the pessimistic assertionthat there is therefore no opportunity forgeneric scientific or technological solutionsto natural resource management problems.This is a confusion of principle and practice.It is certainly now generally accepted thatmonolithic zonal technology recommendations(e.g. for fertilizer dosage) are ineffective.They have been largely replaced bymenus of multiple options, and the choiceof option is determined by local conditions.However, the origins of the menu optionsare no less based on scientific principlesthan are (for example) those created by producingdifferent crop genotypes. Indeed, itcould be argued that failures in realizing thepotential of genotypes have often resultedfrom failure to recognize the environmentalvariations that are taken for granted in naturalresource management research.This brief analysis of multiscale issues inspace and time serves to emphasize fourcross-cutting issues:1. Recognition of the hierarchical linkagesacross scales and their interactions in termsof problems and potential solutions (Swift1999).2. The value of understanding the historicalbasis of present conditions.3. The importance of merging biological,social and institutional analyses in order tounderstand the dynamics of influence bothacross and within scales.4. The value of identifying ‘entry’ points forresearch and intervention, i.e. simplifyingaccess to the complexity of interactive effectswithin any natural resource managementproblem by tackling them throughaccessible and influential components.These issues can be summarized as a fifthchallenge.Challenge 5: What are the rulesgoverning cross-scale transitions innatural resource management?Conclusion: what type ofscience, to do where, and forwhom?The five specific challenges presented aboveprovide a response, but by no means a completeanswer, to the question posed in theopening paragraph. The greatest challengefor any institution whose role is science fordevelopment is that of choice: choice ofone scientific topic versus another; choiceof criteria for research locations; choice ofwhat type of scientific approach to use; andchoice of which of the myriad stakeholdersto work directly with, in what manner andacross what scales in space and time.The scientist in any development-relatedtopic will always be faced by decisions asto where to place her or his activities in theresearch-to-adoption spectrum. Whether toconcentrate on relatively basic research, removedfrom the ultimate client but generatingknowledge that may open up areas ofprogress hitherto inaccessible; or to focuson actions to disseminate knowledge andtechnology that interact directly with, andprovide identifiable benefits for, a selectedgroup of such clients. This dilemma is farfrom peculiar to international agriculturalresearch. The Nobel Prize laureate, immunologistand incisive writer on the philosophyof science, Sir Peter Medawar, picturedtwo ‘Conceptions of Science’ that exist inthe popular imagination (Medawar 1982).He described the ‘Romantic Conception’with the words of the English poet and essayist,Samuel Taylor Coleridge: “The firstman of science was he who looked into athing, not to learn whether it could furnishhim with food, or shelter, or weapons, ortools, or play-withs, but who sought toknow it for the gratification of knowing.”Medawar contrasted this concept withwhat we may term a ‘Pragmatic Conception’:“Science above all else [is] a criticaland analytical activity; …scientific researchis intended to enlarge human understanding,and its usefulness is the only objectivemeasure of the degree to which it does so.”Medawar acknowledged that these two descriptionswere caricatures and concludedthat: “Anyone who has actually done orreflected deeply upon scientific researchknows that there is in fact a great deal oftruth in both [conceptions].” Internationalagricultural research must indeed serveboth these pursuits. By choosing to workfor the poorest of the poor we have alreadychosen to follow the Pragmatic Conception.But our contribution is likely to begreater by applying what we are most suitedto do – to exercise our curiosity and imaginationto empower people with the bestthat the scientific adventure can provide.The discussion in the preceding sectionsargues in almost every part for a holisticapproach to agricultural research for