2017 was the first year of reporting against this indicator set, and the definitions and guidance are still being improved following the pilot. There is only partial reporting against some indicators. Some numbers may change slightly following finalization of data checks.
|TOTALS FOR 2017||HIGHLIGHTS AND LINKS TO MORE DETAILS|
|Number of policies,|
legal instruments, investments and similar modified in their design or implementation in 2017, informed by CGIAR research
4 legal instruments
|Among those reported for 2017 were contributions to the|
design or redesign of:
– 13 global policies/legal instruments
– 42 national policies/legal instruments in more than 30
– 28 national or international-level investments
See examples here. Details can be explored further in Policies/Investments informed by CGIAR Research.
|Altmetric (mentions on media and social media of CGIAR publications, both peer-reviewed papers and others)||Seven of 14 CRPs are currently tracking their publications via Altmetric.|
For 2017, CRPs provided statistics on 1,208 publications, including peer-reviewed publications, briefs, manuals, reports, and others. A total of 799 (66%) of these publications received:
– 45 total policy document citations from institutions such as FAO, the World Health Organization, the World Economic Forum and the World Bank
– 540 total news mentions in sources such as Newsweek, National Geographic, The Japan Times, The Times of India, Al Jazeera, Business Insider, El País, The Guardian, The Zimbabwe Star, AllAfrica, and BBC News.
– 12,906 Tweets
– 16,473 saves on Mendeley
|Notes: All these numbers reflect scores taken from early July 2018. Scores are expected to rise as 2017 publications continue to be shared.|
Keep in mind that tracking via this method is very new. These scores provide a rough overview of how CGIAR publications are shared, but do not cover all CGIAR publications nor do they reflect sharing activity on all forms of social and news media. Information about what constitutes a ‘good’ score can be found here. Both CGIAR and Altmetric are working to improve tracking capacity for 2018.
Highlighted examples of Altmetric scores can be found here. Full Altmetric scores for 2017 can be explored further in Altmetric reported for CGIAR Publications in 2017.
|People trained by CGIAR in 2017||348,927 (40% women)||Long term (degree or other long courses): 1,700 (30% women)|
Short term: 149,408 (19% women)
Not specified: 197, 819 (55% women)
Numbers were not consistently reported due to late introduction of this indicator – this will improve for 2018.
|CGIAR partnerships||1,961 reported||994 (51% of total) in research phase, up to proof of concept|
205 (11%) in piloting phase
647 (33%) in scaling/delivery phase
16 (1%) reported partnering across more than one phase 88 (5%) not defined. Types of partners were not fully recorded in 2017. From a subset of partnerships that CRPs recorded as among their most important (n=268):
– 50% were Academic and Research institutions, both national and international
– 22% were development organizations (NGOs, networks, regional organizations and International Financial Institutions (IFIs) such as development banks)
– 12% were private sector
– 9% were national government institutions (for example, the Ministry of Health)
– 5% were community-based organizations and farmers’ groups
– 2% were funding agencies, including foundations and donors (excluding IFIs)
A list of the top partners reported by CRPs in 2017 is in Selected external partnerships in 2017.
|Number of CGIAR innovations||616 innovations were reported, of which:|
– 134 were at Stage 1: end of research phase
– 66 were at Stage 2: end of piloting phase
– 348 were available for uptake: see list of innovations/findings available for use
– 68 were available for uptake by next users
|Of innovations newly available for uptake (stage 3) in 2017 (n=348):|
– 68 (20%) represented Research and Communication Methodologies and Tools (the CGIAR is well-known for its methods and tools, used by many other researchers and practitioners)
– 228 (66%) were genetic innovations (varieties/ breeds)
– 32 (9%) were production systems and management practices
– 11 (3%) were significant social science findings and evidence
– 9 (3%) related to biophysical research (e.g. computational biology, decision support tools, geospatial analysis).Of these, 67% were reported as novel and 33% were reported as adaptive (adaptations of previous innovations for new areas, situations etc.) (n=348).
The full list is available in CGIAR Innovations in 2017.
|Number of peer-reviewed publications authored/ coauthored by CGIAR researchers||1,764 reported||61% are open access|
86% have been published in ISI publications
CGIAR open data and publications can be explored further in CRP Publications in 2017.
1 Note: these are strictly ’reporting metrics’, not ‘indicators’. They should not be used mechanistically for performance assessment, direct comparison of programs or examination of trends over time. One of the reasons for this is that most of the indicators are potentially gameable and this creates perverse incentives for researchers (e.g. a focus on ’number of publications’ as a performance metric, has been recorded from many research organizations worldwide to result in splitting up publications to get higher numbers in less prestigious journals). Their main value is not as numbers, but as pointers to the underlying databases.