Evaluation of agricultural research in Eastern,Central, and Southern Africa

Research and Development (R&D) evaluation within agriculture is becoming increasingly important as a planning tool in the research management process in eastern, central, and southern Africa. Evaluation of agricultural research in the region is performed at various levels for different purposes. This article traces the evolution of R&D activities, and looks at the current status of the agricultural research evaluation and the capacity to undertake such evaluations as a part of research management-both at the national and regional levels. It critically examines the experiences of the region in evaluating agricultural research and the efforts made to promote such activities, summarizing the lessons learned. Finally, the article analyzes the critical constraints impeding the successful adoption of the agricultural research evaluation process and offers suggestions, which could alleviate these constraints. From 1993 to 1997, he was an advisor on impact evaluation and policy analysis to the Southern Africa Center for Cooperation in Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Training (SACCAR), in Botswana. Graduated in agricultural economics from the University of Guelph, Canada, he started his professional career in Africa, at the University of Dar-es-Salaam in 1979. From 1982 to 1991, he worked for CIMMYT, and was then a senior economist at the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics in Canberra. He has worked and published in a range of subjects, including agricultural policy and development, agricultural marketing, production economics, farming systems research, capacity building, and impact assessment. Anandajayasekeram is the current president of the Association for Farming Systems Research and Extension and the Southern African Association for Farming Systems Research and Extension. Dr. David R. Martella has, since 1991, been Regional Agricultural Advisor at the United State Agency for International Development, Regional Economic Development Support Office for East and Southern Africa, Nairobi, Kenya. He previously worked as an agricultural economist and advisor for USAID in Mozambique. Martella has fifteen years of experience in farming and related enterprises as owneroperator in California, in Mexico, and in Swaziland. He also has sixteen years of research and program management experience in Africa. His areas of specialization include economic theory, econometrics and quantitative methods, and experimental design. Martella has a graduate degree in agricultural economics from Purdue University.     

Contending coalitions in agricultural research and development: Challenges for planning and management

There is a gap between the methods and techniques discussed in planning and management literature, and practitioners’ experiences of agricultural research and extension. This gap is attributable to the fact that outcomes of research and extension (R&E) initiatives are shaped by the interactions of contending coalitions that form around issues or approaches and promote or oppose them. This framework is used to elucidate the development of technologies and methodologies in the past. Implications are drawn for future planning and management, based on seeing the use of methods and techniques in terms of the broader social and political contexts of research and development. This article was prepared for the international evaluation conference:Evaluation for a New Century: A Global Perspective. 1–5 November, 1995, Vancouver, Canada. Sponsored by the Canadian Evaluation Association and the American Evaluation Association.     

Building information systems as universalized locals

We report on our experiences in a participatory design project to develop ICTs in a hospital ward working with deliberate self-harm patients. This project involves the creation and constant re-creation of socio-technical ensembles that satisfy the various, changing and often contradictory and conflicting needs in this context. Such systems are shaped in locally meaningful ways but nevertheless reach beyond their immediate context to gain wider importance and to be integrated with the larger environment. currently working on a participatory design project developing IT systems for psychiatrists working in a toxicology ward of a large general hospital. His research focuses on the local co-production of technologies which he currently explores in a production management context. His research interests lie in the field of human factors and interactive systems design, particularly approaches to IT systems design and development, the relationships between work and technology, and inter-disciplinary approaches to the design of dependable computing systems. carrying out a number of ethnomethodologically informed studies in a variety of applications. He holds a Ph.D. in ethnomethodology from the University of Manchester and is currently involved in research on computer-aided prompting systems for radiological work. He has interests in ethnomethodology, CSCW, SSK and the philosophy of social sciences. where he convenes an interdisciplinary research programme on ‘the social shaping of technology’.     

Unique features of an R&;D work environment and research scientists and engineers

Not only is good management of research the critical difference between a thriving research organization and an average one, but research is the most difficult to manage of all functional activities. (Lamontagne Report, 1972, Vol. 2, referenced in Vol. 6, Ch. 10, p. 8 of the 1994 Report of the Auditor General of Canada). Thomas E. Clarke graduated from the University of British Columbia with a Master’s in Physics in 1967. During his employment at Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd., he became interested in the effective management of scientists and engineers and returned to U.B.C. to obtain an MBA in organizational behavior. Subsequently, he held numerous positions in the Canadian government relating to R&D. During this time he designed Canada’s Industrial Innovation Center Program to support the training of future technical entrepreneurs and to provide advice to small high-tech businesses. In 1980, he started his own consulting firm, Stargate Consultants Limited, 〈www.stargateconsultants.ca〉, which specializes in science policy/program studies and R&D management training.     

Private-Sector Research Ethics: Marketing or Good Conflicts Management? The 2005 John J. Conley Lecture on Medical Ethics

Pharmaceutical companies are major sponsors of biomedical research. Most scholars and policymakers focus their attention on government and academic oversight activities, however. In this article, I consider the role of pharmaceutical companies’ internal ethics statements in guiding decisions about corporate research and development (R&D). I review materials from drug company websites and contributions from the business and medical ethics literature that address ethical responsibilities of businesses in general and pharmaceutical companies in particular. I discuss positive and negative uses of pharmaceutical companies’ ethics materials and describe shortcomings in the companies’ existing ethics programs. To guide employees and reassure outsiders, companies must add rigor, independence, and transparency to their R&D ethics programs.     

Evaluation purposes,processes, products,and probity: Some lessons from experience

This paper shares some of the author’s conclusions following more than three decades of experience with evaluation in a range of areas, including agricultural research, health and social development projects, and programs managed by both national and international agencies. It expounds on the purposes, processes and products of evaluation as well as the probity of the evaluators. Evaluations are often expected to achieve multiple objectives in a short time period and with limited resources. The conclusions and recommendations of evaluations often influence a program’s future course, as well as the reputation of program managers and staff. When there is no effective monitoring or internal evaluation system in place, an external evaluation team must rely heavily on the probity and creativity of its members, particularly, the team leader. This paper offers tips on practical aspects of monitoring and evaluation, and provides insights into research and development processes in developing countries. She has served on the boards, review teams, and advisory committees of several centers affiliated with the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research. She has done research and has written extensively on social issues involving small-farmer development. She is a senior program adviser for the UPWARD network (User’s Perspective with Agricultural Research and Development).     

Evaluation of agricultural research in Latin America and the Caribbean

This article assesses the state of evaluation, and identifies priorities for improving evaluation, in agricultural research organizations in the region of Latin America and the Caribbean in the early 1990s. Based on thirteen case studies conducted in 1992, the article describes the institutional settings and regional patterns, and trends in evaluation practice. Illustrative cases from Argentina, Brazil, and Guatemala are presented. The organizations studied have extensive experience with evaluation; however, this experience has not been well documented or shared. Evaluation is generally the weakest phase in the management cycle. In the past, most evaluations have been extrinsically motivated, and as such, they have been of little use to local researchers and managers. Obstacles to improving evaluation include the centralization of administrative systems, weak program management, a lack of understanding of potential uses of evaluation in management, and limited knowledge of appropriate evaluation methods. Agricultural research managers feel that evaluation training should be provided as one component of a broader effort covering planning, monitoring, and evaluation. Since joining ISNAR in 1990, he has engaged in research, training, and advisory work on research management, with an emphasis on evaluation. Previously, for fifteen years Horton was head of the social science department of the International Potato Center in Peru. Horton received B.s. and M.S. degrees in agricultural economics from the University of Illinois and a Ph.D. in economics from Cornell University. His current interests include action research and learning, organizational assessment, and institutionalization of planning, monitoring, and evaluation. He worked for fourteen years at the Brazilian Corporation for Agricultural Research, conducting research and development activities in the areas of human resources and of strategic management. He is a full professor at the Department of Social and Work Psychology, Institute of Psychology, University of Brasilia, Brazil, where he teaches and advises at the undergraduate and graduate levels and does research and consulting. His current areas of interest are organizational behavior, training, organizational evaluation, and science and technology management.     

Building capacity in planning,monitoring and evaluation: Lessons from the field

This paper reports on the author’s experiences as manager of a capacity-building project in Latin America. The project aimed to strengthen planning, monitoring, and evaluation (PM&E) in agricultural research. Nine lessons are drawn: (1) Project design is much more than a technical process; it is essentially one of negotiation. (2) In capacity-building projects, design activities cannot end when implementation begins. (3) Capacity-building efforts should prepare managers to deal with complexity, uncertainty and change. (4) In capacity-building efforts, it is essential to collaborate rather than patronize. (5) Organizational assessment is a complex social process, intertwined with organizational politics. (6) In designing capacity-building projects, it is essential to involve managers and staff members in assessing needs and opportunities. (7) Action-learning strategies offer great potential for capacity building. (8) In the context of strategic management and organizational learning, PM&E take on new meanings. (9) Training is most effective when it is designed to serve a purpose within an organizational change process. It is concluded that capacity building is more a process of social experimentation than of social engineering. Management systems cannot be imported, but need to be developed within organizations. Development agencies should play catalytic, facilitating roles, rather than take responsibility for organizational change. To support genuine capacity development, donors and funding agencies need to ensure that their planning and accountability procedures foster flexibility, innovation, and learning. Since joining ISNAR in 1990, he has engaged in research, training, and advisory work on research management, with an emphasis on evaluation. Previously, for fifteen years Horton was head of the social science department of the International Potato Center in Peru. Horton received B.S. and M.S. degrees in agricultural economics from the University of Illinois and a Ph.D. in economics from Cornell University. His current interests include action research and learning, organizational assessment, and institutionalization of planning, monitoring, and evaluation.     

Disciplinary roots and branches of evaluation: Some lessons from agricultural research

Since its origins in North America in the 1960s, the field of program evaluation has grown considerably, and its concerns have broadened from accountability to program improvement, decision support, and institutional learning. Program evaluation is now commonly practiced in governmental organizations not only in North America but also in many countries of Western Europe and Oceania. Although program evaluation is a relatively new field with many controversies and lively debates, a unifying body of evaluation theory, methods, and standards is gradually emerging. Evaluation has recently been described as a “transdiscipline,” as are statistics and measurement. This article is based largely on my personal experiences working in agricultural research organizations in developing regions. Here, a number of different types of evaluation are carried out, but program evaluation as defined by Patton (1997) and as practiced by social scientists to assess public programs is largely unknown. Distinct branches of agricultural research evaluation can be identified, with disciplinary roots in the natural sciences and in agricultural economics. The most rigorous agricultural research evaluations are economic studies. Systematic internal evaluation is notably lacking. Current pressures to improve performance, transparency, and accountability are creating demands for more systematic evaluation, and many program evaluation concepts and methods would seem to be of value in agricultural research organizations. However, in the current scenario of declining funding for agricultural research, managers are yet to be convinced to expand their evaluation activities and explore unfamiliar paradigms and methods. Moreover, they are not yet convinced that social-science-based program evaluation would produce useful results. Natural scientists and economists tend to view program evaluation as “soft-science” or no science at all. Douglas Horton works at the International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR) in The Netherlands. Since joining ISNAR in early 1990, he has done research, training, and advisory work on agricultural research management, with an emphasis on evaluation. Previously, for fifteen years, Horton was head of the social science department of the International Potato Center (CIP) in Peru. With colleagues at CIP and in national agricultural research organizations, he documented patterns and trends in world potato production and use, engaged in participatory technology development and assessed the impact of CIP programs. Horton received B.S. and M.S. degrees in agricultural economics from the University of Illinois, and a Ph.D. in economics from Cornell University. While at Cornell, Horton worked with W.F. Whyte, pioneer in the fields of participant observation and participatory action research.     

S&T indicators for strategic planning and assessment of public research institutions

This article presents an approach we have developed for the assessment of public research institutions in the natural sciences and engineering. The method consists in the exploitation of available S&T databases and indicators, including bibliometrics (databases of scientific as well as technical literature), patents, and internal data. Results are therefore derived through multiple databases. The objective is to profile a specific national R&D community in order to assess the positioning of a public institution or program within the community to which it belongs. It involves obtaining the profile of the evolution of an R&D area, the R&D performers, the financing and support institutions, the users of R&D results, and the interactions between all these actors. A case-study of Canadian research in polymers is presented. Part of this research was financed by the National Research Council of Canada, and by a strategic grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. The research benefited from the expertise of Robert Letellier, Robert H. Marchessault, Jacques Martel, and Marielle Piché, and from the technical assistance of Maryse Prud’homme, Marcel Parent, and Benoit Longpré.     

Organizational learning and climate as predictors of self-efficacy

This study broadens organizational contextual considerations by examining organizational learning, participation in organizational learning activities and organizational climate as possible predictors of self-efficacy. As schools have been studied as organizations (Handy, 1986, Understanding schools as organizations, Harmondsworth: Penguin; Ostroff, 1993, Organization Behavior and Human Decision Process, 56, 56–90; Ostroff & Schmitt, 1993, Acadamy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1345–1361), this study provides regression results from n = 679 teachers and indicated that organizational climate and organizational learning were significant predictors of teacher self efficacy, controlling for several individual level variables (i.e., participation in organizational learning, personal self-efficacy, and teaching efficacy). Differences between results from the sample of teachers and n = 734 non-teachers (e.g., principals, assistant principals, administrators, counselors, paraprofessional, custodial, food service, and transportation staff) were examined with regard to predictor variables for teaching efficacy. For teachers, both organizational learning and personal self-efficacy were significant predictors of teaching efficacy, whereas for the group of non-teachers, they were not. In both groups, however, participation in organizational learning was a significant predictor, while organizational climate was not (contrary to Taylor & Tashakkori, 1995, Journal of Experimental Education, 63(3), 217–230). Overall, findings provide evidence for extending the research beyond schools and including organizational learning as a potentially important variable in further studying individual outcomes and organizational effectiveness. Dr. Timothy J. Tobin is Director of Training and Development at Beers & Cutler PLLC. He is responsible for designing, implementing, and evaluating the firm’s organizational climate and learning organization initiatives. He is also an adjunct professor at Trinity University and The George Washington University where he teaches organizational behavior, human resource management, and training courses among others. He is the recipient of Human Capital Magazine’s Future Human Capital Leader Award. His current research interests include the interplay between organizational culture, identity, and learning. Dr. Ralph O. Mueller is professor of educational research and of public policy and public administration at The George Washington University, Washington, DC, and former Chair of its Department of Educational Leadership. His scholarly interests include proper applications of and reliability assessment in structural equation modeling (SEM). He is the author/co-editor of two SEM textbooks, among other writings. Ralph is past chair of the American Educational Research Association’s special interest group on SEM, serves on the editorial boards of several methodological and applied research journals, and conducts regular SEM training sessions for national and international audiences. Dr. Lauren M. Turner is senior lecturer at Northeastern University in the College of Arts and Sciences and the School of Professional and Continuing Studies. Current teaching focuses on leadership studies. Lauren also facilitates in the Vogt Leadership Program with The Boston Consortium for Higher Education. Work-based learning, including action learning and facilitation, is at the core of her efforts to combine classroom and workplace learning. Research interests include self-directed learning and meaningful work, specifically the intersection of these two disciplines as they relate to a construct for meaningful work.     

Linking actors and models for water policy development in Egypt: Analyzing actors and their options

Policy development in the field of water resources management is traditionally supported by various analysis tools and planning models. Recent years have shown increasing attention for the social dimension of policy development, as this involves different actors interacting in an attempt to satisfy their interests. This requires information on the technical and financial aspects of policy options and information on the roles and interests of different actors. The use of the analysis of options technique is explored in this article, with the aim of incorporating such information in the development of a new water policy for Egypt. His main research interest is in the use of actor analysis to support decision making in the field of water resources management, and he has worked on actor analyses for water projects in Yemen, Egypt, and The Netherlands. He received his M.Sc. in Systems Engineering, Policy Analysis and Management from Delft University of Technology in 1999. Nader El-Masry works as a water resources engineer for the National Water Resources Pan Project at the Ministry of Water resources and Irrigation in Egypt. In this position, he is involved in the development of a national water resources plan that should match Egypt’s water demands and supplies until the year 2017. He holds an M.Sc. in Water Resources and Environmental Management, from IHE, Delft, The Netherlands. Tarek Sadek has 12 years of experience in the field of hydrogeology, hydraulics, geomorphology, water resources management and environmental science. Currently, he is director of the National Water Resources Plan Project at the Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation in Egypt. He holds a B.Sc. in Civil Engineering from the Faculty of Engineering of Cairo University (1988), an M.Sc. in Hydrology from the Department of Engineering Hydrology, University College Galway (UCG, 1992), Republic of Ireland, and a Ph.D. in Environmental Engineering from the Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, The University of Melbourne, Australia (1997).     

Evaluations and grassroots politics: The case of Switzerland

The Swiss political system is unique in Europe, both as regards the widely developed rights of its citizens to take a direct hand in the political process and as regards the strong tradition of federalism and the broad-based powers of the Cantons, despite their smallness. Seen in this way, Switzerland, therefore, offers interesting illustrative material for investigating the “strain” placed by “grassroots politics” on the institutional design of evaluations. Werner Bussmann, Ph.D, is director of the “Effectiveness of Public Policies” (NFP 27) research program funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation, in Bern, Switzerland. He also holds a post at the Federal Office of Justice. His research interests include intergovernmental relations, evaluation and organizational learning.     

Psychiatry and Psychology in the Writings of L. Ron Hubbard

Objectives: Celebrity followers of the Church of Scientology have recently used their public forum to attack the modern practice of mental health. The practice of Scientology is rooted in the religious writings of its founder, L. Ron Hubbard. This paper will review the religious writings of L Ron Hubbard to understand Scientology’s position on mental health. Method: This paper reviews four of the major religious books written by L Ron Hubbard, in addition to a comprehensive overview of Scientology compiled by Scientology staff. Results: Hubbard’s theory of mind borrowed heavily from the earlier writings of Freud, until Hubbard’s psychological theory extended to include a spiritual existence that goes beyond the material world. The goal of Hubbard’s psychology and religion were to optimize the freedom of the individual, and he viewed psychiatry and psychology as inherently anti-spiritual and opposed to personal freedom and self-realization. Ultimately Hubbard presents a world view of potential nuclear world cataclysm, fueled by the geopolitical climate and mental health theories that dominated the mid 20th century. Conclusions: Hubbard’s writings mirrored the times in which he lived. His views that mental health practices are inherently anti-religious, freedom-inhibiting, and brain damaging do not reflect the modern-day practices of mental health. Dr. McCall is presently Professor and Chairman of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine at the Wake Forest University School of Medicine. He completed his medical degree and post-graduate psychiatric training at Duke University. He completed a Masters degree in Epidemiology from Wake Forest University. He is board certified in general psychiatry, geriatric psychiatry, and sleep disorders medicine. His research interests include depression, electroconvulsive therapy, quality of life, and insomnia. His research has been continuously funded by the National Institute of Mental Health since 1995, and he is author of more than 100 peer-reviewed journal articles. He is Editor of the Journal of ECT, Immediate-Past President of the Association for Convulsive Therapy, and a prior Director of the Board of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine.     

Freedom,boldness, and economic creativity

The improvement of mankind’s material well-being in a scarcity world is an unending struggle. It is no small, easy task but rather an arduous, difficult, continuous endeavor. Over time, the betterment of man’s condition requires, at a minimum, that economic growth outstrip population expansion. Although economic growth is so important, it is by no means automatic. Rapid economic growth is the outcome of a fine-tuned interaction between mankind and his environment. Maintaining sustained high levels of economic growth depends critically on the product of man’s genius and imagination — technological progress or economic creativity. It is therefore of the utmost importance to identify the determinants of technological improvement, the conditions under which it flourishes, and the characteristics of human beings that foster its development. This paper looks across countries to assess the effect of two potential factors, freedom and boldness, on economic creativity. He has a Ph.D. in economics from the University of Pittsburgh and has published articles on a wide variety of economics topics. His current research interests include the areas of economic growth, economic development, international trade, and global income distribution.     

Policy theories,knowledge utilization,and evaluation

Frans L. Leeuw (Ph.D. in Sociology) currently is Director of The Netherlands’ Court of Audit Department of Policy Evaluation. He also holds the chair of Professor of Policy Effectiveness Research at Utrecht University. Recent publications on policy theories, similarities and dissimilarities of auditing and evaluation research and on the utilization of policy research by government officials.     

Canadian bulk water exports: Analyzing the sun belt conflict using the graph model for conflict resolution

A conflict over the proposed bulk export of water from Canada is systematically studied using the graph model for conflict resolution in order to illustrate how strategic conflicts of this type can be better understood and managed. The ongoing conflict involving a US company, Sun Belt Water Inc., and the Canadian federal and provincial governments is modeled and analyzed using the graph model methodology. This dispute reflects the kinds of controversies that can arise when international trade laws, which stress competition and profits, are in conflict with environmental and social laws. The Sun Belt conflict is especially interesting because of its evolution over several stages; at each stage of the conflict, the objectives of the disputants, and their strategic implications, can be realistically modeled and thereby investigated using the graph model. Amer Obeidi received his B.Sc. in Electrical Engineering from the University of Jordan in 1990 and M.A.Sc. in Management Sciences in 2002 from the University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. He is currently pursuing a PhD degree in the Department of Systems Design Engineering, at the University of Waterloo. His currents research interests include confrontation analysis, conflict analysis, negotiation, cognitive and emotional processes effect on decision making, and choice theory. Dr. Hipel’s major research interests are the development and application of conflict resolution and time series analysis techniques from a systems design engineering perspective. The main application areas of these decision technologies are water resources management, hydrology, environmental engineering and sustainable development. Dr. Hipel is the author/co-author of four books, nine edited books, many journal papers and is an associate editor of six international journals. Moreover, he is a professional Engineer and has carried out consulting activities with engineering firms, government agencies, and utilities in many countries. Director of the Laurier Centre for Military Strategic and Disarmament Studies, and Adjunct Professor of Systems Design Engineering at the University of Waterloo. Dr. Kilgour’s research interests lie at the intersection of mathematics, social science, and engineering. He has applied game theory and related formal techniques to analyze decision problems in international security and arms control, environmental management, negotiation and arbitration, voting, fair division, and coalition formation, and has pioneered the development of systems for decision support in strategic conflict. His most recent books are Perfect Deterrence (Cambridge) and Designing Institutions for Environmental and Resource Management (Edward Elgar).     

Government Subsidized Academic Research: Economic and Ethical Conflicts

Justification for public funding of academic research is based on the linear model of technological advance first proposed by Francis Bacon. The model hypothesizes that government subsidized science generates new technology which creates new wealth. Mainstream economics supports Bacons model by arguing that academic research is a public good. The Bayh–Dole Act allows universities to privatize federally funded research and development (R&D) which is in direct conflict with the public good argument. Diminishing returns to university R&D, challenges to Bacons linear model and the labor exploitation of young scientists by research universities suggest that policy makers may want to reconsider the system for allocating federal R&D to universities and colleges.     

Questioning ‘Participation’: A Critical Appraisal of its Conceptualization in a Flemish Participatory Technology Assessment

This article draws attention to struggles inherent in discourse about the meaning of participation in a Flemish participatory technology assessment (pTA) on nanotechnologies. It explores how, at the project’s outset, key actors (e.g., nanotechnologists and pTA researchers) frame elements of the process like ‘the public’ and draw on interpretive repertoires to fit their perspective. The examples call into question normative commitments to cooperation, consensus building, and common action that conventionally guide pTA approaches. It is argued that pTA itself must reflect an awareness of competing interests and perspectives inherent in the discourse associated with the meaning of ‘participation’ if it is to incite action beyond vested interests and ensure genuine mutual learning.     

Teaching ethics in engineering and computer science: A panel discussion

At a conference, two engineering professors and a philosophy professor discussed the teaching of ethics in engineering and computer science. The panelists considered the integration of material on ethics into technical courses, the role of ethical theory in teaching applied ethics, the relationship between cases and codes of ethics, the enlisting of support of engineering faculty, the background needed to teach ethics, and the assessment of student outcomes. Several audience members contributed comments, particularly on teaching ethical theory and on student assessment. This panel discussion took place at a mini-conference, Practicing and Teaching Ethics in Engineering and Computing, held during the Sixth Annual Meeting of the Association for Practical and Professional Ethics, Washington, D.C., March 8–9, 1997. Biographical information on panelists: Charles Glagola is an assistant professor of civil engineering at the University of Florida. He is a registered professional engineer in the states of Florida and Alabama. Before coming to academia, he had extensive industry experience culminating with his owning and operating a construction and engineering firm in Pensacola, Florida. He currently teaches engineering ethics as part of a professional issues course in the Department of Civil Engineering, and a one-hour engineering ethics course that is offered to all engineering students through the College of Engineering. Moshe Kam is professor of electrical and computer engineering at Drexel University. He heads Drexel’s Data Fusion Laboratory which specializes in multisensor systems and robot navigation. His professional interests include detection and estimation, distributed decision making, forensic applications of image processing, and engineering ethics. Michael Loui is professor of electrical and computer engineering and associate dean of the Graduate College at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. From 1990 to 1991, he served at the National Science Foundation in Washington, D.C. His scholarly interests include computational complexity theory, theory of parallel and distributed computation, fault-tolerant software, and professional ethics. Caroline Whitbeck is a philosopher of science, technology and medicine and is the Elmer G. Beamer-Hubert H. Shneider Professor in Ethics at Case-Western Reserve University. She also directs the WWW Ethics Center for Engineering & Science— http://ethics.cwru.edu— under a grant from the National Science Foundation. The focus of her current work is practical ethics, especially ethics in scholarly and scientific research. Her book, Ethics in Engineering Practice and Research, will appear from Cambridge University Press in winter 1997–98.