National Agricultural Innovation Project (NAIP), ICAR and the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) organized a two day workshop on ‘Impact of capacity building programs under NAIP’ on June 6-7, 2014 at AP Shinde Auditorium, NASC Complex, Pusa, New Delhi. The main purpose of the workshop was to present and discuss the findings of the impact evaluation study on capacity building programs under NAIP by IFPRI. The scientists from ICAR and agricultural universities were sent abroad to receive training in specialized research techniques. Post-training, scientists were expected to work on collaborative projects within the ICAR, which would further enrich their knowledge and skills, expand their research network and stimulate them’ to improve their productivity, creativity and quality of their research. The ICAR commissioned with IFPRI (International Food Policy Research Institute) to undertake an evaluation of these capacity building programs under NAIP in July 2012. The workshop shared the findings on the impact of capacity building programs under NAIP and evolve strategies for future capacity building programs

1. Experiences about the
training programs -
International open trainings
and National trainings
Nachiket Kotwaliwale
CIAE, Bhopal

2. International and National
trainings at CIAE
 No. of scientists at
CIAE trained under
component 1 of
NAIP – 13
 Number of NAIP
sponsored trainings
conducted – 3
 Additionally, CIAE
scientists were core
faculty in two national
trainings conducted at
CIPHET and IARI

3. Training in the context of individual
and institutional skill gaps -
International Training
 For many trainees this was maiden foreign experience
 Moral boost
 Confidence building
 Sense of belonging to sponsoring organization
 Widening of perspective
 Exposure to the future of technology in one’s field of
specialization
 Developed skills on use of modern instruments/
advanced software
 Organization of national training(s) helped development
of facilities and structured course material

4. Training in the context of
individual and institutional skill
gaps - National Training
 For majority did not have any background in the
area/ topics of training – Novel
 Majority were young (assistant professor
equivalent) – learning curve was sharp – training
could be conducted in extended hours
 Involvement of international faculty was very much
encouraging – lot of personal interaction
 Major concern among trainees – availability of
facilities at their respective institutes to take any
further research in the area

5. Capacity built, work culture and
attitudinal changes
 Exposure to the complimentary research
methodology
 Major areas in which capacity built –
 Machine vision
 Sensor application
 NTNC processing
 Fermentation
 Nano-technology
 Packaging technology
 Nutraceuticals

6. Planning, selection, training duration, resource
institution and resource person, training
implementation, and reporting
The international training duration must be
depending upon the research area
The national training sponsored by NAIP
could have been more effective if
Duration of training could be flexible (10-21
days)
ASRB & SAUs give appropriate credit to these
training in career advancement schemes

7. Post-training utilization, linkage
and network developed and
future plan

8. Effective Implementation of On-going/
Completed Research Activities:
 X-ray, CT and MRI image analysis of mangoes for
non-destructive quality evaluation
 National Initiative of Climate Resilient Agriculture
 Enzyme assisted aqueous extraction processing
(EAAP) of soybean
 Image based weed detection and weedicide
application
 Spectral signature generation for some crops at
different stages of plants
 A study on activation of crop residue based charcoal
is underway to obtain the activated carbon at very
low cost by nano cavities augmentation.

9. On-going Research Activities:
 A power tiller mounted laser sensor based single
row herbicide application system has been
developed and tested successfully.
 A tractor operated two row laser sensor based
herbicide application system has been
developed and tested successfully.
 A controller based 5 row tractor operated seed
drill has been developed.
 A project on machine vision application for plant
variety identification has been initiated under
ICAR national fund.
 Membrane technology for soy-milk-powder
production

10. Future research activities
 A major thrust area of research during XII
plan is “Conservation agriculture” and its role
in mitigating the effect of climate change.
 A complete laboratory on machine vision
applications in agriculture has been proposed
in the XII plan EFC document of the institute
 Emphasis has been given to non-thermal non-
chemical processing of foods in the research
programmes proposed during XII plan.

11.  Precision agriculture with appropriate
sensors and instrumentation is now one of
the major thrust areas of the institute.
 Talks initiated with M/s Marine Marshall
products , Erode, Tamilnadu for joint
project/ technical guidance for the
extraction of chitosan and related products
 Contribution to ICAR’s Nano Technology
platform
 Nano technological interventions for waste
management and enhanced energy
conversion

12. Output of International
and National training

13. HRD
 Summer School
 Sensor based application for precision farming to
enhance input use efficiency (Jul. 5- 25, 2011)
 Engineering Interventions in Conservation Agriculture
for Enhancing Agricultural Productivity and Climate
Change Mitigation (Jun. 22- Jul. 12, 2012)
 NAIP sponsored 10-day training
 Non thermal, Non Chemical Processing and membrane
technology in food system (Oct. 12-21, 2011)
 Sensors and protocols for Machine Vision Applications
in Agriculture (Dec. 15-24, 2011)
 Sensors and Actuators for Precision Farming (Mar. 3-
12, 2014)

14. Research Management &
academics
 Linkages were established with
following Universities of USA:
 University of Nebraska, Lincoln,
 North Dakota State University, Fargo
 Cornell University, Ithaca
 Iowa State University, Ames
 Virginia Tech, Blacksburg
 Oklahoma State University, Stillwater
 University of Manitoba, Manitoba
 Washington State University, Pullman

15. Requirements for collaborative
projects with US funding
 Before proposal submission, all proposed US or non-US
subawardee institutions must be registered with
FastLane and Central Contractor Registration (CCR), and
have a DUNS number.
 Fastlane details at
(https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/NSFHelp/Printdocs/FastLane_
Help/pd_fastlane_registration/pd_fastlane_registration.pdf)
 Central Contractor Registration should be handled through
http://www.ccr.gov
 Now known as System for Award
Management (SAM) https://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM
/##11
 Institutions may obtain a DUNS number free of charge
through the Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) online registration
(http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform)

16.  Visits of faculty of international universities
to CIAE, Bhopal/ Coimbatore
 University of Nebraska, Lincoln,
 Iowa State University, Ames
 Virginia Tech, Blacksburg
 University of California
 Some collaborative research activities
proposed for funding under different
international programmes.
 Research paper published – Eight in
collaboration with international faculty, 6 in
collaboration with local scientist(s)
 Five course manuals

17.  Scientists trained at international
laboratories delivered more than 20
lectures in different training courses,
workshops, symposia etc.
 One trainee of national training pursued
his doctoral work in the area of machine
vision.
 One trainee of national training was later
selected for international training

18. Post-training requirement
All trainees should be supported
appropriately with the requisite resources in
terms of manpower and financial support.
Introduction of special fund to develop the
laboratory/ facility.

19. Comparison of International and
National Training
International training National training
• Unique experience &
exposure
• Freedom to work
• Possibility for international
collaboration
• Less expensive
• Comparatively better
planned and structured
• Formation of a national
group
• Not structured in most
cased
• Training of only one or two
scientists per specialized
area at one instt. may not
be adequate
• Limited resources
• Laboratory facilities not
adequate in some cases

20. Thank You