IDARI PROJECT WORKSHOP, PRAGUE, 8-10 June 2004

WP RESEARCH SESSIONS

Over the course of the three-day workshop four dedicated parallel research sessions are scheduled.

In order to ensure that maximum benefit from the individual work sessions is realised across the workshop programme, it is proposed that each work session has identified objectives, a plan for realising those objectives and that the results/progress of each work session is clearly recorded. Work Package leaders the best placed to identify what they consider appropriate objectives (and sub-objectives). It is recognised it may be considered that all participants in a Work Package should be involved in the identification and agreement of objectives and work programming relating to the work sessions and this may indeed occur. However, in order to guide and expedite the process, it will be important for some draft documentation to be in place prior to the Prague workshop.

Two draft templates are attached. The first (marked No.1) is designed to be completed prior to arrival in Prague. It may be that WP leaders wish to have agreement amongst all participants with the objectives of the workshops and this may be done but the form should be completed to provide a guide to the process of selecting objectives. The second form (marked No2) is designed to be completed by the WP leader at the end of each work session. The four forms can be used to facilitate the process of feed back, scheduled to take place on 10th June at the final plenary session.

The proposed process is as follows:

  1. WP leaders identify the objective of the overall workshop meeting
  2. This global objective is broken down into sub-objectives relating to each work session
  3. the procedure planned for the attainment of the objectives is reviewed by the WP leader (i.e. is it realistic)
  4. the WP leader prepares an agenda for each of the work sessions, which will ensure the realisation of the identified objective and related sub-objectives.

IDARI WORKSHOP PROGRAMME: RESEARCH SESSIONS FORM 1

THIS FORM SHOULD BE COMPLETED BY THE WORK PACKAGE LEADER.
Work Programme: Discussion of theoretical approaches and empirical methodology on social capital, governance and rural institutional innovation
Objective (overall) Evaluation and approval of research strategy
Sub-Objectives:
Work session 1 Land Fragmentation: Research questions, hypotheses and empirical methodology
Work session 2 Cooperation for Rural Development: Comparative case study approach
Work session 3 Producer Groups: Research questions, hypotheses and empirical methodology
Work session 4 Cooperation for Environmental Protection: Comparative case study approach
Work session 5 Cooperation for Market Development: Comparative case study approach

Actions (developed from objective and linked to each sub-objective)

  1. Presentation and discussion of PhD project (Dirimanova)
  2. Introduction and discussion of case study design (LT, LV)
  3. Presentation and discussion of PhD project (Banaszak)
  4. Introduction and discussion of case study design (PL, SK)
  5. Introduction and discussion of case study design (BG, HU, PL)
WORKSHOP CHECKLIST:
  • Please ensure that objectives, and related actions, are identified for each work session.
  • Please ensure that an agenda is prepared, either prior to the workshop and individual work sessions or at the start of each session.
  • Please ensure that sufficient time is available to work through the various issues at each workshop.
  • Please ensure that a note taker is elected for each work session. The names of attendees should be recorded. All key decisions should be recorded.

IDARI WORK SESSION REPORT FORM 2
THIS FORM SHOULD BE COMPLETED BY THE WORK PROGRAMME LEADER FOR EACH WORK SESSION HELD IN THE WORKSHOP
Work Programme (please select 1) 1 [ ] 2[ ] 3 [ ]
Work Session (Number 1-4), ______Date: _ _/_ _/_ _
Stated sub- objective: to….______
______
Actions carried out: (details of the work session content)
1. ______
2. ______
3. ______
Issues arising:
1. ______
2. ______
3. ______

Planned response to the issues arising

1. ______
2. ______
3. ______
Progress towards reaching objective (at each workshop session)
Not as expected [ ] As expected [ ] Exceeding expectations [ ]
Why? ______
What could be improved (if anything?) ______

Any other issues?

1. ______
2. ______