Evaluation Tools for R&D Projects Sponsored by the Brazilian National Network for Bamboo’s Research and Development – Redebambu/Br
P. Ohayon, K. Ghavami
Abstract. Since the 70ties local energy saving materials, cement composites reinforced with vegetable fibers, bamboo as well as renovated ancient technologies started to be investigated by scientists and researchers in order to substitute industrialized materials which are highly polluting and high energy demanding in their production. Although proved technically and scientifically that the newly developed non-conventional materials and technologies (NOCMAT) were superior to the conventional industrialized materials they have not been used in large-scale projects. There is an intense on-going search in Brazil for non-polluting materials which consume little energy in their production and/or utilization. Even with the accumulation of technical data concerning the developed materials and structural elements obtained from the research programs, they are not systematically used in large scale in civil construction. Therefore, a systematic and methodological evaluation framework is needed. In this paper a short description of the materials and structural elements using bamboo are given. Then the evaluation tools for the successful implementation of the results in large NOCMAT projects is discussed considering those Research and Development (R&D) projects sponsored by Redebambu/BR – the recent network created in Brazil, which applies the national policy to encourage the bamboo´s handling and sustainable planting. Five important outcomes reflected into the NOCMAT R&D projects such as Efficiency, Effectiveness, Impact, Relevance and Sustainability and its pertinent indicators are presented. Additionally, four relevant dimensions, specifically, (1) Political, Strategic and Normative; (2) Organizational; (3) Allocation and Management of Resources; and (4) Technical, Scientific and Economic evaluation dimensions are considered and discussed.
Keywords
Evaluation Tools, NOCMAT R&D Projects, Redebambu/BR
Published online , 15 pages
Copyright © 2018 by the author(s)
Published under license by Materials Research Forum LLC., Millersville PA, USA
Citation: P. Ohayon, K. Ghavami, ‘Evaluation Tools for R&D Projects Sponsored by the Brazilian National Network for Bamboo’s Research and Development – Redebambu/Br’, Materials Research Proceedings, Vol. 7, pp 199-213, 2018
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.21741/9781945291838-19
The article was published as article 19 of the book Non-Conventional Materials and Technologies
References
[1] Ghavami, K. Bamboo as reinforcement in structural concrete elements. Cement and Concrete Composites, Elsevier, v. 27, n. 6, p. 637-649, July 2005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2004.06.002
[2] United Nations. The Habitat Agenda: Chapter IV: C. Sustainable human settlements development in an urbanizing world, 14 June 1996. Available at:
[3] Ghavami, K. Application of bamboo as a Low-Cost Energy material in Civil Engineering. In: Third CIB/RILEM Symposium – Materials for Low Income Housing, Mexico City. Proceedings. 1989, p. 526-536.
[4] Brasil. Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia Livro Verde – O debate necessário: Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovação – Desafios para a Sociedade Brasileira. Brasília: MCT/Academia Brasileira de Ciências, July 2001.
[5] Albuquerque, M. E. E.; Bonacelli, M. B. M.; Weigel, P. A questão ambiental e a contribuição dos institutos de pesquisa à geração de tecnologias ambientalmente sustentáveis. In: Parcerias Estratégicas, Brasília/DF, v. 15, n. 30, p. 9-24, January 2010.
[6] Kuhlman, S. Evaluation as a source of ‘strategic intelligence. In: Shapira, P.; Kuhlman, S. Learning from Science and Technology Policy Evaluation – Experiences from the United States and Europe. Northampton/MA: Edward Elgar, 2003. (Chapter 18, p. 352-379).
[7] Wickremasinghe, S. I.; Gupta, V. K. Science & Technology Policy and Indicators for Development – Perspectives from Developing Countries. Dehli: Daya Publishing House, 2008.
[8] Bellen, H. M. Van. Indicadores de Sustentabilidade – uma análise comparativa. 2ª Ed., São Paulo: FGV Editora, 2006.
[9] Morin, J.; Rafferty, P. J. The six key functions of technological resources management. Miami/Florida-USA: Institute of Industrial Engineering. Proc. of the Second International Conference on Management of Technology, Feb. 28–March 2, 1990, p. 621-627.
[10] Soltman, C.; Stucki, T.; Woerter, M. The performance effect of environmental innovations. KOF Working Papers, n. 330. Zurich: Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, February 2013.
[11]Edler, J.; Berger, M.; Dinges, M.; Gök, A. The practice of evaluation in innovation policy in Europe. Research Evaluation, Oxford, v. 21, n. 3, p. 167-182, July 2012. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvs014
[12]Edler, J.; Georghiou, K.; Blind, E.; Uyarra, E. Evaluating the demand side: New challenges for evaluation. Research Evaluation, Oxford, v. 21, n. 1, p. 33-47, March 2012. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvr002
[13] Clark, W.; Crutzen, P.; Schellnhuber, H. Science for Global Sustainability: Toward a New Paradigm. CID Working Paper n. 120. Science, Environment and Development Group, Center for International Development Cambridge: Harvard University, 2005.
[14] Sistema Integrado de Información sobre Investigación Científica, Desarrollo Tecnológico e Innovación. Available at:
[15] Dale, R. Evaluating Development Programmes and projects. 2nd Ed., London: Sage Publications, 2004.
[16] Hong, H. D.; Boden, M. R&D programme Evaluation: theory and practice – a Comparative Analysis of Large Scale R&D Programme Evaluation. Surrey/UK: Ashgate Publishing, 2003.
[17] Ellis, l. Introduction to Evaluating R&D Process Management. In: Evaluation of R&D Processes: Effectiveness through Measurements. Norwood/MA: Artech House, 1997.
[18] Geisler, E. The Metrics of Science and Technology. Westport/CT: Quorum Books, 2000.
[19]Cleland, D. I.; Ireland, L. R. O Gerenciamento de Projetos. In: 2. ed. Gerenciamento de Projetos. Rio de Janeiro: LTC, 2007. (Chapter 1).
[20] Clifford, F. G.; Larson, E. W. Gerenciamento de projetos moderno. In: Gerenciamento de projetos – o processo gerencial. 4a. ed. São Paulo: McGraw-Hill, 2009. (Chapter 1).
[21] The World Bank Building Evaluation Capacity. Washington: The World Bank/Operations Evaluation Department. Lessons & Practices, n. 4, p. 1-11, 1994.
[22] International Atomic Energy Agency Planning and Designing IAEA Technical Co-Operation Projects: Guidelines. Vienna/Austria: IAEA, Department of Technical Co-Operation. June 1997.
[23] Knowlton, L. W.; Phillips, C. C. The Logic Model Guidebook – Better Strategies for Great Results. Thousand Oaks/Ca: Sage, 2009.
[24] Chen, H-T. Evaluation Outcomes. In: Practical Program Evaluation. London: Sage Publications, 2005. (Chapter 9, p. 195-229). https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412985444.n10
[25] Holvoet, N.; Renard, R. Desk Screening of Development Projects: Is It Effective? In: Stern, E. Evaluation Research Methods. London: Sage Publications, 2005. (Vol. 4, Chapter 60, p. 87-107).
[26] Brasil. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico. Chamada MCTI/Ação Transversal/CNPq No 66/2013. Available at:
[27] Champagne, F.; Hartz, Z.; Brouselle, A.; Contandriopoulos, A.-P. A Apreciação Normativa. In: Avaliação – conceitos e métodos. Rio de Janeiro: Fiocruz, 2011. (Chapter 4, p. 77-94).
[28] Champagne, F.; Brouselle, A.; Contandriopoulos, A.-P.; Hartz, Z. A Análise Estratégica. In: Avaliação – conceitos e métodos. Rio de Janeiro: Fiocruz, 2011. (Chapter 5, p. 95-104).
[29] Farand, L. A Análise da Produção. In: Avaliação – conceitos e métodos. Rio de Janeiro: Fiocruz, 2011. (Chapter 7, p. 115-158).
[30] Champagne, F.; Brouselle, A.; Contandriopoulos, A.-P.; Hartz, Z. A Análise dos Efeitos. In: Avaliação – conceitos e métodos. Rio de Janeiro: Fiocruz, 2011. (Chapter 8, p. 159-182).
[31] Brouselle, A.; Lachaine, J.; Contandriopoulos, A.-P. A Avaliação Econômica. In: Avaliação – conceitos e métodos. Rio de Janeiro: Fiocruz, 2011. (Chapter 9, p. 183-216).
[32] Brouselle, A.; Lachaine, J.; Contandriopoulos, A.-P. A Análise da Implantação. In: Avaliação – conceitos e métodos. Rio de Janeiro: Fiocruz, 2011. (Chapter 10, p. 217-238).
[33] Geisler, E. Science and Technology, The Economy, and Society. In: Creating Value with Science and Technology. Westport: Quorum Books, 2001. (Part IV, p. 167-315).
[34] Moraes, L. A. F. de; Ohayon, P.; Ghavami, K. Application of Non-Conventional Materials: Evaluation Criteria for Environmental Conservation in Brazil. Key Engineering Materials, Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland, v. 517, p. 20-26, 2012.
[35] Ohayon, P.; Rosenberg, G. Análise dos indicadores de ciência, tecnologia e inovação no âmbito da Fundação Oswaldo Cruz – Fiocruz. Artigo publicado na RSP – Revista do Serviço Público/ENAP, Brasília/DF, v. 65, n. 2, p. 297-319, July/September 2014.
[36] Ohayon, P.; Barreiros, D. S.; Ghavami, K. Science and Technology Observatory for “NOCMAT” in Brazil: Role and Proposed Framework. Key Engineering Materials, Zurich/Switzerland, Trans Tech Publications, v. 600, p. 399-412, 2014.
[37] Ohayon, P.; Ghavami, K.; Jesuz, K. Specifications of Building Environmental Evaluation Methods within Redebambu Network in Brazil. In: Proceedings of the NOCMAT 2015 – 16th Nonconventional Building Materials and Technologies International Conference 2015 – Construction for Sustainability – Green Materials & Technologies. August 10-13, 2015, Winnipeg/Canadá.
[38] Ohayon, P. Modelo Integrado de Indicadores de Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação no Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Rio de Janeiro: UFRJ, 2007. (Research Project sponsored by CNPq/MCTI-Brazil, Edital Universal 2004, Vol. 2, p. 2-24).
[39] Kusek, J. Z.; Rist, R. Step 3: Selecting Key Performance Indicators to Monitor Outcomes. In: Ten Steps to a Results-Based Monitoring and Evaluation System. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank, 2004. (Chapter 3, p. 65-79). https://doi.org/10.1596/0-8213-5823-5
[40] Franceschini, F.; Galetto, M.; Maisano, D. Management by Measurement – Designing Key Indicators and Performance Measurement Systems. Torino: Springer, 2010.
[41] Parmenter, D. Key Performance Indicators – Developing, Implementing, and Using Winning KPIs. 2nd Ed., Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2010.
[42] Ministério da Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação – MCTI. Plano Anual de Monitoramento e Avaliação. Comissão Permanente de Monitoramento e Avaliação. Brasília/DF: ASCAV – Assessoria de Acompanhamento e Avaliação das Atividades Finalísticas/Secretaria Executiva, December 2015.
[43] TECHNOPOLIS GROUP & MIOIR. Evaluation of Innovation Activities: Guidance on Methods and Practices. Study funded by the European Commission. Brussels: Directorate for Regional Policy/European Union, 2012.
[44] Brasil. Ministério do Meio Ambiente. Relatório sobre a Aplicação Preliminar dos Indicadores do Projeto AMA para Monitoramento do PPG7. Brasília: MMA/ Secretaria de Coordenação da Amazônia. Projeto Piloto para Proteção das Florestas Tropicais do Brasil – PPG7. Projeto: Apoio ao Monitoramento e Análise – AMA. March 2001.
[45] UNEP Bergen Ministerial Declaration of Sustainable Development in the ECE Region. Bergen/Norway, 14-15 May, 1990, Industry and environment, v. 13, n. 2, p. 54-56, April/June 1990.
[46] Mullick, A. K. Role of Cement and Concrete in Sustainable Societal Development. 1st International Conference on Concrete & Development, Tehran/Iran, April 30–May 2, 2001, p. 573-582.
