found that although forest fire is often destructive, indigenous use and management of fire were significant in forest manage­ment and conservation. For instance, in Indonesia and Nepal, fires were intended to maintain grasslands for animal agri­culture. In central and northern Australia, aboriginal com­munities had sophisticated applications of fire that took into account seasons, patterns of burning, specific effects on wildlife and plants, and exclusion of fire from particular ar­eas and vegetation (Jackson and Moore, 1998). Aboriginals also used fire to encourage growth of grasses for target wild animal species, particularly kangaroos and wallabies.
     In China, communities in Yunan developed a system of classifying forests and forest systems according to their function and products, such as forests for building materi­als, cash crops, landscaping and graveyards, and protected rattan (Table 2-2).

2.3.1.2   Roles of different organizations in generating, disseminating and adopting AKST
Agricultural entities in ESAP vary in number, composi­tion, capability and performance. These entities include the stakeholders that NARS serves and affects or that can affect NARS. The main roles of stakeholders are varied and their interrelationships evident (Table 2-3). The research agenda crafted nationally reverberates in the activities of research and extension personnel, affecting the decisions of farmers to adopt a technology. Feedback mechanisms allow for the refinement of technology and the accompanying research and extension. Collaboration among stakeholders influences in­vestment, research decisions and information dissemination.
     Organizations realize that research, development, train­ing and extension services need to develop and maintain partnerships with farmers, NGOs, producer organizations, agroprocessors, agribusiness houses, traders, retailers and consumers (van Mele et al., 2005; Hall, 2006). Developing wider links is essential for improving the performance of organizations involved. The optimum use of AKST can be best facilitated by addressing the barriers to change caused by some institutional rigidities (Box 2-2).

2.3.1.3   Transformation of AKST institutions
As production agriculture became increasingly informed and scientific, new researchable areas have emerged in bio­technology, sustainable agriculture, and information and

communications technology (ICT) and climate change. A diversified institutional structure in agricultural research, de­velopment and extension has emerged nationally and glob­ally with profound effects on our ability to produce food and manage our natural resources and the environment.
     Most research efforts have been done by national public research institutes, state colleges and universities and inter­national research centers. The private sector has played a marginal role, especially in basic research. In recent years, farmer organizations, NGOs and the private sector have emerged as key players. As farmers became more organized, experience gained from participatory research schemes and other rural development projects has been used. This has allowed new approaches to research to emerge that put the farmer at the center of development, not just as a user of the technology. NGOs have complemented the role of the state or filled a gap generated by weakness in public ex­tension agencies. Incentives for research and development have increased private sector biological research. The sector accounts for approximately 80% of plant biotechnology re­search worldwide (Chaparro, 1999). The private sector has become important in basic and adaptive research, changing members' role from users of the knowledge generated by the public sector to generators of knowledge. Issues of property rights and plant breeder's rights and their effects have also emerged. This evolving institutional environment needs to be considered in strengthening AKST for sustainable agri­culture and in developing new approaches of cooperation. Faced with diminishing funds from traditional sources, part­nerships among stakeholders should be founded on collabo­ration and mutual benefit.
     In the past 25 years, many ESAP countries have changed how agricultural research and extension is organized and funded. Toward the end of the 1990s, roles of public and international research organizations shifted and support for public agricultural research slowed down (Pardey et al., 2006) (see 2.3.3). Public agricultural research became less understood and more closely scrutinized. Some considered the world's food supply problem solved; some thought that public research was constrained by factors other than re­search or that the private sector should take over the job (Pardey and Beintema, 2001).  Government decisions to continually underinvest in public research exacerbated the global gap in scientific knowledge. For instance, new culti-