| Abstract: | The article examines the issue of priority setting in Third World agricultural research organizations, for those research sectors and topics which—mainly because of the difficulty of quantifying benefits—are outside the domain of economic surplus and benefit/cost techniques. The issue is redefined as one of processing ill‐structured decisions, i.e., decisions in which there is no unique, identifiable, objectively optimal solution. The implications of this for the concept of rational action in this field are explored, and the results used to define a practical approach. This centres on a radical review of the possible options and criteria in priority setting, using four techniques (challenge groups, repertory grid, creativity techniques and flow charting). The final section of the article examines the decision‐making aspects of these techniques in three priority‐setting contexts of increasing difficulty: within a department, where the issue is essentially one of technical choice between competing research lines; within a major institute or research sector, where there is substantial competition for resources; and in an institute or sector which is facing a crisis of resources or relevance. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. |
