Index of Priorities for Southern Region

SRIPMC is very interested in knowing and disributing the priorities for IPM research, extension and regulation action. We and others use these priority lists in several important ways, including these:

• IPM Centers, USDA, and other funding agencies use them when we develop requests for proposals
• Requests for Proposals often require that proposals link to explicit stakeholder-identified priorities
• Researchers and research institutions use them in planning research programs
• Extension educators use them to plan programs and activities
• Evaluators use them to help gauge how well our programs address "real world' needs

What makes a "powerful" priority?

For a particular use, one priority may have more power than another. Here are some thought to keep in mind when you submit or view an IPM priority.

Stakeholder link: Usually proposals are strengthened by addressing priorities that are identified by a broad range of stakeholders. A priority defined only by a single person, without apparent support from the appropriate stakeholder group - even if that person is an expert - may be viewed as less valid than one identified or supported by a group. A priority identified as such by two stakeholder groups (say, a grower organization AND a research/extension committee) may be considered as having more value than a priority identified by only one group. Priorities agreed upon by many stakeholder groups are often considered more valuable than those agreed upon by few.

Needs v Priorities: The term "needs" is not synonymous with the term "priorities". Identifying priorities usually entails sorting the larger list of needs to pick those that are most important and/or should be addressed first. Thus the list of priorities for a setting is a subset of and often much smaller than the list of needs for the same setting. Many people feel that the power of a list of priorities is inversely related to the length of that list of priorities.

Timeliness: The timeliness of a stakeholder-identified priority affects its value. The date that the priority is identified helps to indicate timeliness, but even a chronologically "old" priority may be as valid and timely as a newly identified priority. To evaluate timeliness one should consider whether the results of prioritization are still valid, or whether, on the other hand, either the need has been addressed or other needs might have displaced it in the prioritization.

Priorities from the 2005 CSREES Plant and Pest Biology Stakeholders' Workshop

View submitted priorities:

Priorities submitted prior to May 2007 (with the exception of the CSREES workshop) have been archived. Any of these that are still pertinent should be resubmitted to that they will appear to proposal writers, review panelists, and other interested parties.

Submit a priority:

To submit a priority, please determine it's appropriate placement in regard to the IPM Roadmap Focus Area and Impact Arena in the table below and provide a priority from that area that is a key issue for your organization, with a brief explanation of why it should be a priority.

Factors that should be considered in your priority may include:

• Why is it important or unique to the south?
• Does it intersect with or create other problems?
• Are there important changes occurring that imply greater problems to come?
• What stakeholder groups support this priority (and what evidence can you cite for this)?