Projects Selection and Evaluation Tools for the of Non-Conventional Materials and Technologies (NOCMATS)

Abstract:

The results of many successfully realized Research and Development (R&D) concerned with non-conventional materials and technologies (NOCMAT) in developing countries including Brazil have not been used in large scale in practice. This is due to the lack of selection and evaluation criteria and concepts from planning and designing to implementation programs by governmental agencies and private organizations concerned with the newly developed sustainable materials and technologies. The problems of selecting and evaluating R&D innovation outputs and impacts for construction are complex and need scientific and systematic studies in order to avoid the social and environmental mistakes occurred in industrialized countries after the Second World War. This paper presents a logical framework for the implementation of pertinent indicators to be used as a tool in R&D of NOCMAT projects selection and evaluation concerned with materials, structural elements and technologies of bamboo and composites reinforced with vegetable fibers. Indicators, related to the efficiency, effectiveness, impact, relevance and sustainability of such projects are considered and discussed.

• Periodical: Key Engineering Materials (Volume 517)
• Pages: 13-19
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.517.13
• Online since: June 2012
• Authors: P. Ohayon, Khosrow Ghavami
• Keywords: Bamboo, Evaluation, Fiber, Indicators, Non-Conventional Materials, Project Selection, Technology

References

[1] Ghavami, K. Cement Composites Reinforced with Bamboo and Vegetable Fibers. Proc. of the First International Conference on Concrete & Development, Tehran / I. R. Iran, Apr. 30-May 2, v. II, 2001, pp.445-461.

[2] 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, jul. (2001).

DOI: 10.29327/cb-ciencias-exatas-computacao-tecnologia-inovacao-1.598936

[3] 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–Mar. 2, 1990, pp.621-627.

[4] Marcovitch, J.; Ohayon, P. Évaluation em Science et Technologie au Brésil. Paris: CPE/MRT. Colloque international CPE – Méthodologies évaluatives de la recherche. CPE Étude, n. 51, pp.63-79, Mai (1985).

[5] Valeriano, D. L. Gerência em Projetos – Pesquisa, Desenvolvimento e Engenharia. São Paulo: Makron Books, (1998).

[6] Quinn, J. B. The measurement and evaluation of research results. Hanover, New Hampshire: Darthmouth College, (1958).

[7] Asbury, W. C. Establishing research projects. In: Heyel, C. (ed. ) Handbook of industrial research management. 2. ed. New York: Reinhold Book, (1968).

[8] Cleland, D. I. Systems analysis and project management. 2. ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975. (series in Management).

[9] O'Brien, P. E.; James, J. Project management – an overview. Project Management, Lancaster/Pa, v. 8, n. 3, pp.27-32, Sept. (1977).

[10] Decotiis, T. A.; Dyer, L. Defining and measuring project performance. Research Management, Lancaster/Pa, v. 22, n. 1, pp.17-22, Jan. (1979).

DOI: 10.1080/00345334.1979.11756516

[11] Vasconcellos, E. P. G. de. Avaliação do desempenho de projetos de pesquisa tecnologia. In: V Simpósio de Pesquisa em Administração de Ciência e Tecnologia. 1980, São Paulo. Anais. São Paulo: IA/USP.

DOI: 10.29327/155543.1-8

[12] Ellis, l. Introduction to Evaluating R&D Process Management. Evaluation of R&D Processes: Effectiveness Through Measurements. Norwood/MA: Artech House, (1997).

[13] Geisler, E. The Metrics of Science and Technology. Westport/CT: Quorum Books, (2000).

[14] Cleland, D. I.; Ireland, L. R. O Gerenciamento de Projetos. 2. ed. Gerenciamento de Projetos. Rio de Janeiro: LTC, 2007. (Capítulo 1).

DOI: 10.11606/d.103.2021.tde-22032023-081906

[15] Clifford, F. G.; Larson, E. W. Gerenciamento de projetos moderno. Gerenciamento de projetos – o processo gerencial. 4a. ed. São Paulo: McGraw-Hill, 2009. (Capítulo 1).

[16] The World Bank Building Evaluation Capacity. Washington: The World Bank / Operations Evaluation Department. Lessons & Practices, n. 4, pp.1-11, (1994).

[17] International Atomic Energy Agency Planning and Designing IAEA Technical Co-Operation Projects: Guidelines. Vienna/Austria: IAEA, Department of Technical Co-Operation. Jun. (1997).

[18] Knowlton, L. W.; Phillips, C. C. The Logic Model Guidebook – Better Strategies for Great Results. Thousand Oaks/Ca: Sage, (2009).

DOI: 10.3138/cjpe.27.006

[19] Cunningham, P.; Nedeva, M. Towards a system of continuous evaluation and monitoring for European co-operation in scientific and technical research (COST). Research Evaluation, v. 8, n. 3, pp.142-154, Dec. (1999).

DOI: 10.3152/147154499781777487

[20] 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. Mar. (2001).

DOI: 10.1590/s1414-753x2010000200006

[21] UNEP Bergen Ministerial Declaration of Sustainable Development in the ECE Region. Bergen/Norway, 14-15 May, 1990, Industry and environment, v. 13, n. 2, pp.54-56, Apr. /Jun. (1990).

[22] Mullick, A. K. Role of Cement and Concrete in Sustainable Societal Development. 1st International Conference on Concrete & Development, Tehran/Iran, Apr. 30–May 2, 2001, pp.573-582.