Evaluation Criteria

Points Allocation

The weight given to the applicant's declared focus depends on which contribution type it is. See the full points matrix on the Evaluation System page for how this plays out across all four focus areas.

70% Focus weight for a Research or Patents focus — the remaining three contribution types share the other 30%.

30% Combined weight of the other three contribution types, for a Research or Patents focus.

50% Focus weight for a Practical Innovations or Policies & Programs focus — the remaining three contribution types share the other 50%.

50% Combined weight of the other three contribution types, for a Practical Innovations or Policies & Programs focus.

How the Weights Apply

An applicant's declared focus is weighted at 70% of the total score for a Research or Patents focus, or 50% for a Practical Innovations or Policies & Programs focus. The remaining three contribution types share the rest of the score in equal parts.

Each contribution type is judged against the specific conditions published for it, and against the detailed criteria below.

Detailed Scoring Criteria

Within each contribution type, the committee scores the submitted work against the elements below. Each element's allocated points add up to that contribution type's own 100%, which is then scaled by the weight the contribution type carries in the applicant's overall score (see the points matrix on the Evaluation System page).

1. Research Evaluation Criteria

Research Elements	Weight
1Importance, Originality & Contribution Relevance to Arab food security · Clarity of objectives · Motivation for the topic · Originality of the research · Scientific & practical contribution	20%
2Research Methodology Appropriateness of design · Suitability of procedures · Data collection plan · Data analysis plan & techniques · Ethical considerations	20%
3Literature Review & Hypotheses Development Scope & depth of literature review · Research gap · Hypotheses or research questions	10%
4Results Analysis Presentation & analysis of results · Comparison with prior studies · Quality of discussion · Practical impact & applicability	30%
5Recommendations & Proposed Policies Recommendations · Proposed policies	20%
Total Points	100%

2. Patent Evaluation Criteria

Patent Element	Weight
1Novelty and Originality	20%
2Technical Merit and Innovation	20%
3Intellectual Property Strength	10%
4Commercial and Market Potential	15%
5Economic / Social / Environmental Impact	15%
6Technology Readiness Level & Scalability	15%
7Quality of Presentation and Submitted Documents	5%
Total Points	100%

3. Evaluation Criteria for the Contribution to Agricultural Inventions and Technologies

Element	Weight
1Relevance to the target field/sector	20%
2Innovation and technical excellence	20%
3Supporting environmental and resource sustainability (water, energy, input efficiency)	15%
4Economic and commercial feasibility (cost/benefit, market)	15%
5Field applicability and scalability	15%
6Technology readiness level and intellectual property status	10%
7Quality of presentation and submitted documents	5%
Total Points	100%

4. Evaluation Criteria for the Contribution to the Development of Policies and Programs that have Demonstrated a Tangible Impact on the Development of the Agricultural Sector and the Achievement of Food Security and Sustainability

Element	Weight
1Effectiveness and impact (measurable outcomes)	20%
2Relevance and priority to national/regional policies	15%
3Environmental and social sustainability (resources, diversity, equity)	15%
4Innovation in design and implementation (novel approach or systemic improvement)	10%
5Feasibility of implementation and continuity (financing, institutions, capacities)	10%
6Integration and partnerships (coordination among stakeholders, community engagement)	10%
7Transparency and good governance (governance, accountability)	10%
8Scalability/transferability (replicability in other areas)	5%
9Quality of documentation and submission	5%
Total Points	100%

Note: item 1 above is corrected to 20% here so the column totals 100% — the source scoring sheet lists it as 150%, which appears to be a typo.