What are the barriers and opportunities for scientists and other knowledge holders to contribute to informing policy for more efficient, inclusive, resilient and sustainable agrifood systems?
Recognizing the importance and urgency of leveraging the potential of science and innovation to overcome the intertwined social, economic and environmental challenges of agrifood systems in a globally equitable, inclusive and sustainable manner, FAO’s first-ever Science and Innovation Strategy (the Strategy) was designed through an inclusive, transparent and consultative process. It is a key tool to support the delivery of the FAO Strategic Framework 2022-31 and hence the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
The Strategy states that FAO’s technical work and normative guidance will be based on the most credible, relevant and legitimate evidence available and that evidence will be assessed in a rigorous, transparent and neutral manner. The Strategy is grounded in seven guiding principles, and its three mutually re-enforcing pillars, which define its main priorities and group together its nine outcomes, are: 1) Strengthening science and evidence-based decision-making; 2) Supporting innovation and technology at regional and country level; and, 3) Serving Members better by reinforcing FAO’s capacities. Two enablers are mainstreamed throughout the three pillars: transformative partnerships and innovative funding and financing.
Decades of development efforts around the world have shown that narrow approaches and technological quick-fixes do not work, especially in the long-term. Science and innovation can be a powerful engine to transform agrifood systems and end hunger and malnutrition, but only when they are accompanied by the right enabling environment. These include strong institutions, good governance, political will, enabling regulatory frameworks, and effective measures to promote equity among agrifood system actors. To respond to this, the Strategy emphasizes the need to ground actions on science and innovation in the guiding principles: rights-based and people-centered; gender-equal; evidence-based; needs-driven; sustainability-aligned; risk-informed; and ethics-based.
Another lesson, integrated into the scope of the Strategy, is that single disciplines on their own are not able to address systemic challenges in a holistic manner, leading to a growing appreciation of the need for supporting sustainability science, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity. While science is fundamentally important, the Strategy also recognizes the knowledge of Indigenous Peoples and small-scale producers as an important source of innovation for agrifood systems.
RATIONALE FOR THIS CONSULTATION
Science and evidence are essential for sound decision-making, but do not necessarily provide a singular course of action. Scientific findings may be limited by insufficient data, uncertainties, contrasting results, and can be contested. Decision-making is often influenced by a variety of both structural and behavioral drivers and barriers as well as numerous stakeholders with diverse values and with significant power asymmetries.
One of the nine outcomes of the Strategy (Outcome 2 under Pillar 1) focusses on strengthening science-policy interfaces[1] for agrifood systems. The Strategy indicates that FAO will strengthen its contribution to science-policy interfaces (SPIs) at national, regional and global levels to support organized dialogue between scientists, policy-makers and other relevant stakeholders in support of inclusive science-based policy making for greater policy coherence, shared ownership and collective action. The added value of FAO’s contribution is to focus at national and regional levels in addition to the global level, to address issues that are relevant to agrifood systems taking into account as appropriate information and analyses produced by existing SPIs, such as the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition (HLPE-FSN), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), and to enable ongoing and effective dialogue through the institutional architecture provided by the FAO Governing Bodies.
Integration of science and evidence into effective agrifood system decision-making processes remains a significant challenge. For example, and for a variety of reasons, policymakers may not inform scientists and other knowledge holders about their needs while scientists and other knowledge holders may not actively engage in the policy-making process. Additionally, many obstacles may compromise this participation.
It is against this background that this online consultation is being organized by the FAO Chief Scientist Office to further identify and understand the barriers and opportunities for scientists and other knowledge holders (drawing their knowledge from other knowledge systems, including Indigenous Peoples, small-scale producers, etc.) to contribute to informing policy for more efficient, inclusive, resilient and sustainable agrifood systems.
QUESTIONS TO GUIDE THIS CONSULTATION
We invite participants to address some or all of the following discussion questions (as relevant to their experience) and provide examples as appropriate.
1 |
Analysis of the complexities and practical problems associated with science-policy interfaces |
|
|
2 |
Knowledge production for policy |
|
|
3 |
Knowledge translation for policy-making |
|
|
4 |
Assessing evidence |
|
|
5 |
Examples |
|
Comments are welcome in all six UN languages (English, French, Spanish, Russian, Arabic and Chinese).
Your contributions to the online consultation will be compiled and analyzed by the FAO Chief Scientist Office. The results will inform work on the development of guidance for strengthening science-policy interfaces as well as science- and evidence-based policy processes for agrifood systems, helping to ensure that effective policy decisions are made based upon sufficient, relevant and credible science and evidence. Proceedings of the contributions received will be made publicly available on this consultation webpage.
We look forward to receiving your valuable input and to learning from your experiences.
Dr Preet Lidder, Technical Adviser in the Chief Scientist Office, FAO
Dr Eric Welch, Professor, Arizona State University
[1] The Strategy defines the term ‘Science-Policy Interface’ as mechanisms for organized dialogue between scientists, policy-makers and other relevant stakeholders in support of inclusive science-based policy-making. Effective science-policy interfaces are characterized by relevance, legitimacy, transparency, inclusivity, and ongoing and effective dialogue through an appropriate institutional architecture.
- Read 91 contributions
Opportunities
ICT deployment for open development presents promising broad opportunities to inform policy for sustainable agrifood systems. Examples, m-agriculture, e-agriculture, agtech app etc. through transparent knowledge/policy advocacy interface, monitoring, evaluation.....etc.
Strategic consolidation and transition of ICT new generation into knowledge bearers and policy appraisal entities in agrifood systems development. It can be possible through capacity building for decentralized knowledge transmission to policy instrument. Focus on new generation political candidates, advocacy NGOs, private commercial knowledge packages for agrifood systems policy reform.
Russia/Ukraine conflict negative impact on global agrifood systems; covid19 lockdown that redefined food order/delivery as well as shortened information dissemination time through virtual online meeting like zoom and intensifying negative impact of climate change such as flood and bush fire are all informative warning that should reverbrate in policy listening devices for agrifood systems redesigning..
In my view that is..
Many a time work done by scientists doesn’t contribute to policy, because of several barriers:
- The work being done may not have any policy implications considering the national priorities & global realities
- Scientists may not be knowing how to draw attention of policy makers to work done & evidence generated
- Lack of opportunities including ignorance on how to contribute in the policy development processes like consultations, feedback etc.
The private sector agencies proactively promote their products often succeeding in getting included their interests in policy documents. While public organizations often don’t so proactively promote their work- may be lack of motivation & encouragement, lack of incentives etc.
- The scientists prefer to publish their work in science journals, but the papers published in subject specific journals are not generally read by policy makers, decision making bodies. There are other modes like blogs, newspaper/magazine articles and social media channels, which can attract the attention of policy making bodies, since these are written in simple and easily understood ways compared to complex scientific writings.
- The scientists if they are passionate about work they have done and believe that it has strong policy implications, have to strive hard to make it widely available so as to get attention of policy makers. This is required at the level of individual scientists since institutional mechanisms are often not in place to facilitate conveying scientists’ work to policy making bodies.
I have tried to reach to wider audiences via my blogs on contemporary issues, which are read by people close to policy making bodies, who would otherwise not care to read my articles published in journals on my subject. For instance, I found Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) as an important way-out to meet expenses incurred in outreach activities, since public sector funds are increasingly getting scarce.
Example: I guided one PhD thesis in on CSR, made conference presentations, wrote research articles and published blogs at popular platforms like Agrilinks (USAID) & AESA. This effort may slowly reach or already in discussion that CSR funds can be tapped to reach unreached in rural areas.
Can We Improve Public Extension Services Using Corporate Social Responsibility Funds?
https://agrilinks.org/post/can-we-improve-public-extension-services-using-csr-funds
Can CSR Funds Strengthen Indian Livestock Sector?
https://www.aesanetwork.org/can-csr-funds-strengthen-indian-livestock-sector/
Livestock Farmers’ Perception on Animal Husbandry Services Rendered Under Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
https://acspublisher.com/journals/index.php/ijvsbt/article/view/2459
Seizing and scaling Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) for Improving Public Extension Services
Obstacles :
- Lobbying (with politicians) to "create doubt" around scientific questions that can call into question financial profits.
- Scientists can offer breakthrough solutions but these are not always heard by political decision-makers if there is little money to be made behind them.
- The (ultra) reductionist thought which is dominant and difficult to challenge because it has immense academic and financial power, while a more holistic approach to rupture is urgently needed. For example, too much focus on nutrients (nutri-centered approach) rather than on the food and its matrix for the relationship with human and environmental health.
- Empirico-inductive and holistic science not yet sufficiently recognized while it can provide quick and effective solutions for more efficient, inclusive, resilient and sustainable agri-food systems. See for example our work on the 3V rule and the role of the food matrix in human and environmental health:
1. Fardet A, Rock E. Chronic diseases are first associated with the degradation and artificialization of food matrices rather than with food composition: calorie quality matters more than calorie quantity. Eur J Nutr 2022;62:2239-53.
2. Fardet A, Rock E. How to protect both health and food system sustainability? A holistic ‘global health’-based approach via the 3V rule proposal. Public Health Nutr 2020;23:3028-44
3. Fardet A, Rock E. Reductionist nutrition research has meaning only within the framework of holistic thinking. Advances in Nutrition 2018;9:655–70.
Opportunities :
- Awareness and the current environmental emergency can make political decision-makers more open and receptive to the voice of scientists.
- Research and development of less destructuring technological processes for food: how to preserve minimally processed foods for a long time without ultra-processing them for more sustainable food systems?
- Relocation of food processing.
Barriers
In ideal situation, cohesive agrifoods systems policy requires articulated knowledge evidence for a secured practice; at the same time knowledge-based agrifoods systems require strong policy backup for smoother operation hence the need of an official platform to abridge the knowledge-policy information synergy. A structured synergy comprising knowledge holders, agrifood systems actors and policy instruments sufficed to operationalize interests and responsibilities in the abridged synergy model. In developing nations however, there are barriers for this ideal situation to materialize:
Disorganized market system. Market provides basis for quick introduction and absorbtion of new knowledge and for adoption of new technology in order to meet business obligations. This implies that best practice knowledge-driven agrifood mechanisms hold significant promise from the bottom-up to vividly inform policy.
Lack of technical and management skills. Upstream system operators (smallholder farm producers) in their position as focal point community targeted by policy are unable to initiate demand of policy that will take good care of their interest particularly when they are aware of useful knowledge that which requires coast clearing policy. Typical issue here is the menacing activities of middlemen monopoly in Nigeria where the farmers (primary losers) cannot organize advocacy moves for collaboration with the knowledge holders in the bid to inform the policy.
Very slow digitalization process (in developing countries). This barrier is responsible for the existing huge gap between knowledge holders and the policy due to absence of many infrastructures (products and services) for real time consultation, harmonization and synergy.
Eroded public extension service. Virtual research and extension communication has a means of collecting feedback from the extension service beneficiary farming communities as evidence-based knowledge to leverage agrifood systems policy. In the absence of this vital information flow the policy is unable to sufficiently adjudge the needs of the communities. Aggravating this situation is the absence of alternative decentralized commercial extension service that would have developed commercially organized information delivery on demand by policy.
I think.
Mr. Julio Prudencio
1. Análisis de las complejidades y los problemas prácticos asociados a las interfaces científico-normativas
Conozco la aplicación de las Políticas de sistemas alimentarios ya que recientemente elaboré 3 Estrategias de Desarrollo Agroalimentario en mi país. Una Estrategia a nivel nacional y 2 a nivel regional (las cuales pueden ser consultadas en https://Julioprudencio.com); y estoy muy consciente de aportar con datos objetivos y conocimientos científicos a las Políticas Públicas (PP).
Las actuales autoridades gubernamentales priorizan datos referidos al mercado externo (el acceso a los mercados de exportación, los precios internacionales, los productos más demandados) para la obtención del máximo de recursos financieros fomentando solamente un modelo de fomento a las exportaciones. Y eso es precisamente una debilidad muy grande ya que las PP no están priorizando la fortificación interna de alimentos, la diversidad productiva, el procesamiento de los productos…. Por lograr mayores recursos financieros, están sacrificando los recursos naturales.
La oportunidad a la que me he enfrentado es conocer la serie de saberes y conocimientos que tienen los Pueblos Indígenas en términos de la producción y la diversificación productiva, de la conservación de sus recursos, de la transformación.
Los desafíos son lograr mayor apoyo de las PP expresado en proyectos, en recursos financieros; en capacitación, conservación y ampliación de las fortalezas productivas que posee el país.
2. Producción de conocimiento para las políticas
- Las acciones que realizo para alinear mis investigaciones con los problemas y retos son tratar de difundir lo más ampliamente posible los resultados de las investigaciones, ya sea a través de la web como a través de artículos de prensa, libros…y también a través de clases académicas a los estudiantes universitarios. También realizo esfuerzos especiales para que lleguen los resultados de las investigaciones a directores de las empresas gubernamentales, de las organizaciones/instituciones de cooperación externa, ONGs, etc.
- Las preguntas de las investigaciones están enmarcadas sobre todo por el conocimiento científico, académico, ejercitado hace años a través de diversas investigaciones y evaluaciones de proyectos realizadas anteriormente.
- Las comunidades de investigación se ven reflejadas en el diagnóstico de situación que describe muy bien sus necesidades, carencias y problemas. De ellas mismas salen las propuestas de solución a esos problemas, propuestas que hay que perfeccionarlas y adecuarlas al contexto. Estas comunidades (campesinos y Pueblos Indígenas) tienen una serie de retos a los que se enfrentan sus sistemas alimentarios. Por un lado, sufren un abandono del Estado y escaso apoyo económico y técnico. Por otro lado, tienen una fuerte presión de intereses económicos externos expresados en el acaparamiento de tierras/territorios, o en la introducción de transgénicos, lo que llega a crear una división al interior de las comunidades (pueblos indígenas, campesinos).
- Yo trabajo en investigación socioeconómica y también evaluando proyectos de desarrollo de diversas instituciones/gobiernos municipales/cooperación internacional en diferentes regiones de mi país y también de otros países (sobre todo de la región andina de Sud América y también del Caribe) en temas de pobreza, seguridad alimentaria nutricional, cambio climático, genero, sistemas alimentarios…… lo que me da la oportunidad de compartir conocimientos y experiencias con diversos tipos de profesionales (sociólogos, antropólogos, agrónomos), técnicos, profesores de escuelas, nutricionistas, sobre todo a través del trabajo de campo (con metodologías de encuestas, estudios de caso, entrevistas, trabajos grupales, etc) con campesinos, pueblos indígenas, dirigentes de organizaciones y otros que me permiten recoger información directa y actualizada.
- Las investigaciones son realizadas por un equipo de profesionales que dirijo, de diversas especialidades y experiencias, siendo apoyados también por gente del lugar (enfermeras, profesores, dirigentes, estudiantes, a los que capacitamos para lograr un apoyo en el campo y mayor conocimiento).
3. Traslación de conocimientos para la elaboración de políticas
Es muy escaso el apoyo recibido para la realización de investigaciones ya que actualmente en mi país no se valora la investigación científica. Es muy difícil lograr un financiamiento para realizar investigaciones basadas en trabajo de campo.
Solo hay un apoyo limitado cuando se evalúan (como consultor) los proyectos de desarrollo específicos de las instituciones. En estos casos, se obtiene información que posteriormente es cruzada con otras variables, profundizando así otras temáticas vinculadas al proyecto evaluado, resultando en una nueva investigación específica. Bajo estas condiciones, se invierte mucho tiempo no compensado financieramente, en las investigaciones resultantes.
4. Evaluación de los datos objetivos
- Los datos son creíbles porque están respaldados por el trabajo de campo, por la realidad actual mostrada adecuadamente a través de encuestas y entrevistas realizadas bajo un modelo estadístico representativo. Otro respaldo importante es que las organizaciones sociales y organizaciones de productores - como también las autoridades comunales y municipales - ven reflejadas su situación y apoyan decididamente las investigaciones, a través de sus declaraciones, de sus publicaciones.
- La mejor manera de comunicar las evaluaciones es a través de seminarios/talleres presenciales donde se validan los resultados, y se da la oportunidad de rebatir lo expuesto, reafirmar y profundizar lo hallado. También hay que difundir, dependiendo del público al que se quiere llegar, mediante la prensa (con resúmenes), en cuadernillos, en la biblioteca virtual que he creado sobre seguridad alimentaria nutricional (https://Julioprudencio.com), por whatsapp; Linkedin y también incorporar en el pensum (contenido) de las materias a dar a los estudiantes universitarios.
5. Ejemplos
i) Durante años hemos investigado los diferentes programas de donaciones de alimentos en Bolivia (de la PL 480; de la PAC de la UE y de otras fuentes) y su impacto en la economía, en la producción interna, en el consumo y dieta alimentaria, en los precios, en las organizaciones de mujeres receptoras, en la dependencia que generan, y en otras variables. Luego, hemos realizado una serie de talleres de análisis y discusión a diferentes niveles (con académicos; con autoridades gubernamentales (como Ministros de Desarrollo Agropecuario, de Planificación, etc); con mujeres receptoras de alimentos donados; autoridades municipales, y otros) demostrando estadísticamente y con series históricas, el nivel de dependencia creado por las donaciones alimentarias y su impacto negativo en los precios internos, en la producción y en la superficie cultivada de los principales alimentos (trigo por ejemplo); en el cambio de los hábitos alimentarios y otros
Acompañaron a estos eventos, una serie de publicaciones como libros, cuadernillos, cuadernos populares, programas radiales y otros a nivel regional y nacional.
Posteriormente, fui contratado como asesor de la Cámara de Diputados y de Senadores para elaborar el Anteproyecto de Ley que después fue promulgado como Ley. Desde esa vez, se han suspendido las donaciones de alimentos (ahora se permiten sólo en caso de emergencias, y tienen que ser de procedencia nacional).
(La serie de libros publicado sobre el tema, así como los cuadernos populares, artículos en revistas internacionales, en la prensa, los programas radiales y otros sobre el tema de las donaciones alimentarias, están disponibles en https://Julioprudencio.com).
ii) En el año 2013, por mi conocimiento sobre la temática (por las investigaciones sobre la realidad agroalimentaria nacional, por mi acompañamiento a las evaluaciones internacionales sobre la implementación del Derecho Humano a la Alimentación en Bolivia, entre otros) y sobre todo por mi insistencia, en el fomento a la producción interna y consumo de alimentos de procedencia nacional, la FAO me contrato para la elaboración del Anteproyecto de Ley relativo al Programa Nacional de Alimentación Complementaria Escolar, habiendo desarrollado una sistematización de los diversos estudios (desayunos, meriendas y almuerzos escolares, productos procesados con refuerzo nutricional, y otros) así como un largo trabajo de consenso con diferentes organizaciones de productores, asociaciones de madres de familia de escolares, diversos profesores rurales y urbanos, autoridades escolares y otros. Posteriormente trabajé con diferentes autoridades del Ministerio de Educación, lo que dio origen al Ante Proyecto de alimentación escolar, el cual posteriormente fue promulgado por el Congreso Nacional como ley 622 en el año 2014.
iii) Previo a la aprobación de la Nueva Constitución Política del Estado del año 2009, he desarrollado tanto de forma personal como junto a otras instituciones(AIPE, Fundación Tierra y otras) una intensa campaña de reflexión, análisis y debate (con artículos, publicaciones, talleres) sobre diversos temas referidos al fomento a la producción nacional, a la protección del aparato productivo interno, a la diversificación productiva, a la participación de las organizaciones en las decisiones y construcción de políticas públicas referidas a la alimentación sana, entre otras1.
En esta incidencia política, influyó mucho el hecho de que yo haya asistido regularmente a la conformación de las Directrices Voluntarias del Derecho Humano a la Alimentación (como componente de la red FIAN International) mediante una serie de reuniones de trabajo realizadas en varias oportunidades en Roma /FAO y también en el Ministerio de Cooperación y Economía de Alemania (Berlín).
En la CPE se logró la aprobación de una serie de artículos referidos al tema alimentario (como el derecho humano a la alimentación y al agua; la obligación del Estado de garantizar la seguridad alimentaria mediante alimentos sanos, adecuados y suficientes para toda la población; la promoción del consumo interno de productos hechos en Bolivia; la conservación y protección del Medio Ambiente y de los recursos naturales junto al fomento a la biodiversidad; y también diversos derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas (tierras, territorios) entre otros2.
Note:
1) Inclusive he organizado un seminario internacional sobre la alimentación en el nuevo contexto de la CPE de Bolivia.
2) No habiendo logrado la prohibición de producir productos transgénicos como la soya, ya que ese tema se impuso en la CPE en el último tramo de la elaboración, de forma no clara ni publicada, respondiendo más bien a una serie de intereses político económicos en perjuicio del sistema alimentario boliviano.
Truly,Integration of science and evidence into effective agrifood system decision-making processes remains a significant challenge. For example, Natural Farming is currently being promoted in a big way in India. The conventional researchers are busy doing research in chemical soil health & fertility boosters, plant protectants including developing resistence, while decision makers want large scale adoption of natural farming accepting it as one effective measure to tackle many issues concerning soil & plant health affected by chemicals. The researchers by and large due to their qualifications & training may not be comfortable with idea of natural farming but decisions flowing from top decision making bodies.The Government has re-adopted the Indian Natural Farming System for Agriculture, since Natural Farming System is an ancient technique used by farmers for farming and at that time people also knew how to live in harmony with the nature. India is one of the leading producer of organic products & exports, with number one position in the world in terms of the number of producers, since organic production, standards, guidelines and bioinputs are available so comparatively it is easier for farmers to adopt it. The organic farming got a boost in India primarily due to growing demand for organic products in importaining countries in EU & other developed countries. In case of natural farming, the standards, guidelines, certification mechanism will have to be developed so that small scale farmers are able to benefit from natural farming. Several Indian states are working on promoting natural farming. Hope the field trials on natural farming, if taken up, may generate evidence that it is a practical and proven way of sustainable farming-good for farmers, consumers & environment on the whole!
As per the recent statement from the government, during the last year, an additional area of 4.78 lakh hectares has been brought under natural farming in 17 States. To promote natural farming, the Indian government has approved the National Mission on Natural Farming as a separate scheme with an expenditure of INR 1,584 crores. The Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) and all Krishi Vigyan Kendras (KVKs), Central and State Agricultural Universities and Colleges are making all-round efforts to promote natural farming. May be this decision of the Indian government to promote natural farming helps in long run towards improving health of soils, plants, animals & human including safer environment which is getting polluted due to use of agrochemicals.
My experience in working with small scale producers tells me that scientists struggle no learn from and communicate with non-scientists, even in an area as universal as food and ag. This is true in many instances, and COVID taught us that all too well. But more specifically, beyond the science, key stakeholders in the local food system are driven by many factors. The local food movement in the US for example, resulted from consumers wanting to "know the person producing their food". Also, conversations around innovations such as GMOs and CRISPR technologies tend to be high level and ill-designed for the average consumer to understand. People become skeptical about scientists and what we do in the "lab", and how this impacts our global food supply.
I have benefited a lot from hanging my lab coat and investing time in trying to understand the undercurrents that are propelling the growing consumer desire for local, sustainably produced food. I spend time learning from farmers and cottage food producers (manufactures using home kitchens to prepare food for direct consumer sales). Many of them feel that we in the academy don't listen to them and are more interested in furthering the publish or perish agenda, than we are about helping then effectively and safely produce food.
I also get the sense that we in the academy do not get proper training in working with community partners and government agencies, beyond seeking for funding and reporting research progress. This is an important skill set, and it takes humility to enter into spaces as learners rather than the experts. For academicians and regulatory staff to benefit from community knowledge, we MUST be willing to change the way we've always doen things. We have to be willing to make the time and invest the resources necessary to be invited into the spaces where food systems are discussed in practice, rather than designing studies that require food procuers to come to us in our offices.
Policies and knowledge are factors as much more important as the food systems itself.
Invariably, the policies, strategy and guideline for scientific and knowledge management of the food systems required continuous improvement and knowledgeable dissemination in order to eradicate ignorance.
Additionally, eradication of ignorance is of equal measure and importance as eradicating hunger and poverty. Hence the inter-connectedness of Food Systems and Knowledge Systems takes center stage towards advancing science, policies and evidence generation for maximal impact
I see that the very discussion question stated above excellent and timely. However, in my view the discussion question is not some continents and countries of the world. Thus, I recommend to question to be continent or country or development status specific. Then it will be easy involve in the discussion and forward comments suggestions, ideas etc. on the topic of discussion, please.
Government departments are responsible for policy formulation. While they try to hold consultations, these are rarely sufficiently broad and inclusive. They tend to focus on same traditional and friendly partners. Such rigid approach does not augur well for innovative thinking and inclusion of scientists. Governments should consider mandatory tripartite team composition on all projects. In the same way, academic/research institutions should consider the same requirement. In other words, funding should only be available to teams whose composition include representatives from the public, private and research sectors. In this way, the government departments have the benefit of other stakeholders through the policy development process.
One may also encourage the cooperative extension system approach applied in the US. Not only does it bring the public sector and researchers closer, it also places them within the practice community.
This activity is now closed. Please contact [email protected] for any further information.