Political Science? Strengthening Science-Policy Dialogue in Developing Countries

This paper from the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) describes research that systematically examines the science-policy interface in developing countries. The research effort was a response to the challenges of incorporating science, technology, and innovation (ST&I)-related knowledge effectively into policy dialogue in developing countries and a need for more information on that interface. It is a multi-layered analysis combining theoretical and empirical strands, comparing Northern and Southern contexts, and drawing out theoretical insights as well as providing practical recommendations for action. "It focuses on three broad questions: What is the patterning of relationships between scientific researchers, policy decision-makers and intermediaries in developing country contexts? What are the challenges and opportunities for strengthening these linkages? What types of strategies exist or could potentially be adopted to improve evidence-informed policy processes?"

Through responses from 600 researchers, policy-makers, and intermediary organisation communities, and 7 country case studies in Asia, Latin America, and sub-Saharan Africa, the researchers explored: "i) relations between the scientific research and policy communities in each country; ii) the ways in which policy-makers access scientific and technical information; ...iii) examples of success and failure in bridging science and policy; and... iv)... potential means of collaboration for intermediary organisations working at the science and development policy interface."

The following key themes emerged:

1. Interaction and deliberation rather than uni-directional research dissemination is needed to bridge the ST&I researcher-policymaker gap;
   
2. Policy-engaged scientists are critically important; and
   
3. Improving public understanding of ST&I will facilitate better policy dialogues.

The theoretical and the empirical results indicated a strong consensus on the need for intermediaries and boundary organisations to pilot roles they might play to address situations
such as:

• The politicisation of science;
• The differing focus, timescales, and incentives of policy-makers and scientists;
• The differing incentives and priorities among government agencies; and
• The disjuncture between scientists’ concern to identify and highlight elements of risk and uncertainty in research findings when engaging in policy dialogue and the demand for certainty in policy-making.

The science-policy interface in the South was found to differ from Northern contexts in that there is less use of science in politics for policy formation due to less scientific capacity, less concern about policy engagement and scientific objectivity, more tension between indigenous knowledge and Western scientific knowledge, and less concern about "diluting" scientific information in translation to the public - in fact, more interest in promoting it to inform public opinion.

Specific strategies found by the research for strengthening the science-policy interface in developing countries include:

• There is a need for capacity building, institutional reform, and public education in science literacy among policy-makers, scientists, and the general public.
• The deliberation and participation needed for effectively feeding scientific and technological information into policy involves bringing stakeholders together for face-to-face, direct engagement with intermediaries helping to bridge research and policy in these interactions.
• Policy-makers expressed interest in greater access to advice from scientific experts regarding the policy relevance of their findings - a call for greater engagement and applicability of research findings to policy concerns.

In conclusion, the paper states that this dearth of practical policy approaches suggests a role  "for intermediaries to explicitly address the question of mediation and to explore how levels of mutual credibility can be maintained through relevant accountability mechanisms and decision-making procedures."