|
|||||||||
| |
|||||||||
Science and Technology Response from Jock Campbell, IMM Ltd To place this response in context, IMM is a private sector research and development group based at Exeter University Campus. We have been involved in implementing DFID-funded research projects for many years and I was for a time a programme manager under RNRRS. This topic is key to the success of many of the areas in the other topics under discussion in this electronic forum. The questions raised are complex and far reaching but I will have a stab at some of them. Unless development is evidence-based, and much of it is not, its chances = of success are greatly reduced. DFID has a very strong comparative advantage in that its policy direction and advice is driven by its experience at the grassroots level. Maintaining this micro-macro linkage is, in my opinion, essential if DFID's policy role is to remain informed and relevant. As regards the source of AST knowledge I feel that a diversity of sources is necessary to address a range of development needs. Very specific issues that DFID needs to address around particular policy concerns may need to be sourced through direct commissioning of research through mechanisms such as the RNRRS programmes. Wider sub-regional and regional research initiatives may need to operate through sub-regional/regional research agencies but competition in the delivery of such research outputs needs to be in place if research quality is to be maintained. Greater use can also be made of national research capacity especially where capacity building is included. DFID's research commissioning project in Bangladesh (Support for Universities Fisheries Education and Research), whilst slow to start, has improved the capacity, awareness and willingness of national research institutions to collaborate with each other, incorporate livelihoods issues into technical research areas, to think strategically about their research outputs and place the poor at the centre of what they do. As to the role of the private sector in knowledge generation, much of the AST knowledge is currently generated by private sector agencies which are often more flexible, adaptive and willing to be innovative than larger academic/international research institutes. Again there would seem to be a need for a diversity of knowledge generators. As regards integrating research into mainstream programmes, the first hurdle would seem to be increasing the value of research outputs to the development process. From our experience in knowledge generation and uptake a key element is getting the knowledge to the right people in the right format. Outputs often need to be packaged in many different ways to change the behaviour of a diversity of stakeholders in development programmes and this requires a commitment to providing sufficient funds for this important part of the research process. Informing and influencing strategies need to be systematic (see the work done by Norrish and co from Reading University) if they are to really influence behaviour change. DFID also has a major role to play as a knowledge broker - taking its vast experience in different parts of the world and translating it into forms that can be much more widely used. Integrating research outputs with in-country development programmes will also necessitate closer linkages between London and country programmes and the ability of country offices to commission against their own research priorities. In response to the point made by Vinay Chand about the capacity of smaller countries to get involved in research, this is very important and emphasises the need to closely link research with capacity building. We recently worked with government and NGOs in Cambodia to research the impact of government policy reforms on the poor. This required a very substantial re-orientation of attitudes and skills of local institutions to implement but the process has paid considerable dividends in other areas such as general awareness of what poverty means and how to understand it. In addition the Post-Harvest Fisheries Research Programme (one of the RNRRS programmes) has piloted an innovative approach of applying and combining past research outputs (including tools and approaches) to Cambodia where the complementary effects of applying a range of research outputs is significantly changing government attitudes and practices. The combining of enough research tools/methods into a critical mass has been sufficient to generate support by the government for capacity building to take up and use the outputs. In Ghana we have been working with the government to understand the fisheries post-harvest sector so that priorities identified by the poor can feed back into the PRSP. Budgetary support was available to do this already but it was not achieved because there was insufficient capacity to fully understand the sector or to develop participatory tools to understand the livelihoods of the poor. Through DFID-funded research the government has gained the capacity and the tools, but above all now has the evidence to prove the importance of the sector to the livelihoods of the poor. It is now likely that the sector will get into the PRSP and that budgetary support will be available to respond to some of the issues identified. Hence budgetary support and targeted research go hand-in-hand. On the wider topic of research design a key point must be the role that the poor play in the research process. There is a tendency for participation, where it does occur, to be extractive with the poor having little really meaningful role in the various stages of the research process (from research prioritisation, through design and implementation, to analysis and presentation). Research should ideally involve the poor much more, this is imperative from a rights and governance perspective as well as from the perspective of improving the relevance of research outputs. Jock Campbell IMM Ltd Website: http://www.ex.ac.uk/imm/ The Innovation Centre, Rennes Drive, University of Exeter Campus, Exeter, EX4 4RN, UK Tel: +44 1392 434143 UK Mobile: 07770 940 122 Email: <address removed> ============================================================= To send a reply to this message that goes to all list members, make sure that you send your reply to <address removed> To unsubscribe from this list, send an email to "<address removed>", with the message body: unsubscribe science-and-technology <your-email-address>
Please visit dfid-agriculture-consultation.nri.org.