The Experts below are selected from a list of 261 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Bruce M. Campbell - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Learning from failure at the Science–Policy interface for climate action in agriculture
Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 2021Co-Authors: Dhanush Dinesh, Dries Hegger, Joost Vervoort, Bruce M. Campbell, Peter P. J. DriessenAbstract:Science–Policy engagement efforts to accelerate climate action in agricultural systems are key to enable the sector to contribute to climate and food security goals. However, lessons to improve Science–Policy engagement efforts in this context mostly come from successful efforts and are limited in terms of empirical scope. Moreover, lessons have not been generated systematically from failed Science–Policy engagement efforts. Such analysis using lessons from failure management can improve or even transform the efficacy of efforts. To address this knowledge gap, we examined challenges and failures faced in Science–Policy engagement efforts of the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS). We developed an explanatory framework inspired by Cash et al.’s criteria for successful knowledge systems for sustainable development: credibility, salience, and legitimacy, complemented with insights from the wider literature. Using this framework in a survey, we identified factors which explain failure. To effectively manage these factors, we propose a novel approach for researchers working at the Science–Policy interface to fail intelligently, which involves planning for failure, minimizing risks, effective design, making failures visible, and learning from failures. This approach needs to be complemented by actions at the knowledge system level to create an enabling environment for Science–Policy interfaces.
-
Science Policy interfaces for sustainable climate smart agriculture uptake lessons learnt from national Science Policy dialogue platforms in west africa
International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 2019Co-Authors: Robert B Zougmore, Samuel T. Partey, Mathieu Ouédraogo, Philip K. Thornton, Edmond Totin, N Karbo, Bougouna Sogoba, Bounama Dieye, Bruce M. CampbellAbstract:Connecting Science with Policy has always been challenging for both scientists and Policymakers. In Ghana, Mali and Senegal, multi-stakeholder national Science-Policy dialogue platforms on climate-...
Oksana Udovyk - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Models of Science–Policy interaction: Exploring approaches to Bisphenol A management in the EU
Science of The Total Environment, 2014Co-Authors: Oksana UdovykAbstract:This study investigated Science-Policy interaction models and their limitations under conditions of uncertainty. In detail, it looked at the management of the suspected endocrine-disrupting chemical Bisphenol A (BPA). Despite growing evidence that BPA is hazardous to human and environmental health, the level of scientific uncertainty is still high and, as a result, there is significant disagreement on the actual extent and type of risk. Analysis of decision-making processes at different regulatory levels (EU, Sweden, and the Swedish municipality of Gothenburg) exposed chemicals risk management and associated Science-Policy interaction under uncertainty. The results of the study show that chemicals management and associated Science-Policy interaction follow the modern model of Science-Policy interaction, where Science is assumed to 'speak truth to Policy' and highlights existing limitations of this model under conditions of uncertainty. The study not only explores alternative models (precautionary, consensus, Science-Policy demarcation. and extended participation) but also shows their limitations. The study concludes that all models come with their particular underlying assumptions, strengths, and limitations. At the same time, by exposing serious limitations of the modern model, the study calls for a rethinking of the relationship between Science, Policy, and management.
-
Models of Science-Policy interaction: exploring approaches to Bisphenol A management in the EU.
The Science of the total environment, 2014Co-Authors: Oksana UdovykAbstract:This study investigated Science-Policy interaction models and their limitations under conditions of uncertainty. In detail, it looked at the management of the suspected endocrine-disrupting chemical Bisphenol A (BPA). Despite growing evidence that BPA is hazardous to human and environmental health, the level of scientific uncertainty is still high and, as a result, there is significant disagreement on the actual extent and type of risk. Analysis of decision-making processes at different regulatory levels (EU, Sweden, and the Swedish municipality of Gothenburg) exposed chemicals risk management and associated Science-Policy interaction under uncertainty. The results of the study show that chemicals management and associated Science-Policy interaction follow the modern model of Science-Policy interaction, where Science is assumed to 'speak truth to Policy' and highlights existing limitations of this model under conditions of uncertainty. The study not only explores alternative models (precautionary, consensus, Science-Policy demarcation. and extended participation) but also shows their limitations. The study concludes that all models come with their particular underlying assumptions, strengths, and limitations. At the same time, by exposing serious limitations of the modern model, the study calls for a rethinking of the relationship between Science, Policy, and management.
Naho Mirumachi - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Science–Policy processes for transboundary water governance
Ambio, 2015Co-Authors: Derek Armitage, Michelle Morris, Thomas W D Edwards, Andrea K Gerlak, Roland I Hall, Dave Huitema, Ray Ison, David Livingstone, Glen Macdonald, Naho MirumachiAbstract:In this Policy perspective, we outline several conditions to support effective Science–Policy interaction, with a particular emphasis on improving water governance in transboundary basins. Key conditions include (1) recognizing that Science is a crucial but bounded input into water resource decision-making processes; (2) establishing conditions for collaboration and shared commitment among actors; (3) understanding that social or group-learning processes linked to Science–Policy interaction are enhanced through greater collaboration; (4) accepting that the collaborative production of knowledge about hydrological issues and associated socioeconomic change and institutional responses is essential to build legitimate decision-making processes; and (5) engaging boundary organizations and informal networks of scientists, Policy makers, and civil society. We elaborate on these conditions with a diverse set of international examples drawn from a synthesis of our collective experiences in assessing the opportunities and constraints (including the role of power relations) related to governance for water in transboundary settings.
Derek Armitage - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Science–Policy processes for transboundary water governance
Ambio, 2015Co-Authors: Derek Armitage, Michelle Morris, Thomas W D Edwards, Andrea K Gerlak, Roland I Hall, Dave Huitema, Ray Ison, David Livingstone, Glen Macdonald, Naho MirumachiAbstract:In this Policy perspective, we outline several conditions to support effective Science–Policy interaction, with a particular emphasis on improving water governance in transboundary basins. Key conditions include (1) recognizing that Science is a crucial but bounded input into water resource decision-making processes; (2) establishing conditions for collaboration and shared commitment among actors; (3) understanding that social or group-learning processes linked to Science–Policy interaction are enhanced through greater collaboration; (4) accepting that the collaborative production of knowledge about hydrological issues and associated socioeconomic change and institutional responses is essential to build legitimate decision-making processes; and (5) engaging boundary organizations and informal networks of scientists, Policy makers, and civil society. We elaborate on these conditions with a diverse set of international examples drawn from a synthesis of our collective experiences in assessing the opportunities and constraints (including the role of power relations) related to governance for water in transboundary settings.
-
Science Policy processes for transboundary water governance
AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment, 2015Co-Authors: Derek Armitage, Michelle Morris, Thomas W D Edwards, Andrea K Gerlak, Roland I Hall, Dave Huitema, Ray Ison, David LivingstoneAbstract:In this Policy perspective, we outline several conditions to support effective Science–Policy interaction, with a particular emphasis on improving water governance in transboundary basins. Key conditions include (1) recognizing that Science is a crucial but bounded input into water resource decision-making processes; (2) establishing conditions for collaboration and shared commitment among actors; (3) understanding that social or group-learning processes linked to Science–Policy interaction are enhanced through greater collaboration; (4) accepting that the collaborative production of knowledge about hydrological issues and associated socioeconomic change and institutional responses is essential to build legitimate decision-making processes; and (5) engaging boundary organizations and informal networks of scientists, Policy makers, and civil society. We elaborate on these conditions with a diverse set of international examples drawn from a synthesis of our collective experiences in assessing the opportunities and constraints (including the role of power relations) related to governance for water in transboundary settings.
Bounama Dieye - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Science Policy interfaces for sustainable climate smart agriculture uptake lessons learnt from national Science Policy dialogue platforms in west africa
International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 2019Co-Authors: Robert B Zougmore, Samuel T. Partey, Mathieu Ouédraogo, Philip K. Thornton, Edmond Totin, N Karbo, Bougouna Sogoba, Bounama Dieye, Bruce M. CampbellAbstract:Connecting Science with Policy has always been challenging for both scientists and Policymakers. In Ghana, Mali and Senegal, multi-stakeholder national Science-Policy dialogue platforms on climate-...
-
Science Policy interactions for climate smart agriculture uptake lessons learnt from national Science Policy dialogue platforms in west africa ccafs working paper no 265
2019Co-Authors: Robert B Zougmore, Samuel T. Partey, Mathieu Ouédraogo, Philip K. Thornton, Edmond Totin, N Karbo, Bougouna Sogoba, Bounama DieyeAbstract:Science–Policy interfaces are critical in shaping agricultural and environmental governance. However, connecting Science with Policy has always been a challenge for both scientists and Policymakers. In Ghana, Mali and Senegal, the CGIAR Research Program on Climate Change, Agriculture and Food Security (CCAFS) supported the creation of a multi-stakeholder national Science-Policy dialogue platforms on climate-smart agriculture (NSPDP-CSA) to use scientific evidence to create awareness on climate change impacts on agriculture and advocate for the mainstreaming of climate change and climate-smart agriculture (CSA) into agricultural development plans. Since their establishment, there is limited information as to how the modes of operation and achievements of the NSPDP-CSA improve our understanding of the SciencePolicy interfaces of agricultural and climate change decision making. This study aimed to use the evidence from the operations and achievements of the NSPDP-CSA to make recommendations for effective Science-Policy interaction on climate change and CSA. We used semi-structured questionnaire interviews and review of technical reports produced by the platforms to obtaining the information aforementioned. The results showed that using NSPDPCSA may be an innovative approach to effectively engaging Policymakers/decision-makers for climate change and CSA mainstreaming into agricultural development policies and plans in Ghana, Mali and Senegal. For effective Science-Policy interaction, the study suggests the following recommendations: (a) Institutionalising the NSPDP-CSA through embedding them within national institutions improves their credibility, relevance and legitimacy among Policymakers; (b) two-way communication may have a phenomenal advantage in the codevelopment of solutions that address climate change vulnerabilities and impacts; and (c) using relevant communication products and packaging CSA and climate change with evidence to align with country priorities will facilitate readily uptake in Policy decision-makings. A framework of operation for the platforms was suggested based on lessons learnt from the 3 countries’ experiences and achievements.
