Generating and communicating science information to support policy and decision-making in forestry
-
Upload
robert-nasi -
Category
Technology
-
view
68 -
download
0
Transcript of Generating and communicating science information to support policy and decision-making in forestry
Generating and communicating science information to support policy and
decision-making in forestry
‘The whole life of policy is a chaos of purposes and accidents. It is not at all a matter of the rational implementation of the so-called decisions through selected strategies.’
Clay and Schaffer (1984).
The policy change process
‘Constraints to successful management of sustainable forest management over the years largely relate to the adoption of recommendations - not the generation of ‘best practice’. Dawkins & Phillip (1998).
The gap between knowledge and
practice
Who needs to know?
Policy knowledge . . . is not effective if retained in the hands of the producer.
Policy makers . . . do not generally go about seeking knowledge to assist them in understanding every decision they must make.
Policy knowledge . . . must be expressed, communicated, channeled, explained or otherwise distributed to policymakers if it is to affect policy decisions' (Webber 1991).
Research for change…
Uptake / Adoption Curves
Early Adopters Laggards
Time
Numberofusers
Research shows that when 10 to 25% of a target ‘population’ has adopted an innovation, the whole process becomes self-sustaining.
ONLY THEN DO ‘GOOD PRODUCTS SELL THEMSELVES’
Early Majority
Late Majority
Cumulative
FrequencyPioneers
The Impact Pathway model
Inputs (e.g. finance, staff, equipment,
systems, etc…)
SRF4 system-level
outcomes
Impacts(e.g. reduced deforestation
and degradation)Outcomes(e.g. forests and tree resources are better
managed)
Outputs(e.g. publication, training,
databases)
In fact it is probably more like this…
From http://boru.pbworks.com/w/page/13774906/Learning-Selection-Change-Model
KASA: knowledge, attitudes, skills, aspirations
From Outputs to Impacts
The bushmeat issue
Liaison group on NTFP
Keynote to CBD (2001)
Support from African Parties
Scientific work: PhDs, review, papers, etc.(2002-2008)
Bushmeat CBD priority at COP 9
(2008)
Liaison group on bushmeat
(2009)
Recommendation to SBSTTA (2010)
COP 10 Decision (2010)
Scientific work with actors(2009-2011)
Tools, guidelines(2012, OT) Policy changes
(2011-2012)
Improved, more sustainable practices (2012-)
Impact Pathway
Impact Pathway: inputs to outputs
Inputs: CRP65 components15 research themes+ Gender, Capacity building,Sentinel landscapes
SRF4 system-level
outcomes
Impacts(e.g. reduced deforestation
and degradation)
Outcomes(e.g. forests and tree resources are better
managed)
Outputs(e.g. publication, training,
databases)
Original research and capacity building with
research partners
THINKING beyond the canopy
Research outputs
Overall, the production of science outputs is not a major issue
but Publication results can
be improved in terms of quality and quantity
Other types of outputs (e.g. capacity building, gender) are not yet adequately considered and/or recorded
THINKING beyond the canopy
Research outputs: New (?) Thinking
Original scientific pieces in reputable journals with good research partners
Syntheses pieces channeled through “big” players (e.g. WB)
Communication strategy in place before publishing• “Derived” products for non-
science users (policy briefs, blogs, etc.)
New incentive structures for rewarding outputs
1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 491
10
100
1000
10000
Stern Lomborg Tilman
Num
ber o
f cita
tions
H factor:D. Tilman 51N. Stern 19B. Lomborg 09
Impact Pathway: outputs to outcomes
Inputs: CRP65 components15 research themes+ Gender, Capacity building,Sentinel landscapes
SRF4 system-level
outcomes
Impacts(e.g. reduced deforestation
and degradation)
Outcomes(e.g. forests and tree resources are better
managed)
Outputs(e.g. publication, training,
databases)
Original research with partners
Synthesis research and outreach
THINKING beyond the canopy
Outputs to outcomes
We are generally able to claim a few significant outcomes per year
but This is a painful exercise Few of these outcomes
are real IPGs Supporting evidence is
somewhat scant and/or attribution disputable
Why?• Improper project design
• Passive expectations of outcomes
• Inappropriate communication or outreach
• Lag time between outputs and adoption
• Change in donor or societal interests
• “It simply didn’t work…”
THINKING beyond the canopy
Outputs to outcomes: “Forcing” Opportunities
Project for change Write for “impact” Do not over-commit Plan M&E properly “Force” recognition Work with the right
partners (research partners for research; development partners for outcomes…)
Use PIPA methods (http://boru.pbworks.com/w/page/13774889/Background)
Improved certification schemes- FSC, UNEP, CIFOR; GEF funded- Brazil, Mexico, Cameroon- Preparation phase 2002-2004
- Several stakeholder workshops- Agreement on what needs to change (e.g. SLIMF certification
standards)- Selection of right partners (CIFOR: backstopping research;
FSC-IC: develop approve standards; country partners and certification bodies: develop and test new standards)
- Implementation 2005-2009 - Production of several outputs- Database for monitoring aspects of HCVF and biodiversity in
FSC certified forests- FSC step-by-step guide - Good practice guide to meeting FSC
certification requirements for biodiversity and HCV Forests in SLIMF
- Guide to markets for forest products and services for smallholders
- FSC guide to certification for smallholders- National SLIMF standards for Mexico, Brazil and Cameroon
- Outcome 2010: endorsement of the new SLIMFs standards for the 3 countries by FSC
Impact Pathway: outcomes to impacts
Inputs: CRP65 components15 research themes+ Gender, Capacity building,Sentinel landscapes
SRF4 system-level
outcomes
Impacts(e.g. reduced deforestation
and degradation)
Outcomes(e.g. forests and tree resources are better
managed)
Outputs(e.g. publication, training,
databases)
Original research with partners
Synthesis research and outreach
???
THINKING beyond the canopy
Outcomes to impacts: ouch!
Quantification of impact is difficult; all the more for policy research
Attribution is generally multiple and non documented
Causality links between outcomes and impacts are weak or unclear
Lack of proper methods to assess NRM and policy research impacts
“The evidence of impacts of CGIAR research on new or improved management practices and on natural resource management is insignificant.”(Science Council, 2006)
THINKING beyond the canopy
Outcomes to impacts: Some Hints
Specific research linking outcomes to impacts• Systematic reviews
• Long-term monitoring experiments (Sentinel Landscapes)
New monitoring & evaluation methods
Impact evaluation as integral part of project design
Outcomes as impacts on a different scale
Carefully disaggregate impact:• Via adoption of specific
outputs by farmers
• Via institutional innovation or policy-influence
Increase our capacity in research about impact of research
How to foster adoption and
implementation of good
research based practices and
policies?
Outreach and uptake efforts that have little or no effect
Educational materials (distribution of recommendations for changed practice; including practical guidelines, audiovisual materials, and electronic publications) Didactic educational meetings (lectures like this one!!)
Pile of 855 guidelines in general practices in the Cambridge and Huntingdon Health Authority : “The mass of paper we collected
represents a large amount of information, but it is in an unmanageable
form that does little to aid decision making”
Interventions of variable effectiveness
Audit and feedback (or any summary of performance)
The use of local opinion leaders (practitioners identified by their colleagues as influential)
Local consensus processes (inclusion of participating practitioners in discussions - problem focus & appropriateness of solutions)
UNFF 4, Brazzaville 2004
Consistently effective outreach efforts.
Educational outreach ‘visits’ ‘Social’ media (blogs, twitter, facebook, website). Repeated reminders (manual or computerized). Multifaceted interventions a combination that
includes two or more of the following: ‘audit’ and feedback, reminders, local consensus processes, or marketing).
Interactive educational meetings (participation of intended users in workshops that include discussion or practice).
Publications and impact?
Publications
Number of downloads /yr
Publications
Title Download(2005 - 2011)
Realising REDD+: national strategy and policy options 46,793Hutan pasca pemanenan: melindungi satwa liar dalam kegiatan hutan produksi di Kalimantan
38,947
Moving ahead with REDD: issues, options and implications 29,252Dari desa ke desa: dinamika gender dan pengelolaan kekayaan alam 28,974Belajar dari Bungo: mengelola sumberdaya alam di era desentralisasi 22,992Payments for environmental services: some nuts and bolts 22,350Plantulas de 60 especies forestales de Bolivia: guia Ilustrada 22,035Panduan singkat cara pembuatan arang kayu: alternatif pemanfaatan limbah kayu oleh masyarakat
21,875
Atlas industri mebel kayu di Jepara, Indonesia 20,014Partisipasi masyarakat dalam pembuatan kebijakan daerah di kabupaten Tanjung Jabung Barat, Jambi: ketidakpastian, tantangan, dan harapan
19,712
Menuju kesejahteraan dalam masyarakat hutan: buku panduan untuk pemerintah daerah
19,160
Riquezas da floresta: frutas, plantas medicinais e artesanato na América Latina
18,623
Impact on scientific publication
1st 2008
2nd 2008
3rd 2008
4th 2008
1st 2009
2nd 2009
3rd 2009
4th 2009
1st 2010
2nd 2010
3rd 2010
4th 2010
1st 2011
2nd 2011
3rd 2011
0
500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
4,000,000
754,017
3,374,799
Page views
Quarter
Launch of new CIFOR website
Social Media
New Blog
Web-based outreach
Journalist workshops
• 2011: 2 media workshops in Indonesia trained 37 journalists (Bali & Central Kalimantan)
• 2012: 3 media workshops in Vietnam training 40 journalists + 12 editors – Workshops planned in Peru and Papua
Conclusions• Passive dissemination of information is generally
ineffective• Best practice for dissemination and promoting
effective diffusion is well known but seldom implemented by research institutions
• Applied and strategic research institutions must reward success in uptake / adoption not just count publications
• Further empirical studies on the relative effectiveness and efficiency of different dissemination and uptake strategies is required – build this into the research process
THINKING beyond the canopy
www.cifor.org/crp6www.cifor.org/crp6