Science and Policy discordant: Science-Policy Platform is needed in Ethiopia to support decision makers

Kassahun Embaye Senior Researcher, Ethiopian Institute of Agricultural Research Kassahuney@gmail.com

Introduction
The problems and opportunities facing Ethiopia are diverse in type, scale and complexity. They interact in complex webs of relationships to make situations worse or better. The desire and policy objective of the government is clear: security and advancement in all fronts. These require appropriate policies and strategies to direct and guide all inclusive socio-economic growth, equitable sharing of growth benefits, development and sustainability in all aspects – economy, social and environment, in a balanced way. Science is an essential tool in formulation and design of appropriate policies and strategies.



The scientific and development efforts of Ethiopia so far are undeniably noticeable but not enough. They are mostly fragmented and half-done, although they look robust when aggregated at national level, as they are mostly guided by personal perceptions and common senses of scientists and development experts. There is no reason to blame the present policies and strategies. They are all appropriate and good, although there is always room for improvement. The argument is on the process of policy formulation, strategy design, multi-year plan preparation and implementation as well as monitoring and evaluation. There is no a compelling framework that guide them all to start from the big picture (national problems), identify, characterize and prioritize their components by importance, scale, spatial and temporal dimensions, and distribute the responsibilities to address them in an integrated and coordinated manner based on mandates of organizations. The framework should endeavor to establish common objectives and shared responsibilities across sectors and along the different layers of government structures, in a way that promotes alignment, interfacing, complementarity and reinforcement of efforts.

The proposed Science-Policy Platform could be facilitated by Science-Policy Panel, which should be composed of few (about ten) prominent experts from the relevant disciplines, policy makers, implementing agencies, multi-lateral organizations, representatives of NGOs and CBOs. The main task of the Platform would be to review the realities on the ground from previous works, reports and observations, analyses of policies and strategies and implementation performances in order to identify policy and strategy gaps, map out the work required to address them and suggest the appropriate sector that should take the responsibility. The sectors that have shared the responsibilities should then incorporate the activities that must be accomplished into their periodic and annual plan of operations to successfully fulfill the responsibilities they took. This process of support, check and balance, is hoped to bring about dramatic change over time by defining and harmonizing relationships, promoting integrated and coordinated planning and implementation, developing culture of collaboration and cooperation, accountability for actions and inactions and exchange of information based on “common objective and shared responsibility” principle. Duplication would be avoided, efforts would be reinforced and synergy would be created!
Science and Policy relationships: perspective difference and trust deficit.
Science and policy making are two different fields of activity, with their own goals, priorities, quality criteria and rules - and even with their own language. The main difference is the position and value of scientific knowledge in both fields. For researchers the production of a piece of scientific knowledge is -often- the overall aim of their activities – publishing an article in reputable journal for promotion and vanity. For policymakers and development agents such knowledge is only one of the very many ingredients needed to develop, implement and evaluate policies or to undertake development initiatives effectively. For them a good knowledge should give a clear and unambiguous answer to questions related to the development, implementation and evaluation of policies and development initiatives.

Researchers are acutely aware that any research result could not be complete due to the complexity of the matter under investigation, of the fact that conclusions are only valid in specific contexts, and that there always remain unexplored issues that could affect the validity of the research results. Policy makers on the other hand look for a complete set of knowledge applicable across time, space and situation for a required purpose. These differences usually lead to misunderstandings, miscommunication, irritation, frustration and sometimes even conflict. Policy makers usually get different answers for the same question from different scientists due to differences in specialties, differing theoretical orientation and point of view. This leads to mistrust.

Misunderstandings, miscommunication and mistrust also prevail between researchers and development agents. Development agents require an appropriate technology to boost the accomplishment efficiency and effectiveness of a given task. Researchers usually provide only a segment of a technology at a given time. Technology is a package of hard- and soft-ware: tool, equipment, knowledge and skill. For example, if a technology is required to produce a hand-written letter in English, the following set of hard- and soft-ware is required: paper, pen, and knowledge of English alphabet letters, as well as skill on how to write them on paper using a pen. Different researchers usually focus on one of these package components at a time, and there is no arrangement to bring these components, which are usually produced by different researchers and at different points in time and space, together to generate a useful technology. Technology generation is not usually adequately planned in an integrated way in the first place. I think this is the reason why considerable research results including those published in reputable scientific journals are shelved permanently and never used. A bridge between science and policy as well as between research and development is urgently needed.
The way forward for Ethiopia: integration, coordination, reinforcement and synergy
Ethiopia has produced many useful policy and strategy documents. I wonder how much our policy makers benefited from nationally generated science knowledge in the formulation and design of these policies and strategies? I guess, they probably had but not to the possible extent. In the absence of properly researched, analyzed, documented and disseminated information relevant for policy and strategy preparation, it becomes necessary to adopt and adapt such information from outside and use common sense. Experience exchange and borrowing appropriate information are among the needed strategies to produce useful instruments. However, our research system has to be reoriented and strengthened to generate the core information and technology needed to accelerate socio-economic growth, equity, development and sustainability.

Socio-economic growth and development endeavors require research on diverse issues at various scales and complexities in an integrated and coordinated manner. Integration and coordination are easily said than done. A proper strategy and structure are actually required to bring about and effectively implement integration and coordination systems across sectors and layers of government structures, CBOs, NGOs, etc., particularly at macro level. At present all sector ministries and organizations are working hard to implement their annual work plan. Their reports also show that they are accomplishing them successfully. However, this will never be enough. They have to read each other, benefit from the work of each other, coordinate their work, reinforce each other and create synergy. This is difficult without putting in place an effective and efficient mechanism by which all departments within ministries, sector ministries and other development partners plan together, monitor together at regular intervals, evaluate together their performances and learn from their successes and failures together. Both processes and output/outcome/impact have to be critically examined paying particular attention to interfaces and linkages. Establishing an effective Science-Policy-Development platform coordinated by a panel of prominent professionals selected from science, policy and development sectors could be one complementary mechanism to the ones that already existing. The panel of professionals will organize regular meetings for assessment of policy, strategy and development gaps, for facilitating integrated and coordinated planning, for monitoring and evaluation, for brainstorming on emerging issues and on how to address them properly, etc. The meetings should benefit from the participation of all actors, stakeholders representatives, collaborators and partners. The panel of experts should filter out and select from the meeting new and valuable ideas, important issues of convergence, policy and development gaps, issues of equity and sustainability and constraints for smooth operations and appropriate measures to address them and forward them to the government for review and consideration. It must be understood that this platform will only complement and strengthen the work of the parliament and other regulatory government organization. These regulator establishments should actively participate and meaningfully contribute to the success of the meetings and finally review the reports of the meetings and incorporate in their working system the ideas and issues identified by the meetings for attention and action, if they think are really important.