Research uptake and impact: are we in danger of overstating ourselves?

Wary of the pressure that researchers are under to demonstrate impact, Louise Shaxson injects a dose of realism into the debate around what that impact ought to look like. Researchers must provide clear policy messages, carefully define the relevance of their research, be realistic about what can be achieved, and be clear about whether they’re practising research communication or advocacy

Research for better aid: an evaluation of DFAT’s investments

Assesses the degree to which the investment by the Australian aid program into research has been appropriate, effective and efficient, and provides recommendations for improving DFAT’s future management of research investment. Foreword Explores how research investment can be best managed to ensure DFAT supports aid innovation and high-quality aid program and policy decision-making. The evaluation focuses on whether the management of DFAT’s considerable development research investment has been appropriate, effective and efficient. Employing a multi-dimensional evaluation method, it draws on the experiences of DFAT staff and stakeholders, as well as the available expenditure data, in arriving at a set of well-supported findings and recommendations. The report makes several important points about the need for DFAT to have a clear sense about why and how it funds research. The department’s managers and officers need especially to be conscious of the effectiveness and efficiency risks implicit in their highly devolved form of research investment management. These risks will be reduced if robust knowledge management systems and a strong culture of research use are embedded in the department. The experience of other aid donors indicates that achieving this will be a significant challenge. The evaluation also makes a finding with clear implications for the way the department engages with research institutions in partner countries. It shows that, while the department’s research funding to Australian institutions increased significantly from 2005 to 2013, the level of direct funding to partner country institutions did not increase to the same extent and was, indeed, flat over the last five years of that period. There are clear benefits to be had in building research capacity in those institutions, either directly or through partnerships with Australian and international researchers. Given Australia’s ongoing investment in the Pacific, this may be a region in which future research funding can be focused.   &nbsp

Covid-19 shows why health and well-being should be an everyday target

The Covid-19 pandemic has exposed the fragilities of our global health systems, and the contrasting health infrastructures between countries, like Nigeria, constrained by development challenges. If a silver lining can be drawn from the spread of the pandemic – will African leaders progress from political will to political action in strengthening local health systems

Stimulating Demand for Research Evidence: What Role for Capacity?building?

There has been a great deal of interest in recent years in supporting evidence?informed policymaking in developing countries. In particular, there have been efforts to build the capacity of researchers and research intermediaries to supply appropriately packaged research information (for example in the form of policy briefs) to policymakers. While supply of research information is important, it will only be used to inform policy if it is accessed, valued and understood by policymakers. In this article, we discuss our understanding of demand for research from policymakers; the capacities which underlie it; and how these might be supported

Understanding policymakers' perspectives on evidence use as a mechanism for improving research-policy relationships

This special issue examines how relationships between research and policy in environmental and sustainability education (ESE) can be strengthened. Our contribution draws on three cases from outside the ESE space to analyse policymakers’ perspectives on using evidence to inform decision-making, and to show that government-based policymakers develop ‘policy narratives’ which influence their evidence use. We also illustrate how government departmental systems and processes lead policymakers to develop ‘evidence narratives’ which help them make sense of what evidence to use and how to use it in the policy development process. At its core, such work involves negotiating three normative positions around evidence, concerning: fidelity to science, democratic representation, and cost-effective use of public money. In light of this, we suggest that where policy narratives and evidence narratives interact should be interpreted as a key site for empirically investigating evidence-informed policymaking activities. Developing a detailed awareness of what policymakers do on a daily basis, and discerning how organisational systems and processes influence particular demands for evidence and how it is used, will foster a better understanding of the relationships between research and policy

The spread of Conservation Agriculture: policy and institutional support for adoption and uptake

Conservation Agriculture (CA) in its many local adaptations has been practiced for more than three decades. In year 2013 it was deployed on some 155 million hectares worldwide on both large and small farms. In most cases, it has led to yield, economic and environmental benefits, and thus would appear to deserve greater policy and institutional support to accelerate opportunities for adoption and uptake. CA represents an alternate approach to the sustainable intensification of agriculture and differs fundamentally from modern approaches based largely on intensive tillage and purchased inputs that often disrupt ecosystem functions. CA incorporates a number of apparently counterintuitive and often unrecognised elements that simultaneously promote soil health, productive capacity and ecosystem services. Important constraints appear to be preventing wider-scale adoption of CA. Experience across many countries has shown that the adoption and spread of CA requires a change in commitment and behaviour of all stakeholders. For farmers, social mechanisms that encourage experimentation, learning and adaptation to local conditions are a prerequisite. For policy-makers and institutional leaders, transformation of tillage to CA systems requires that they fully understand the large economic, social and environmental benefits that these systems offer. Such transformations call for sustained policy and institutional support that provides both incentives and ‘motivations’ to encourage farmers to adopt components of CA practices and improve them over time. Here, we summarise the key institutional and policy requirements. Many of these apply widely to other forms of more sustainable agriculture.Dans ses nombreuses adaptations locales, l’Agriculture de Conservation (AC) est pratiquée depuis plus de trois décennies. En 2011, elle était déployée dans des fermes de toutes tailles et de tous horizons couvrant une surface totale de quelque 125 millions d’hectares. Dans la plupart des cas, elle s’est traduite par des avantages économiques et environnementaux, et il apparaît donc qu’un soutien politique et institutionnel de plus grande ampleur se justifierait pour accélérer son adoption et son implémentation. L’AC constitue une approche vers l’intensification durable de l’agriculture qui se démarque radicalement des approches modernes basées en grande part sur un travail intensif des sols et sur l’achat d’intrants qui perturbent souvent les fonctions de l’écosystème. L’AC intègre un certain nombre de composantes apparemment contre-intuitives – et souvent non reconnues – qui  ont un effet favorable à la fois sur la santé des sols, la capacité de production et les écoservices. De sérieux obstacles semblent venir entraver une adoption à plus grande échelle de l’AC. L’expérience acquise dans bon nombre de pays a fait ressortir que l’adoption et l’extension de l’AC nécessitaient une remise en question quant à l’engagement et au comportement de toutes les parties prenantes. Pour les fermiers, des mécanismes sociaux propres à encourager l’expérimentation, l’apprentissage et l’adaptation aux conditions locales s’imposent en tant que préalables. Pour les décideurs et les leaders institutionnels, le passage du travail des sols classique aux systèmes AC exige qu’ils comprennent pleinement les grands avantages économiques, sociaux et environnementaux qu’offrent ces systèmes. De telles évolutions ne passeront que par un soutien politique et institutionnel porteur à la fois de motivations et d’ « incitations » encourageant les fermiers à adopter les divers aspects des pratiques AC et à les améliorer au fil du temps. Nous proposons ici une synthèse des impératifs majeurs sur les plans politique et institutionnel – sachant qu’un grand nombre de ces impératifs sont largement applicables à d’autres formes d’agriculture plus durable.La Agricultura de conservación (AC), en sus distintas versiones locales, lleva practicándose desde hace más de 3 décadas. En el año 2011, se practicó en más de 125 millones de hectáreas en todo el mundo, en explotaciones tanto grandes como pequeñas. En muchos casos, ha producido beneficios económicos y medioambientales y, por tanto, merece un mayor apoyo político e institucional a fin de acelerar las oportunidades para su adopción y práctica. La AC representa un enfoque alternativo a una intensificación sostenible de la agricultura y difiere, en sus fundamentos, de los enfoques modernos, basados principalmente en unos cultivos intensivos y en la compra de insumos que suelen alterar el ecosistema. La AC incorpora una serie de elementos, en apariencia contrarios a la intuición y que no gozan de reconocimiento, pero que favorecen tanto la salud de los suelos, como la capacidad productiva y los servicios ecosistémicos. Parece ser que existen limitaciones importantes que están evitando la adopción a una mayor escala de la AC. La experiencia en muchos países ha demostrado que la adopción y la expansión de la AC requiere un cambio en el compromiso y el comportamiento de todas las partes interesadas. Para los agricultores, los mecanismos sociales que favorecen la experimentación, el aprendizaje y la adaptación a condiciones locales son un requisito previo. Para líderes institucionales y legisladores, la transformación del cultivo intensivo en sistemas de AC requiere que comprendan las grandes ventajas económicas, sociales y medioambientales que estos sistemas ofrecen. Dichas transformaciones requieren un apoyo institucional y político constante que ofrezca tanto incentivos como «motivaciones» para animar a los agricultores a adoptar prácticas de la AC y a perfeccionarlas con el tiempo. Aquí, resumimos los requisitos políticos e institucionales clave. Muchos de ellos se aplican de manera generalizada a otras formas de agricultura sostenible

The spread of Conservation Agriculture: policy and institutional support for adoption and uptake

Conservation Agriculture (CA) in its many local adaptations has been practiced for more than three decades. In year 2013 it was deployed on some 155 million hectares worldwide on both large and small farms. In most cases, it has led to yield, economic and environmental benefits, and thus would appear to deserve greater policy and institutional support to accelerate opportunities for adoption and uptake. CA represents an alternate approach to the sustainable intensification of agriculture and differs fundamentally from modern approaches based largely on intensive tillage and purchased inputs that often disrupt ecosystem functions. CA incorporates a number of apparently counterintuitive and often unrecognised elements that simultaneously promote soil health, productive capacity and ecosystem services. Important constraints appear to be preventing wider-scale adoption of CA. Experience across many countries has shown that the adoption and spread of CA requires a change in commitment and behaviour of all stakeholders. For farmers, social mechanisms that encourage experimentation, learning and adaptation to local conditions are a prerequisite. For policy-makers and institutional leaders, transformation of tillage to CA systems requires that they fully understand the large economic, social and environmental benefits that these systems offer. Such transformations call for sustained policy and institutional support that provides both incentives and ‘motivations’ to encourage farmers to adopt components of CA practices and improve them over time. Here, we summarise the key institutional and policy requirements. Many of these apply widely to other forms of more sustainable agriculture.Dans ses nombreuses adaptations locales, l’Agriculture de Conservation (AC) est pratiquée depuis plus de trois décennies. En 2011, elle était déployée dans des fermes de toutes tailles et de tous horizons couvrant une surface totale de quelque 125 millions d’hectares. Dans la plupart des cas, elle s’est traduite par des avantages économiques et environnementaux, et il apparaît donc qu’un soutien politique et institutionnel de plus grande ampleur se justifierait pour accélérer son adoption et son implémentation. L’AC constitue une approche vers l’intensification durable de l’agriculture qui se démarque radicalement des approches modernes basées en grande part sur un travail intensif des sols et sur l’achat d’intrants qui perturbent souvent les fonctions de l’écosystème. L’AC intègre un certain nombre de composantes apparemment contre-intuitives – et souvent non reconnues – qui  ont un effet favorable à la fois sur la santé des sols, la capacité de production et les écoservices. De sérieux obstacles semblent venir entraver une adoption à plus grande échelle de l’AC. L’expérience acquise dans bon nombre de pays a fait ressortir que l’adoption et l’extension de l’AC nécessitaient une remise en question quant à l’engagement et au comportement de toutes les parties prenantes. Pour les fermiers, des mécanismes sociaux propres à encourager l’expérimentation, l’apprentissage et l’adaptation aux conditions locales s’imposent en tant que préalables. Pour les décideurs et les leaders institutionnels, le passage du travail des sols classique aux systèmes AC exige qu’ils comprennent pleinement les grands avantages économiques, sociaux et environnementaux qu’offrent ces systèmes. De telles évolutions ne passeront que par un soutien politique et institutionnel porteur à la fois de motivations et d’ « incitations » encourageant les fermiers à adopter les divers aspects des pratiques AC et à les améliorer au fil du temps. Nous proposons ici une synthèse des impératifs majeurs sur les plans politique et institutionnel – sachant qu’un grand nombre de ces impératifs sont largement applicables à d’autres formes d’agriculture plus durable.La Agricultura de conservación (AC), en sus distintas versiones locales, lleva practicándose desde hace más de 3 décadas. En el año 2011, se practicó en más de 125 millones de hectáreas en todo el mundo, en explotaciones tanto grandes como pequeñas. En muchos casos, ha producido beneficios económicos y medioambientales y, por tanto, merece un mayor apoyo político e institucional a fin de acelerar las oportunidades para su adopción y práctica. La AC representa un enfoque alternativo a una intensificación sostenible de la agricultura y difiere, en sus fundamentos, de los enfoques modernos, basados principalmente en unos cultivos intensivos y en la compra de insumos que suelen alterar el ecosistema. La AC incorpora una serie de elementos, en apariencia contrarios a la intuición y que no gozan de reconocimiento, pero que favorecen tanto la salud de los suelos, como la capacidad productiva y los servicios ecosistémicos. Parece ser que existen limitaciones importantes que están evitando la adopción a una mayor escala de la AC. La experiencia en muchos países ha demostrado que la adopción y la expansión de la AC requiere un cambio en el compromiso y el comportamiento de todas las partes interesadas. Para los agricultores, los mecanismos sociales que favorecen la experimentación, el aprendizaje y la adaptación a condiciones locales son un requisito previo. Para líderes institucionales y legisladores, la transformación del cultivo intensivo en sistemas de AC requiere que comprendan las grandes ventajas económicas, sociales y medioambientales que estos sistemas ofrecen. Dichas transformaciones requieren un apoyo institucional y político constante que ofrezca tanto incentivos como «motivaciones» para animar a los agricultores a adoptar prácticas de la AC y a perfeccionarlas con el tiempo. Aquí, resumimos los requisitos políticos e institucionales clave. Muchos de ellos se aplican de manera generalizada a otras formas de agricultura sostenible