IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/diedps/192018.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The interface between research and policy-making in South Africa: exploring the institutional framework and practice of an uneasy relationship

Author

Listed:
  • Grimm, Sven
  • Gensch, Mareike Magdalena
  • Hauf, Johanna
  • Prenzel, Julia
  • Rehani, Nitja
  • Senz, Sarah
  • Vogel, Olivier

Abstract

The interface between research and policy-making is gaining relevance, as global challenges and their complexities increase. Policy-makers worldwide discuss and need to address complex common global challenges such as climate change, peace and security or human food security. This is highly relevant to all countries, and comes with a particular urgency for globally engaging rising powers, of which South Africa is one. The aim of this paper is to explore the extent to which the South African science and policy systems facilitate or hinder research-based policy advice. This exploration starts with the policy institutions that shape science and academic research. Inter-institutional relations between government and research institutions, as well as funding and other, non-monetary, incentive structures are portrayed in order to assess their strengths and weaknesses. This research is empirically based on more than 100 interviews and background discussions conducted between February and April 2017 with South African and German actors, comprising university scholars from different universities and academic disciplines, researchers from think tanks, Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs), and government agencies, as well as consultants, international actors and policy-makers. The interface between policy and research is tension-ridden in any context for a number of reasons, including, among other things, divergent rationales, different time-horizons and subsequently disappointed mutual expectations. Some tensions in the relationship between researchers and decision-makers, however, also emanate from the specific context in which the interface between researchers and decision-makers is organised. In order to address these tensions, the following recommendations are considered the most relevant to South African actors at the interface between research and policy-making, and are elaborated upon in the paper: 1. South Africa’s government needs to increase expenditure on research and development to the same level as in other middle-income and BRICS countries. 2. Government officials and researchers in South Africa need to engage in co-creation of research; positive examples exist for this already. 3. Research institutions need to offer training for researchers and policy-makers. 4. Research institutions, such as South Africa’s National Research Foundation (NRF) should incentivise network creation for junior researchers. 5. South African government and research institutions should strengthen “knowledge-broker” positions. The recommendations and suggestions are meant to serve as stimuli for a discussion around possible starting points for South African and international actors – Germany being the example explored here – who want to strengthen the already existing science–policy interface in South Africa.

Suggested Citation

  • Grimm, Sven & Gensch, Mareike Magdalena & Hauf, Johanna & Prenzel, Julia & Rehani, Nitja & Senz, Sarah & Vogel, Olivier, 2018. "The interface between research and policy-making in South Africa: exploring the institutional framework and practice of an uneasy relationship," IDOS Discussion Papers 19/2018, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:diedps:192018
    DOI: 10.23661/dp19.2018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/199539/1/die-dp-2018-19.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.23661/dp19.2018?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eger, Jens & Öhler, Hannes & Rudolph, Alexandra, 2018. "Is the sectoral aid allocation within countries need-oriented?," IDOS Discussion Papers 17/2018, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    2. Haas, Peter M., 1992. "Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 1-35, January.
    3. Kirsty Newman & Catherine Fisher & Louise Shaxson, 2012. "Stimulating Demand for Research Evidence: What Role for Capacity‐building?," IDS Bulletin, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(5), pages 17-24, September.
    4. Dick, Eva & Schraven, Benjamin, 2018. "Regional migration governance in Africa and beyond: a framework of analysis," IDOS Discussion Papers 9/2018, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    5. Griffith-Jones, Stephany & Leistner, Samuel, 2018. "Mobilising capital for sustainable infrastructure: the cases of AIIB and NDB," IDOS Discussion Papers 18/2018, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Claude Paraponaris, 2017. "Plateformes numériques, conception ouverte et emploi," Post-Print halshs-01614430, HAL.
    2. Barry Eichengreen and Fabio Ghironi., 1997. "European Monetary Unification and International Monetary Cooperation," Center for International and Development Economics Research (CIDER) Working Papers C97-091, University of California at Berkeley.
    3. Jeanie Bukowski, 2017. "A “new water culture†on the Iberian Peninsula? Evaluating epistemic community impact on water resources management policy," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(2), pages 239-264, March.
    4. Mateos-Garcia, Juan & Steinmueller, W. Edward, 2008. "The institutions of open source software: Examining the Debian community," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 333-344, December.
    5. Catherine Long, 2017. "Delegated Service Authority: Institutional Evolution of PEPFAR Health-Based Program Implementing Units in Tanzania," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8(3), pages 303-312, September.
    6. Sandberg, Kristin Ingstad & Andresen, Steinar & Bjune, Gunnar, 2010. "A new approach to global health institutions? A case study of new vaccine introduction and the formation of the GAVI Alliance," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(7), pages 1349-1356, October.
    7. Sosay, Gül & Zenginobuz, Unal, 2005. "Independent regulatory agencies in emerging economies," MPRA Paper 380, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Muriel Figuié & Tristan Fournier, 2010. "Risques sanitaires globaux et politiques nationales : la gestion de la grippe aviaire au Vietnam," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 91(3), pages 327-343.
    9. Cynthia Couette, 2024. "Epistemic competition in global governance: The case of pharmaceutical patents," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 15(3), pages 516-527, June.
    10. Lütz, Susanne, 1998. "Wenn Banken sich vergessen ...: Risikoregulierung im internationalen Mehr-Ebenen-System," MPIfG Discussion Paper 98/5, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    11. Acosta, Matias & Szlamka, Zsofia & Mostajo-Radji, Mohammed A., 2020. "Transnational youth networks: an evolving form of public diplomacy to accelerate the Sustainable Development Goals," SocArXiv 8247s, Center for Open Science.
    12. Yannis Papadopoulos, 2018. "How does knowledge circulate in a regulatory network? Observing a European Platform of Regulatory Authorities meeting," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(4), pages 431-450, December.
    13. Thor Olav Iversen, 2023. "Boundary experts: Science and politics in measuring the Sustainable Development Goals," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(4), pages 600-610, September.
    14. Ole Danielsen & Kutsal Yesilkagit, 2014. "The Effects of European Regulatory Networks on the Bureaucratic Autonomy of National Regulatory Authorities," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 353-371, September.
    15. Cardinale, Roberto & Cardinale, Ivano & Zupic, Ivan, 2024. "The EU's vulnerability to gas price and supply shocks: The role of mismatches between policy beliefs and changing international gas markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    16. Gough, Ian & Abu Sharkh, Miriam, 2010. "Financing welfare regimes: a literature review and cluster analysis," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 41208, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Amy A. Quark & Rachel Lienesch, 2017. "Scientific boundary work and food regime transitions: the double movement and the science of food safety regulation," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 34(3), pages 645-661, September.
    18. Raul Lejano, 2006. "The Design of Environmental Regimes: Social Construction, Contextuality, and Improvisation," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 187-207, June.
    19. Temilade Sesan & Willie Siyanbola, 2021. "“These are the realities”: insights from facilitating researcher-policymaker engagement in Nigeria’s household energy sector," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-11, December.
    20. Chiapello, Eve, 2017. "Critical accounting research and neoliberalism," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 47-64.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Wissenskooperation; Aufstrebende Mächte;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:diedps:192018. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ditubde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.