What kind of
development research
centers Latin America
needs?
Research organisations and
policy making in Latin America
Valeria Arza
CONICET & CENIT/UNTREF
Argentina
1
Introduction
In Latin American countries (LAC):
• Complex developmental challenges
• Good quality research, also in social
sciences
But
No close collaboration between
research organisations (RO) and
LAC policy making
2
FOCUS
Social science. Emphasis on development
related research at RO in LAC
KEY QUESTIONS
What are the guiding principles of the research agenda
at RO?
Are their research outputs diffused widely?
What are the relations between RO and policy makers?
Is it possible to improve the social and policy relevance
of research carried out in RO?
3
ORGANISATION
1. Characteristics of RO in LAC
2. Relation between RO and policy making
3. Ideas to improve social relevance of
research at RO
4
1. Characteristics of
RO in LAC
5
1. Characteristic of RO in LAC
Historical perspective
•
Early 20th century: universities; 1950s
public research institutes (PRI)
–
–
•
UNI: autonomous, responds to scientific
system.
PRI better aligned to policy
Since 1980s, new missions and new RO
emerge, contribute to heterogeneity:
–
–
–
New public RO aligned to new economic
paradigm (e.g. 27 new PRO created in Mexico)
Hybrid public-private RO, especially in science
NGOs
6
1. Characteristic of RO in LAC
Heterogeneity
% of RO producing
research articles
International
organisations
% of RO enabling
online access to
research articles
100%
81%
Public bodies (gov
agencies and PRO)
76%
47%
Universities
96%
30%
NGO
92%
52%
Own elaboration, based on Villatoro, 2005. Sample of 256 organisation in 26 LAC
LAC social organisations network (RISALIC)
See http://www.risalc.org/portal/instituciones/
Few efforts in knowledge dissemination
• 32% of RO have most of their publications online
• In Central America 20% in Mercosur 47%
7
1. Characteristic of RO in LAC
Heterogeneity
Two main groups of RO: one is well integrated to
international community and the other more locally
oriented. The former:
– The most prestigious and well funded.
– Its research agenda guided by career progress
and is articulated to research interests of the
international community.
– No incentives to identify or to study
developmental needs
– No incentives to diffuse findings locally
– It reproduces: get funding, train students,
publish, gain prestige, etc.
8
1. Characteristic of RO in LAC
Funding
• Until 1980s, mainly state funds, since then
more sources, domestic and, mainly,
international
• Agenda subordinated to international
priorities?
• Conflict of interests, when operation
budgets are dependent on few sources
– Health research in Mexico and tobacco funders
of a private RO
– Social research for a new mining law and mining
funding of a public RO in Argentina
9
2. The relation
between RO and
policy makers
10
2. RO and Policy Makers
How could RO help in policy making?
– To understand causal links
– To design specific policies
– To diffuse and disseminate and thus to
enhance wider understanding that helps to
gain public consensus for specific policies
11
2. RO and Policy Makers
Obstacles
• Tactical obstacles: recommendations might
lie outside the acceptability area of the
electoral base.
• Temporal obstacles: urgent needs may not
articulate with the scientific culture
• Communicational obstacles
• Epistemic obstacles: the need to simplify
realities to proceed to decision-making does
not articulate easily with the complexity of
social research.
12
2. RO and Policy Makers
Some contexts improve communication
• Mutual trust: few number of RO normally achieve it
– Negative consequences for democracy and participation.
– Risk of political capture by “elite specialist”
• Unsettled situations widen range of RO that get
access to policy community
– Complexity
– Policy makers need to validate decisions to the electorate
• Political cycles make politicians more or less
receptive to RO
– Quality research may find policy relevance in a near future
• Social research on immigration in the 1990s (based on human rights
approach) clashed with political values at the time but found their
way in policy making in the mid-2000s in Argentina
13
3. How to improve
social relevance of
research at RO
14
3. To improve RO relevance
Challenges
• To identify developmental and social needs
• To produce research that responds effectively to
those needs without reducing excellence.
• To improve public policy quality and to challenge
mainstream visions through alternative and longterm thinking based on empirical evidence.
• To bridge the cultural and political gap between the
community of researchers and that of politicians to
make research outputs recognised as valuable inputs
for policy making (i.e. to improve applicability of RO
research outputs).
15
3. To improve RO relevance
Ideas for debate
1. RO internal definitions: To promote
internal discussions at RO to define
values, strategies and methodologies
to improve social relevance and
political applicability of social
research.
– When development and social problems
required alternative solutions and
analysis, multi and trans-disciplinarity can
strengthen RO capacities to do so.
16
3. To improve RO relevance
Ideas for debate
2. Interactions: To improve the
interaction between RO and civil
society to better understand social
needs and to make research outputs
more visible and thus politically
desirable.
– This implies direct interaction with civil
society groups but also higher efforts in
capacity building, dissemination and
outreach activities.
17
3. To improve RO relevance
Ideas for debate
3. Play politically:
Rational/comprehensive models find
limits when getting in the policy
arena. Policy choices remain highly
political
– Seek political mediation by social
movements or mass media
– To become more institutionalised within
the political community.
18
Thank you!
19