The Role of Communication in Governance: The River Health Programme as a Case Study

Strydom, WF; Hill, Liesl; Eloff, Estie

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-46266-8_14

Cited by 3 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Scientists and policymakers have different mental models (or differing forms of cultural relevance) that form and regulate the way they see, understand and experience the world and subsequently the way they behave. 30,31,32 This does not imply that people with different mental models cannot communicate. Scientists must just be aware that, when communicating environmental information to [policymakers], a deliberate effort is required to ensure that the message is conveyed accurately, since people's interpretation of a piece of information may differ, and their resulting responses may be entirely the opposite to what was anticipated.…”

Section: Differing Worlds and World Views (Mental Models) Cultures Go...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Scientists must just be aware that, when communicating environmental information to [policymakers], a deliberate effort is required to ensure that the message is conveyed accurately, since people's interpretation of a piece of information may differ, and their resulting responses may be entirely the opposite to what was anticipated. 31 Apart from differing world views, the career structures, cultures and goals of scientists and policymakers also differ, 33 as do the day-to-day operations within which they function. 34 While the goal of the scientist is to advance science, the policymaker aspires to obtain popular support.…”

Section: Differing Worlds and World Views (Mental Models) Cultures Go...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The 'role of science communication is gaining prominence' in South Africa and internationally. 31 However, communication between scientists and policymakers remains poor 3,9 and is aggravated by scientific evidence having limited relevance to current policy problems, as well as by policymakers insisting on exact answers, even when these are not contained in available evidence. 36 Scientists are often too conservative in communicating their results, especially when this could result in major policy changes, 37 and thus keep waiting for 'enough evidence to communicate'.…”

Section: Poor Communication and Lack Of Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…5 Both the credibility of the information and the credibility of the scientist influence communication between policymakers and scientists. Credibility of information is based on 'expertise and trustworthiness', 16 namely whether the science is realistically communicated, 31 as well as if it is perceived to be 'true' and better than other information. 16 The competence of a scientist depends on knowledge and expertise.…”

Section: Uncertainty Credibility and Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…54,67 Such measures will ensure that public concerns are taken into account when decisions are made on science-based issues. 54 It is in the context of this interface that the media tends to play an extremely important role in knowledge transfer, primarily to the public, 31 but, by default, also to decision-makers, who, despite their decision-making capacity, are also members of the public and are exposed to the same media influences.…”

Section: Relationships Across Boundariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Evidence-based policymaking: A review

Strydom¹,

Funke²,

Nienaber³

et al. 2010

S Afr J Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The process of facilitating the uptake of evidence, for example, scientific research findings, into the policymaking process is multifaceted and thus complex. It is therefore important for scientists to understand this process in order to influence it more effectively. Similarly, policymakers need to understand the complexities of the scientific process to improve their interaction with the scientific sphere. This literature review addresses those factors that influence the uptake of scientific evidence into policymaking, the barriers to using science in policymaking, as well as recommendations for improved science-policymaking interaction. A visual diagram of the gears of a car is used to convey the message of the complexities around the engagement between science and policymaking. It is concluded that the issue of evidence-based policymaking remains unresolved and questions for future research on the science-policy interface are raised.http://www.sajs.co.za

show abstract

Section: Differing Worlds and World Views (Mental Models) Cultures Go...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Differing Worlds and World Views (Mental Models) Cultures Go...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Poor Communication and Lack Of Engagementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Uncertainty Credibility and Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Relationships Across Boundariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Evidence-based policymaking: A review

Strydom¹,

Funke²,

Nienaber³

et al. 2010

S Afr J Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

'It will harm business and increase illicit trade': an evaluation of the relevance, quality and transparency of evidence submitted by transnational tobacco companies to the UK consultation on standardised packaging 2012

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionTransnational tobacco companies (TTCs) submitted evidence to the 2012 UK Consultation on standardised packaging (SP) to argue the policy will have detrimental economic impacts and increase illicit tobacco trade.MethodsA content analysis of the four TTC submissions to the consultation assessed the relevance and quality of evidence TTCs cited to support their arguments. Investigative research was used to determine whether the cited evidence was industry connected. Fisher's exact tests were used to compare the relevance and quality of industry-connected and independent from the industry evidence. The extent to which TTCs disclosed financial conflicts of interest (COI) when citing evidence was examined.ResultsWe obtained 74 pieces of TTC-cited evidence. The quality of the evidence was poor. TTCs cited no independent, peer-reviewed evidence that supported their arguments. Nearly half of the evidence was industry-connected (47%, 35/74). None of this industry-connected evidence was published in peer-reviewed journals (0/35) and 66% (23/35) of it was opinion only. Industry-connected evidence was of significantly poorer quality than independent evidence (p<0.001). COIs were not disclosed by TTCs in 91% (32/35) of cases.ConclusionsIn the absence of peer-reviewed research to support their arguments, TTCs relied on evidence they commissioned and the opinions of TTC-connected third-parties. Such connections were not disclosed by TTCs when citing this evidence and were time consuming to uncover. In line with Article 5.3 of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and broader transparency initiatives, TTCs should be required to disclose their funding of all third-parties and any COIs when citing evidence.

show abstract

Bridging the science–policy interface: A new era for South African research and the role of knowledge brokering

Godfrey¹,

Funke²,

Mbizvo

2010

S Afr J Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Government departments and agencies are faced with issues of increasing socio-ecological complexities around environmental sustainability and global change, which require them to make decisions that have the potential to impact greatly on society and economies. As a result, they are under increasing pressure to develop policies that consider a wide spectrum of scientific and indigenous knowledge. It is acknowledged that in South Africa, as elsewhere, a gap typically exists between the scientific or research community and the policymaking community, due to a number of underlying reasons at both ends. This gap often results in a unidirectional 'push of evidence' by researchers to policymakers, with a hope that policymakers will take up these findings and use them in policy identification, formulation or implementation. To support the uptake of evidence in policy, it is also important to stimulate an environment of 'evidence pull' by the policy community from the research community, as well as increasing the dialogue between these communities. A model of knowledge brokering is proposed in this paper as a means to bridge this gap between science and policy and, thereby, ensure the uptake of evidence in policy development and implementation. This model looks at the need for institutional mechanisms, such as knowledge-brokering offices, both within research organisations and government departments. It also highlights the importance of researchers involving policymakers from the onset of their research process, with a continuous dialogue between the two parties, both during and after the research, as a means of increasing the likelihood of research uptake.http://www.sajs.co.za

show abstract

The Role of Communication in Governance: The River Health Programme as a Case Study

Cited by 3 publications

References 6 publications

Evidence-based policymaking: A review

Evidence-based policymaking: A review

'It will harm business and increase illicit trade': an evaluation of the relevance, quality and transparency of evidence submitted by transnational tobacco companies to the UK consultation on standardised packaging 2012

Bridging the science–policy interface: A new era for South African research and the role of knowledge brokering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About