1

Needs, barriers and opportunities fordeveloping policy and community-relevant

research

Robin Reid and Batkhishig BaivalColorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA

Overview

• Over-arching entry points for policy to affectmanagement

• How difficult creating information that is useful tocommunities and policy makers is

• Different models of interaction among stakeholders

• Planning backwards as one approach

• Participatory ways to co-create knowledge together

• Working to continually span boundaries among policy-makers, communities and researchers

• Potential needs and opportunities for creating relevantresearch

Rangelandchange

Ecol. change+/- Biodiversity+/- Soil fertility+/- Rainfall

Social change+/- Migration+/- Poverty+/- Equity

History & social contextBio-physical constraints

Underlying causes of change

Proximate causes of changeCropland and settlement expansion,

overstocking, sedentarisation, fencing

Institutions, economic development, climate,livestock and human pop change, governance,

policy

Rainfall /snow, soil fertility,biodiversity, hydrology

Land-use history, currentland tenure, governance

Positive feedback that accelerates

degradation

Negative feedback that slows/stops

degradation

Reid et al. 2006

Problems with linking science with policyand community needs

• Herders, policy makers and scientists have different needs andincentives

• Scientists often focus on what is interesting to discover, not whatwould be useful to communities and policy makers

• We often miss an opportunity make use of all knowledge(herders, policy makers, scientists) and focus only on one type ofknowledge (scientific)

• The products scientists think are useful (e.g., complex models)make scientists the only ‘experts’ and are too abstract to beuseful initially.

• Scientists often need a lot of time to produce reliable information,making information out-of-date for community / policy needs

• Communities often do not value their own knowledge stronglyand do not criticise ideas from scientists enough

Different models for linking research with policy andcommunities

Social / ecological scientistsHerders, NGO’s, policy makers

Model 1: No interaction

Time

Model 2: Science has the answer to theproblem and delivers it when it is ready

Model 3: Initial consultation amongscientists, policy-makers and / or herders,but no follow up

Model 4: Herders, policy makers, andscientists consult initially and thendiscuss results at the end

Model 5: Constant engagement amongherders, communities, NGO’s, gov’t andscientists

Making science relevant:Key questions to ask to plan backwards to link needs with

knowledge

• What are the critical issues that communities / policymakers are now struggling to resolve?

• Of these issues, which ones lack critical information thatnew knowledge can provide?

• What local, scientific and policy knowledge is needed tofill this gap in our understanding of this issue?

• Then, working backwards: What map, model, analysiscan we produce together that will most effectively supportaction by herders, NGO’s, communities on the ground?Or will best inform current critical policy debates?

2

The core research team can span boundaries among differentstakeholders at local, national and international levels. Forexample, Mongolian scientists can bring the best of their

science to herders, local NGO’s and government organisations.

Local herders,and community

andconservationorganisations

Nationalgovernmentinstitutions

International andnational

conservation anddevelopment

agencies

Integrated trans-disciplinary

scientific team

Local, nationaland international

NGO’s anddonors

Reid (2008)

Scale Major actors What issue they influenceGlobal

National

Landscape /local

National bodies of 2or more countries,regional body if it

exists

Trans-national flows ofpeople, animals, resources;

security, harmonisingpolicies

This boundary spanning is particularly effective if we do itat different levels of scale

National agencies /ministries, non-profits

/ NGO’s, religiousgroups

Communityorganisations, local

resource managementauthorities; individualherders and state land

managers, local leaders

Development of newnational policy and

enforcement of existingpolicy / management

Development of new localpolicy, implementation of

local policy andmanagement, strengthening

local institutions

Increasing scale / extent of influence

Increasing involvement in im

plementation

Reid (2008)

One approach to doing participatory research with herders

Herderroles

Scientistroles

Co-creationroles

Co-develophypotheses

Design datacollection, train

team

Summarize localknowledge

about problem

Summarizescientific

knowledge aboutproblem

Buildcommunity team

and support

Co-collect data, co-create boundary

objects

Co-interpretresults, co-create

lay-personcommunications

Discuss resultswith policy

makers, privatesector, others

Analyze data,make analysis

accessible

Interview long-term residentsabout results

Discuss resultswith scientists

and others

Discuss resultswith communities

and others

One example: Making science work for communities in AfricaKnowledgegenerated:Ecological and socialstates and processes,cost-benefit analyses,mapping land use

Changing mindsets: Promoted morediscussion and ‘buzz’; acceptance that wildlifeloss is occurring, the need for action, andpastoralism is not usually the cause of loss

Catalyzing better planning and implementation:faster, more effective land-use planning,enforcement of regulations, conservation goalsincluded in agricultural policyKnowledge

exchangemechanisms:Over 250meetings, 6 radioprograms, 10policy briefs, and30 trainingsessions by coreteam with localand nationalmanagers, policymakers, NGO’s

Strengthening local institutions: broughtcommunity concerns to national attention;community members have more confident voice;supported office as community nerve centre; newinformation closes information and power gap

Empowering community members:increased skills and pride, better leadershipskills and thus more effective action

Action

Actio

nAc

tion

Action

Revising policy to address sustainabilityissues: More forward-looking policy thataddresses both livelihoods and conservation,providing incentives to improve both.

Action

Potential needs & opportunities for creating researchrelevant for policy makers and community members in

Mongolia

• Two way relationshipbetween the research andpolicy development

• Recognition of CBNRM asa scientific subject

• Recognition of importanceof CBNRM as naturalresource policy direction

• Experimenting withevaluating long-term socialand ecological outcomes

• Examine more specific phenomenawhere social and ecological systemsare integrated in a common propertymanagement system

• Opportunity to scale-up andcompare with otherinitiatives/projects within the country

• Opportunity to compare with othercountries’ initiatives/projects

• Resilience assessment for the semi-arid and arid ecological zones

Potential needs & opportunities for creating researchrelevant for policy makers and community members in

Mongolia

3

Discussion questions

• Is there a gap between research and policymakers and communities?

• What are some ways we can make sureresearch is relevant to the needs of policy

makers and communities?

• What are the big concerns from the perspectiveof policy makers and the perspective of

herders?