A critical view of science-policy integration:

Lessons learned from the SPICOSA Project experience

Loraine McFadden
FHRC, Middlesex University
Y
Y
 
  Y 

Y


 


  







   
 





Y
         


    

  


  

   



   


ë

As with ecological reality, ͚societal reality͛ is itself pure
dynamics. We need to get better at facilitating this idea

°


 


 ½

   

   
  
 

   

  

 
   


Y
Y
 
  Y 

Y


 ë
 !"
"#!

Positively - some policy issue can facilitate integration:

Selection of the
policy issue: =more straightforward to establish roles and interfaces e.g.
major defining nitrogen loading, water quality and human well-being
force on
integration =͚Loaded͛ (compound) i.e. it allows numerous, interesting
linkages to be developed through the modelling stage

Negatively ʹ Some limit in a dramatic way the relevance of social components

ͻthe relations (similarities and differences) between different user groups being removed by concentrating
solely on one user group

ͻthe impact of local governance structures are being removed i.e. tourist fishers͛ rights, property rights by
simplifying the policy issue

Y
Y
 
  Y 

Y


ë" !$

 !$

SSAs team͛s work with stakeholders and the inclusion of social components within the SAF model benefited
greatly from previous project work and current exchanges within other projects.

Earlier experiences facilitated participatory components to be

laid and regular exchanges allowed these to be build upon.

Strong impression that running a process of participation

as initiated in the design step ʹ parallel to the SAF
process ʹ would make the output stage easier to conduct
and potentially more fruitful.

Developing regular working relationship over considerable period of time increased learning both among
stakeholders and between stakeholders and scientists.

Important impact was that it made the introduction of complex social issues easier.

Y
Y
 
  Y 

Y


 !
!
!" Y


Clear evidence of power play: negative (not constructive) and positive.

Negative aspect: SSA scientists only meeting with a key political figure and
sidelining all the other stakeholders as irrelevant.

Positive aspect: Example of debates between different decision-makers within a

reference group reflecting on the political risks of different measures

SAF model may not be able to contribute to addressing all problematic issues arising from such
discussions, however these debates contribution to collective reflection about the approach
adopted.

Political processes proved difficult to incorporate into the model development work:
ͻ The formulation of political processes was weakly developed within the project
ͻ Is it a lack of bravery on the part of the social sciences

Y
Y
 
  Y 

Y


 Y

& 
!
#$
%$&

ͻ
: @
@@ 
@  
 

@

 @,
ͻ : 
@

@
@
@@  @ @@@

@ 
 
 
@
ͻ
!&  @

@

@  
@
ͻ & there are conflicting or competing perspectives.

Understanding this context of knowledge is important to achieving the aim of improved dialogue
between science and policy.

Using this context, knowledge created within a project can more closely reflect the ͚real world͛
complexities of decision-making in coastal environments that is, the pre-judgements, perceptions,
cultural and institutional factors that condition knowledge: the ͚meaningful context͛ of knowledge.

Y
Y
 
  Y 

Y


' ! ?





 

  

 

  ?

 


 











  

 
  



!! 


  




 

 

( 
The effectiveness of stakeholder engagement
) '  and extent to which policy issue reflects
! interests and priorities

Multiple perceptions exist of any single policy issue: different stakeholders can frame the same
policy issue in different ways. Information complexity of beliefs and social constructs
surrounding policy issue is critical.

Y
Y
 
  Y 

Y


 *!!!&
#!
 !
Academia: validated and funded on the basis of research
outputs and fundamentally interested in ͚the experiment͛ Forum which allows
ͻAway from the idea that stakeholders different agendas to be
Differences fulfilled but which also
motivations, should participate in scientific
2 

 nurtures commonality
drivers, goals endeavours
in goals and the metric
and constraints ͻTowards scientists liaising with whereby success are is
stakeholders in knowledge networks. defined

$
!!" How best to structure
+
!,- the organisation,
facilitating and critically
͚Formal projects͛ the dominant form through which organisations the funding of
plan and manage change: although may be less effective means of participatory (science-
realising social change policy) problem-solving?

Y
Y
 
  Y 

Y


ë!&

ë. 
+ -$#!$+ -

SPICOSA: = Applying systems methodology in practice in the coastal zone

ambitious =Trans-disciplinarity: there is a very thin literature on how to do this and most
across several trans-disciplinary research does not actually deliver trans-disciplinary research
directions =Converting science into practice

 "  

//
,
!
$$"

Managing the motivation

Against the necessary
of scientists to remain
rewards of participation
committed when the
as they are perceived by
benefits are still being
other stakeholders
exploring
Y
Y
 
  Y 

Y


ë!&

ë. 
+ -$#!$+ -

Challenges to consider: à




 













1)Ambitions of each of the players in the 

 




science-policy integration process: what do
we mean by success?

2)Manage these expectations: what are How best can we promote this context of
reasonable outcome measures of success? learning, given the time and budget and
other constraints on efforts towards science-
policy integration?

-  @


 
@@    
@@ 

  @ 
@

Y
Y
 
  Y 

Y



"

 

!

': too much emphasis on identifying single

optimum parameters and social indicators as well
as quantifiable social processes

#0!&Social world continuously

changing and a policy-world that is in reality an experiment.

Possible to recognise importance of dynamics of social

interaction but at same time develop a tool that replaces social
interaction rather than support it

The interface in a social learning process is anticipated to be itself social: that is, people.
Experience and resources at odds with the nature of the research project.

Y
Y
 
  Y 

Y


Potential critical bottom-line that having the research community in the driving seat (e.g.
funding, organising) may actually be constraining rather than promoting integration:
but who would we put in our place?

°arriers may not always be formally recognised

or addressed at the start of integrated research
projects.
1
at ensuring such important
conversations are conducted at a team level early
in research projects and revisited during the
process.

Y
Y
 
  Y 

Y