 Scientists play important role in the

governance process. This role,

however, remains enigmatic because
of some traditional notions and
practices that limits the role of science-
based people on policy making. The
“new science” provides an opportunity
to recast this role and to conceive a
new form of policy making dynamics.
 Discuss the issues which are
associated in the interplay between
science and technology on one hand,
and on governance on the other;
 Formulate questions regarding the
interplay between science, technology
and governance;
 Reflect on the interplay using these
questions as a framework; and to
 Design an advocacy plan that aims to
influence policy on health issues in the
Philippines.
• What is inconvenient about climate
change as an issue?
•Why do you think this environmental
issue is used as an icon to elucidate
on the relationship between
scientists and policy making?
• Does this relationship has a future?
Justify.
 Climate change as truth and apathy of the
people
 Scientists expose the truth
 Balance between knowledge creation and
knowledge usage.
 Inconvenient truth because it means cutting
off economic activity.
 Climate Change is a moral issue
 Kyoto Protocol
 The policy maker – usually
an elected or appointed
official; makes decisions on
which policy to implement
 The policy advocate – a
member of civil society;
influences the decision-
making process
 The policy analyst – an
objective analyst; provides
technical advice and
recommendations
 While there may be scientists
who become politicians, and
while some scientists become
advocates, the natural
domain of a scientist is policy
analysis
 Scientists have the technical
capability to act as policy
consultants, or to participate
in technical policy working
groups, and act as advisers to
policy makers and even policy
advocates
 It is of common
knowledge that
development problems
require both political as
well as technological
solutions
 Ideally, scientific
knowledge leads to the
development of
technologies that are
used in the development
process.
 The perceived “neutrality” of
science
 The failure of scientists to
translate their works into
“readable” forms
 Lack of State support for S and
T
 The control of science by
powerful elites
 The “cultural” divide between
“science” and “politics”
 Reforming governance –
balancing the political and
scientific considerations in
policy making.
 Reforming science --
begin to see science no
longer as a neutral domain
of knowledge, but more as a
prescriptive activity that
emerges to respond to the
issues and problems of
society
 “Old” Science
Emphasis on individual researchers Emphasis on teams of researchers
Academic control over research
direction
Curiosity and discipline driven
Problems defined to minimize
uncertainty in results
Local organizational knowledge
base
“New” Science
Research direction shaped by
interaction with users
Problem and issue-based, multi-
and inter-disciplinary
Problems all contain large and
pervasive uncertainties
Diverse sources of knowledge and
networks of information
 “Old” Science “New” Science
Quality judged by peer review Judgment by users and peers

Apparent disinterest of researchers Researchers are partisans (value

(value free) laden)
Communication by scientific articles Diverse forms of communication

Linear logic from results to action Highly non-linear relationship

between results and action
Stakes are low Stakes are high
 Many NGOs have taken up
science-based advocacy in
the areas of the
environment, sustainable
agriculture, global
warming, and public
health
 Increasing participation of
scientists and academics
in providing critical inputs
to the formulation of
global agreements
›
 Growing acceptance of the idea
that while global governance is
the expertise of trained
diplomats, the crafting of
meaningful and valid
agreements is also dependent
on the work of scientists
 Led to the emergence and
development of “epistemic
communities”
 A transnational community of
science-based policy analysts who
are familiar both with the natural
sciences as well as with
governance processes.
 Organized as networks of people
whose existence is established and
maintained through repeated
interaction in international
meetings and conferences, joint
research projects, and involvement
in international and
nongovernmental organizations
 There are already networks in
civil society with science-
based connections
 There are also now a growing
number of natural scientists
more directly involved in
policy advocacy
 These scientists appreciate
their roles in the
development of alternative
governance systems and
sustainable development
processes