Partnerships at the leading edge: a Danish vision for knowledge, research and development
It identifies six principles for a strategy:
- Knowledge should continue to play an important part in Denmark’s development policy
- research should continue to play an important part in knowledge policy
- Public funding of research and research institutions is justified and necessary, both in Denmark and in the South
- The basis of funding needs to be a partnership, reflecting the principles of Denmark’s development policy – ‘realistic agreements concerning shared visions, joint objectives and reciprocal obligations’
- In that context, Danida has a responsibility to the research sector as a whole, and needs to take a holistic view of the impact of its decisions about centre, programme and project funding.
- By the same token, researchers who receive funding have a responsibility to Danida, especially in terms of the agency’s need for specific policy advice
- .Both Danida and the research sector in Denmark have responsibilities to include developing country counterparts as partners in programming.
There are real problems in translating research into policy, and in building strong links between researchers and policy-makers. Danish development research institutions are latecomers to modern forms of dissemination; some research is not well attuned to the needs of Danish development co-operation; and Danida as an agency does not always absorb relevant research findings available from the Danish research sector. Action is needed on both sides, based on a clearer understanding of the differences between research and policy-making.
There is also need for more investment in the knowledge sector in Denmark’s country or sector programmes. ENRECA is an innovative programme, but is often not related to the aforementioned programmes and, on its own, is not a sufficient response to the urgent need to strengthen the research and innovation systems in Denmark’s partner countries.
Knowledge management in Danida should be given a more coherent institutional priority, including the resources needed to drive change. Knowledge management would includecapacity to access sources of knowledge in Denmark and abroad, to participate in cutting edge debates on development issues, and to initiate new research programmes.
As institutional interventions, the report recommends that:
- the Danish Government brings development research more firmly into the mainstream
- The role and position of the Council for Development Research (RUF) should be reconsidered
- a Centre for Advanced Study in Development Research should be established
- Danida should fund specialist research centres. This should encourage a strongly applied focus, with an agenda that is not entirely driven by Danida, but taking into account the needs and priorities of Danish development co-operation
- these research centres should be subject to performance contracts
- centres should not be overly reliant on core grants from Danida, but should ‘market-test’ their research capacity by competing for a share of grants, and by taking on more applied work
- Danida make adequate organisational and staffing adjustments in order to facilitate knowledge management both in relation to external partner as with the aim of promoting knowledge-related components in sector programmes
See also related documents:
- Some New Ideas About Research for Development: review by Erik Arnold and Martin Bell on current thinking relevant to the funding of research (primarily technical research and development) and the options for donor agencies
- Danida and Danish development research: towards a new partnership
- Review of Danida funded research in the health sciences
- Review of Danida funded research in agriculture and natural resources
