• E. Haribabu

• P. Devaraj

• Mamata Mishra

• Kalamani

• Sreekumar

• N. K. Sanghi

• Ramasubramanian

Group 3

What drives policy (policy / programmes / legislations) as of now, according to the group

• Bureaucracy • Political leadership• Private individuals• Specialists• Business houses• Civil society• International

Politics

Scope definition: policy in general and not restricted to any sector

•Policy making ends up being eclectic activity

•The movement of knowledge overtime, from public to private sector institutions means vested interest dictate policy

•Often the ones who control the resources are the ones who make policy

•Even these people don’t seem to have long term objectives and are driven by short term gains

•International financial institutions with their own agenda too have a say in policy making

•The relevant stake holders are not consulted

•Currently market forces drive the policy

•In some sectors where innovation can have an impact, there is no thrust on innovation

•Every five years gathering of such large number of people to make a policy - whether it results in anything is questionable

• Role of civil society in setting the agenda is rather less• The state has reduced its role in welfare activities• Short sightedness is slowly entering the social sector

also with the increase in the commercialised welfare sector

• Researchers had more social concern earlier, now the control of research has gone into private sector

What drives policy (policy / programmes / legislations) as of now, according to the group

Issues related to the Process of Policy

What constitutes knowledge or expertise which is used as input into policy making right now in the field that the

group is involved in

• People’s knowledge does not find any place in policy making

• Knowledge becoming ‘intellectual property’ has resulted in even public institutions wanting to do patented research or applied research

• The knowledge of traditional areas was not integrated into policy making

• Knowledge from the social sciences does not permeate policy (ASI – POI data)

Centralised System is part of the problem

Knowledge of the raw material, content and organization all are available among communities

Technology knowledge looms larger than all knowledge, often ending up with the wrong questions

• Academic knowledge is driven by recognition

• Recognized academics don’t publish their works in India

• International publications don’t have Indian agenda (and why not have international publications from India??)

What constitutes knowledge or expertise which is used as input into policy making right now in the field that the

group is involved in

Concerns / Questions on ‘scientific’ research & publication

An analysis, …noticed … that the priorities of research as perceived by the international journals do not coincide with the national priorities of India. An example is the case of research papers on infectious diseases, whereas 40 –45% of the medical cases admitted in India are for infectious diseases, it is only 3% in the U.S., which means if a research paper is presented to any international journal by an Indian researcher on this subject it would be considered of a lesser value than a paper on say some other health issue of significance to the U.S. or western countries. – Dr. Arunachalam, Scientific Advisor to PM, 2004

How were community experiences showcased to

present alternative knowledge or expertise

• Experience / Success of people’s knowledge does get policy recognition but need not reflect in government policy (post-tsunami agriculture)

• NPM being showcased does not seem to result in policy change

• On domestic violence, though policy have reflected civil society concerns and experiences, there is not enough thought on implementation and regulatory mechanism resulting in its non-adherence

Yes, no, yes, no…

Where and how were community

representatives themselves involved in

the policy influencing and policy –formulation

process

• Community forest management – the communities are taking the lead

• Social sector: dowry act, the SC/ ST atrocities act, etc. where the dalit movement or women movement have been acknowledged

• In the infrastructure sector too community participation happens at some level, but, not sensitive nor informed consent

• Civil society representatives who also have independent research capacities are not given due credit / recognition

At the grass root democratic level, community representative participation is rather easy. As it gets centralised, the community voice seems to be less heard

Was there an involvement of

academics or formal specialists in the

process and did that add to credibility?

• Wherever academics had their own agenda it resulted in wrong decisions

• Wherever specialists represented vested interest or short sighted career growth too it results in wrong ideas being promoted

• Scientists too have vested interest in publications (ex: M.S.S. on Sonora wheat and radiation)

• Consultancy dis-proportionate influence in policy

Some do, some don’t, some better don’t,…

What ‘tools’ helped and what did not in successful policy

influencing…

• Working with the government sector at any level – not only implementing but also refining

• Knowledge, associated practices and organizational reforms

• Judiciary• Campaigning• Monitoring methods, Feedback / Review

mechanisms• Role of media

Radical re-questioning doesn’t work with any conventional tools, only political will can do such radical shifts

Political strategising as one of the areas in which the civil society will have to concentrate for them to create significant impact in society

The last word…

“If we are able to judge when to use a machine and when to avoid it and if while using it we do so with understanding, quite a few of our difficulties will be solved. …We should be as careful in using machines as a doctor is in prescribing poisonous medicines. Machine-power can make a valuable contribution towards economic progress. But a few capitalists have employed machine power regardless of the interests of the common man and that is why our condition has deteriorated today.” - Gandhiji in conversation with Manu Gandhi, Bhangi Nivas, New Delhi, April 10, 1947