Communicating forestry research

for evidence-based policy in Cameroon

Sandrine Ebakisse

Ottawa

January 24th, 2014

Cameroonian forestry sector

Presentation of the research

Results of the study

Discussion and recommendations

Questions and comments

3

Cameroonian forestry sector

4

Cameroonian forest are part of Congo basin: world’s second-larget

stropical forest Cameroonian forest represents the second

income resource for the state: about 6% of GNP

Cameroonian forestry sector

5

Dynamism of policies:

General policy in 1993

Forestry law in 1994

Environnemental law in 1996

PSFE (sectorial program) in 2003

Review process since 2010 for the forestry law

Multiplicity of actors:

Central and local public agencies

Local governments

Civile society organizations

National and international private sector

Donors

International threaties

Large economic projects

CORRUPTION Intersectorial

policies

Participatory process of planning

Presentation of the research

― Research uptake

― Research questions

― Interviewees

6

vision Mission Goals Strategy Tactics Outputs Outcomes Impacts

7

Depend of our action

Don’t depend of us

Research uptake

R4D: research for change, for better living conditions of poor peoples

Plan Execution of the plan

Research uptake

Research communication: influence rather than impact in people behaviours or Change in policies and practices (Weiss – 1970) .

8 Philip Davies, Is evidence-Based Government Possible?

Evidence

Experience and

expertise

Pragmatitsm and

contingencies

Judgement

Ressources

Values

Habits and traditions

Lobbyists and pressure

groups

Research uptake

Research influence is not a product but a process (Carden – 2011). does not just try to make that the evidences it

brings is used by policies makers. contribute to the decision making process by

promoting evidence based policies and practices.

9

Research questions

How can communication better contribute to research influence ? What is the link between research that had policy

influence and communication approaches?

Were these approaches aligned with the general context and the research institution’s Theory of Change?

What best practices of these institutions can help to increase communication’s contribution to research influence?

12

Interviwees

Research institutions:

— Centre for International Forestry Research (CIFOR )

— Centre for Environment and Development (CED)

— International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD).

Public administrations: Cameroonian ministry of forest and wildlife (MINFOF).

Donors:

― European Union

― French government research Institutions 13

About Research institutions

14

Evidence/

science based

Interest / values

based

Confrontation /

outside track

Cooperation /

inside track

Advising

Lobbying Activism

Advocacy

Source: Daniel Start and Ingie Hovland “Tools for Policy Impact A Handbook for Researchers”

CIFOR CED

Results of the study

CED & CIFOR influence through direct and

indirect communication strategies.

Conditions/success factors of influence

throught communication

Limits due to the poor governance of the

forestry sector 15

CIFOR influence throught direct strategy The domestic market of timber

16

Evidence (research results)

Lack of regulations about exploitation of domestic timber

Great capacities concerning incomes (50% of total timber production)

Large network of corruption

Communication (direct strategy)

Discussions with the MINFOF based on the first set of data

In collaboration with MINFOF officers:

– Large diffusion of a broader report

– Print and broadcast media

– Public debates

Influence (what happened ?)

Nomination of responsibles in MINFOF

Sollicitation of CIFOR as a resources for the understanding and discussions on this matter

Broader studdy about the economic importance of forests in Cameroon

CED influence throught indirect strategy The Herakles Farm Gate

17

Evidence (research results)

Illegal contractual procedures

High environnemental risks

Violation of communities’ rights

Communication (indirect strategy)

Diffusion throught media channel (press conferences, releases…)

Distribution to other NGOs

Broadcasts and public debates

Influence (what happened ?)

Crisis meeting at MINFOF

Pressure from various actors

Public positionning of the ministry

Reconsideration of the term of the contract

Conditions/success factors of influence Communicate continuously and with patience

Respond to the interest of the government / decision makers

Be abble to network and create external pressure

Use informal relations 18

Limits due to the poor governance of the forestry sector

Indicators of poor governance

The double discourse of decision makers

To be In / to gain finances from donors / to keep a hidden agenda / to protect subjective interest.

The poor structure of forestry research Increasing lost of interest about forestry research / difficult access to information.

19

Limits due to the poor governance of the forestry sector

How it affects Research Communication

Informal nature of relations between actors. Researcher mainly communicate with decision makers by informal ways.

Informal character of access to forestry information. To know what is going on in the sector you must personally know peoples.

20

Discussion and Recommendations

Informal communication or Research objectivity?

Influence by all means or contribution to an evidence based decision making process?

Work on communication but not only

― Security of formal relations

― Importance of institutionnal capacities

― Results of a good structure of forestry research

21

Questions and comments

22

Thank you for your attention!