Transcript No Slide Title

Science-Policy interactions in
the water sector – Some
reflections on the role of
science academies
Philippe QUEVAUVILLER
European Commission
DG Research
Directorate I ‘Environment’
Understanding the system: Needs for
multi-disciplinary and sectoral
undertakings
bio-physical system
D
River Basin Management
societal system
D
P
P
P
R
S
S
S
I
S
Base sketch from Meade (1996) and DPSIR from EEA
Looking at different sectors –
Integrated knowledge and
policy implications?
D
P
S
I
Driving Forces
Pressure
State
Impact
Discharges
Environmental
conditions:
Agriculture
Industry
Energy
Transport
Landuse
Resource use
Services
Households/
Consumption
Response
R
 physical
 chemical
 ecological
Nature
and
environment
Health
Understanding the system=
integrated knowledge (mixing
natural, social, economic sciences)
Source: EEA
WFD
But also…..
Linking knowledge to
policy implementation –
Anticipating & Feeding
with research outputs
linked to well defined
Poliy milestones
+Parent legislation
Adopted on 20.12.2000
(e.g. Flood Directive)
River basin districts
Delineation water bodies
2005
Analysis of pressures
and impacts
2005
Design of monitoring
Programmes
2006
RBMP – 2009/2015
Programmes of
Measures
2012
Classification of bodies ‘at risk’
Account of classification:
 Surveillance monitoring
 Operational monitoring
(+ investigative monitoring)
6 years cycle / Review
GOOD STATUS
OBJECTIVE
R&D responding to driver’s
needs, yes, but should we not
put some order in the house to
avoid missing opportunities?
FP6/7
IPs
Research
LIFE
Demonstration
& testing
Interreg
Trans-boundary
implementation
Courtesy Bob Harris, Sheffield University
COST
Co-operation
& networking
FP6/7
ERA-Nets
Co-operation
and coordination of
research
Establishing links with ‘science-users’
POLICY
DEVELOPMENT
DESIGN OF
POLICY
RESEARCH,
SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS,
POLICY INTEGRATION
POLICY
REVIEW
POLICY
IMPLEMENTATION
Example of established platform:
Common Implementation Strategy 2010-2012
Water Directors
Steering of implementation process
Chair: Presidency, Co-chair: Commission
Strategic Co-ordination Group
Art. 21
Committee
Co-ordination of work programme
Chair: Commission
WG A
“Ecological Status”
WG D
“Reporting”
WG F
“Floods”
Climate
Change & WFD
WFD and
Agriculture
Chair: JRC, DE, UK
Chair: EC, EEA, FR
Chair: EC, IE
Chair: DE, EC
Chair: FR, UK
WG C
“Groundwater”
WG E
“Chemical Aspects”
Water scarcity
and drought
Chair: EC, AT
Chair: EC, JRC, IT, FR, SE
Chair: IT, FR, ES
Established working groups
Temporary working groups
Stakeholders, NGO’s, Researchers, Experts, etc.
Communication involves two ways
exchanges of information
•who - is your audience
or the users of the
information?
Translators/transformers
a two-way process
•what - do they need to
know?
•how - is it best
presented?
Research
Community
“Doers of science”
“Translator/Transformer”
“Users”
(e.g. Policymakers &
regulators)
DEFINING THE NEEDS
•when - do they need
the information?
TRANSLATING & UNDERSTANDING
Can Science Academies help in the „transforming“ work?
Courtesy of Peter Allen-Williams (IWRM.Net) & Bob Harris
Research results
Four stages to implementation
Research
EU- or NATIONAL PROJECTS
Dissemination
Communication
International / National / Regional Policy
and Research
Uptake
A role for Science Academies?
Courtesy of Peter Allen-Williams (IWRM.Net) & Bob Harris
Implementation
Linking initiatives
on relevant themes
EU-Funded research
RTD synergies,
Critical mass?
Links with EU,
National, regional
stakeholders?
Joint dissemination
strategies, communication
efforts (single voice)?
Linking specific case studies
at relevant scales
Case studies
Project data:
EEA, WISE?
Links with regional
projects, incl.
INTERREG?
Links with River Basin
Authorities, local science
providers, others?
Transfer and use of research:
where to start, top-down or
bottom-up?
High
Authorities
Coordinating
Groups,
Incl. Academies?
Policy question & purpose
Policy Implementation
Working Groups
Scientific / Technical
Recommendations
‘Users’ of Science information
(RBD level, local)
 Implementation
1st level of communication
through “Science-Policy Briefs”
• Science-Policy Briefs should have a ‘cascade’
effect, starting from policy questions to which
science contributes to bring responses (decisionmakers), and providing technical/scientific
recommendations with increased level of details
(implementers)
• Briefs are an incentive to consider potentially
interesting research outputs but they do not
ensure themselves an appropriate transfer: needs
for downscaling ‘relays’ and demonstration at
river basin levels
• Usability conditioned by proper communication
(guides?) and language barriers
Example of Science-Policy
Briefs
-
The XEROCHORE project (drought research) has produced 5 Science
Policy Briefs on the link between drought and the EU Water Framework
Directive, i.e.:
characterisation of water bodies and of the analysis of pressures and impacts (Art. 5)
monitoring of surface water and groundwater status and of protected areas (Art. 8 relevant also for Art. 1)
recovery of costs for water services (Art. 9)
implementing a programme of measures (Art. 11, including Annex VI part b)
river basin management plans (Art.13)
2nd level of communication
through “technical guides”
Accessible science information, from state-of-the-art
review up to “cooking recipes” describing how to
apply specific research outputs
Effective communication / use at
catchment level!
Sustainable land use
practices !
Image from presentation by Dr Peter Heiland used.
Interfacing needs
Expertise, tools
Research recommendations
Linked to policies (short to long-term goals)
Scientific
knowledge
INTERFACE
Data infrastructure
“memory”
Transfer & dissem.
“usability”
Demonstration, practical works
at most appropriate level / scale
POLICY-MAKERS
Member States
Commission
Interactive interface
Seen from a different angle
Research
DEVELOPMENT
EU-wide
IDENTIFICATION
OF RESEARCH NEEDS
DATA ACCESS
Data from projects
National
Results (info / data)
directly usable/
transferable?
USERS
YES
NO
Policy
Expert Groups
INFORMATION
EXCHANGES
Webportal
INFORMATION
ACCESS
• Demonstration (applicability)
• Capacity-building
• Networking
TRAINING
Education,
Training
A POSSIBLE OPERATIONAL SCIENCE-POLICY
INTERFACE IN SUPPORT OF INTEGRATED
RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT
Conclusions – Role of Science
Academies?
• ‘integrated knowledge’ is a must to effectively
support policies – this requires multi-disciplinary
and sectoral cooperation. Science Academies may
have a liaison role in this respect
• An operational science-policy interfacing is
essential to ensure proper synergies and take-up
of scientific results by “users”. Possibilities for
Science Academies to contribute to relays of
scientific information/outputs?
• Specific research needs have to be identified in
which Science Academies have obviously a role to
play
• Last but not least, the strong “knowledge
anchorage” of Science Academies should be
better used and known by policy-makers and
stakeholders