Evidence based Policy for Biological and Social Sciences (EBP-BioSoc)
Duration: 2007-2009
The full title of the project is “Validity of scientific knowledge and public intervention: The case of agriculture in sustainable development” which is funded by a French programme called the “Agriculture and Sustainable Development Programme” under the Agence National de la Recherche (French National Research Agency) and involving various ministries and research agencies. The project includes researchers from France (led by Dr. Catherine Laurent), Brazil (led by Dr. Maria Jose Carneiro) and South Africa and will compare decision-making processes in these three different political contexts. The South African team consists of Frank Matose (Programme for Land and Agrarian Studies at the University of the Western Cape), and Nicky Allsopp (South African National Biodiveristy Institute, SAEON).
The project is designed to analyse the way in which the empirical validity of available scientific knowledge is evaluated and taken into account in public interventions that bring into play interactions between agriculture, biodiversity conservation, and economic cohesion. It will mobilise knowledge from social science, bio-technical science, ecology and the philosophy of science. The project in South Africa focuses on the Working for Water (WfW) as a measure aimed at sustainable development objectives may possibly give rise to antagonisms between biodiversity protection objectives and economic cohesion objectives. It is intended to:
The full title of the project is “Validity of scientific knowledge and public intervention: The case of agriculture in sustainable development” which is funded by a French programme called the “Agriculture and Sustainable Development Programme” under the Agence National de la Recherche (French National Research Agency) and involving various ministries and research agencies. The project includes researchers from France (led by Dr. Catherine Laurent), Brazil (led by Dr. Maria Jose Carneiro) and South Africa and will compare decision-making processes in these three different political contexts. The South African team consists of Frank Matose (Programme for Land and Agrarian Studies at the University of the Western Cape), and Nicky Allsopp (South African National Biodiveristy Institute, SAEON).
The project is designed to analyse the way in which the empirical validity of available scientific knowledge is evaluated and taken into account in public interventions that bring into play interactions between agriculture, biodiversity conservation, and economic cohesion. It will mobilise knowledge from social science, bio-technical science, ecology and the philosophy of science. The project in South Africa focuses on the Working for Water (WfW) as a measure aimed at sustainable development objectives may possibly give rise to antagonisms between biodiversity protection objectives and economic cohesion objectives. It is intended to:
- observe how designers of measures mobilise sources of scientific knowledge, assess their quality (suitability for field of application, knowledge of controversies, etc.), and take their empirical validity into account in drawing up guidelines. This is combined with:
- an approach which philosophers of science qualify as 'internal', by analysing the scientific knowledge mobilised in practice, in relation to its status in the field of scientific debate, and
- an approach qualified as 'external', by analysing the way in which the limits to the empirical validity of scientific knowledge are taken into account in the economic and political regulation of cohesion/environment contradictions
- Finally, the knowledge base thus compiled and the connection between these three angles of analysis should enable us to identify properties which are sources of particular compatibility between scientific theories and public decision-making
The research is therefore intended to construct a framework of analysis that will enable us to account for the way in which empirical validity of scientific knowledge mobilised in public intervention is taken into account.
WORKSHOP: Can land and agrarian reform in South Africa create opportunities for smallholder farmers and help reduce rural poverty?