Plan to Boost African Science Academies Bears Fruit
Christina Scott
Efforts to tackle the long-standing problems facing societies in Africa
through the African Science Academy Development Initiative have begun to
yield profound dividends.
A ten-year project is underway by the US National Academy of Sciences to
strengthen the capacity of science academies in Nigeria, South Africa and
Uganda so that scientific evidence doesn't remain trapped in peer-reviewed
journals but influences government policy and improves the quality of life
of citizens.
But as a recent editorial in Nature noted, national science academies in
Africa are institutionally and financially weak and lack the skills to
communicate with both policy makers and with the wider public through the
media.
As a result of the US programmes, and in response to precisely the same
concerns raised in Nature, the Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAf), held
its first international double symposium on evidence-based
decision-making in Pretoria/Tshwane in South Africa recently earlier this
month.
"It is a supremely important topic," said Dr Xola Mati, senior
project
officer at the South African Academy offices in Pretoria/Tshwane.
The symposium, at the offices of Africa's single largest research
organisation, South Africa's Council for Scientific and Industrial Research
(CSIR), focused on how the continent's scientists can be best placed to give
advice to government, with input from Academies around the globe, South African
government officials, and other researchers in and outside of the Academy.
The symposium was also attended by Professor Joseph Malo, president
of the Kenyan National Academy of Sciences. "The double symposium was part
of the approved work plan approved by the ASSAf council and the USA's National
Academy of Sciences in order to build the capacity of African academies so they
can give good reputable advice, and also develop the receptiveness of African
governments to requesting, receiving and using such advice," said ASSAf
executive officer Wieland Gevers.
"Although ASSAf proposed the symposium in July last year as one of
the priorities, the recent editorial in Nature and coverage in SciDev.Net of
the Kenyan conference on African Science Academies have strengthened and fueled
our resolve to tackle these issues," he added.
The South African symposium focused closely on the need to open up channels
of communication on matters of evidence with policy makers, with a considerable
presence from representatives of the South African government, including deputy
health minister Nozizwe Madlala-Routledge and policy-makers in science, health,
agriculture and education ministries.
The symposium was also addressed by Dr Olive Shisana, president and chief
executive officer of the South African government-funded Human Sciences
Research Council (HSRC) which in many ways has stepped into gap left by the
absence of functioning Academies in Africa in order to provide governments with
research and advice in its specific sphere, which is social science.
Although based in South Africa, the HSRC has access to international funds
in order to do research throughout Africa. "Olive Shisana has been
particularly active in establishing continental networks, including SAHARA
(the Social Aspects of HIV/AIDS Research Alliance)," Gevers explained.
"But
the HSRC doesn't do systematic reviews offered by Academies - or to put it
another way, they don't do jury work, we do."
Scientists from South Africa were fascinated by the varied strategies used
by different Academies. Prior to the symposium, few had realised that the US
National Academy of Sciences often took funding for specific projects from
government departments, arguing that their track record and reputation protected
them from pressure. On the other hand, the Royal Society in the UK could count
on one hand the number of times in their long history that they had used
government money, preferring to remain utterly independent in order to forestall
any allegations of bias.
"In African countries there is no tradition of science academies being
trusted or used," Professor Gevers confirmed. "It is a tightrope
between
being independent and being heard."
The consensus was that given the relatively vulnerable institutional and
financial position of the South African Academy, it would be best to model
itself on the Royal Society to avoid any perception - particularly with a
highly-skeptical public - that their findings could be influenced. "At
least
until a track record has been established which is sufficiently strong,"
Gevers pointed out.
Many South African government representatives said that they had not been
aware of the existence of the Academy but left the symposium impressed with the
idea of utilising South Africa's scientific human resources to tackle problems
of disease and poverty. "The Academy of Science of South Africa is an
opportunity for the government to tap into the expertise of its higher education
system at very little cost," was how Mark Orkin, former head of the HSRC,
put it at the conference.
Some participants from government battled with the concept that the Academy
is not meant to compete with universities by doing fundamental research, but is
available to weigh up and analyse the best-available evidence before coming to a
conclusion - a conclusion which is presented simultaneously to the wider public
as well as to the government or to any agency commissioning the research.
ASSAf is now preparing a book utilising the papers from the conference, said
Dr Xola Mati.
The South African Academy is also tackling the issue of not communicating
enough with the media and with the public. The Academy already has taken
over responsibility for the peer-reviewed South African Journal of Science,
one of the oldest science journals in the southern hemisphere, in 2001 when the
centralised clearing-house for numerous scientific academic journals run by the
government's Bureau of Scientific Publications closed down.
In addition, in 2004 the Academy also began producing the more popular
science magazine Quest every two months.
The Academy is also conducting its first two studies. Soon academy executive
officer Wieland Gevers will be releasing the Academy's first study, on the
publishing of scientific research in South Africa. The country has 350 journals
but battles with issues of visibility and accessibility and reputation. Several
South African journals have not being cited at all in an period covering more
than a dozen years. The findings made by Gevers' 14-member panel are likely to
have a resounding impact on university funding, academic careers and the
position of South Africa in the global science community.
But the most controversial study is being handled by Barry Mendelow, the
acclaimed biomedical scientist, scholar and administrator from the
University of the Witwatersrand (Wits) in Johannesburg. Professor Mendelow is
chairing an Academy panel into nutrition and immunity in relation to
HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis infections. Beetroot, garlic and olive oil -touted by
the South African health ministry, which opposes anti-retroviral drugs, as a
significant weapon in the war on AIDS - are not going to escape scrutiny. The
first draft of the study will be assessed by independent members of the Academy
and the full report is expected in 2007.
|
