Thumbnail Image

Science–policy interface in action #2









Also available in:
No results found.

Related items

Showing items related by metadata.

  • Thumbnail Image
    Brochure, flyer, fact-sheet
    Science–Policy Interface in action #1 2024
    Also available in:
    No results found.

    The brochure delves into the critical interface between science and policy within the agrifood system, emphasizing its role in driving transformation, resilience, and food security. It highlights the importance of Science–Policy Interfaces (SPIs) in translating scientific discoveries into actionable policies and practices. Through examples like the Murray–Darling Basin Authority, it showcases how SPIs facilitate informed decision-making. The brochure also outlines various SPI mechanisms at national and global levels. Emphasizing the need for national-level SPIs, it offers insights into FAO's regional efforts in Europe and Central Asia. Additionally, it introduces a model approach for country-led SPI initiatives. Targeted at policymakers, scientists, and stakeholders, the brochure serves as a valuable resource for understanding and implementing inclusive, science-based policymaking in the agrifood sector, aiming to enhance resilience and sustainability.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Book (stand-alone)
    Guidance on strengthening national science–policy interfaces for agrifood systems 2024
    Also available in:
    No results found.

    In line with its Science and Innovation Strategy, FAO has developed this guidance on strengthening science–policy interfaces (SPIs) for agrifood systems at the national level, helping to ensure that effective policy decisions are made based upon sufficient, relevant, and credible science and evidence. It is targeted to SPIs that are focused on the transformation of agrifood systems to contribute to the achievement of the SDGs, with a focus on the needs of low- and middle-income countries. The guidance first reflects on the “why”, i.e. the need for a national SPI, analysing the potential benefits of an SPI in addressing country-specific agrifood system challenges, and mapping and assessing the science–policy advisory ecosystem. Second, it outlines the core aspirational elements of a functional SPI, including its aims and roles, guiding principles, and three broad SPI models (the “what”). The final two sections focus on the “how”, detailing the core structural elements of an effective, just, and equitable SPI, focusing on the convenor and stakeholders, scale and scope, and governance; and, covering the procedural elements of an SPI, discussing the operationalization of an SPI, capacity development activities, and the importance of learning and reflexivity for achieving the desired impact. The publication is structured to allow readers to explore the document in a modular way, particularly if they have a specific concern in mind.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Book (stand-alone)
    Global science–policy interfaces related to agrifood systems: a desktop review of structures and common patterns 2024
    Also available in:
    No results found.

    This background paper to the guidance that FAO is developing on strengthening science–policy interfaces (SPIs) for agrifood systems at the national level sets provides information about the structures and patterns common to global SPIs. It aims to: 1) provide a broad overview and comparison of how international SPIs work, 2) identify a set of categories that are relevant to the work of SPIs, 3) present a systematic, comparative analysis based on publicly available data, 4) draw preliminary conclusions based on findings, and 5) suggest further avenues for study. The conceptual framework identifies three key components of SPIs that, operating together, have the potential to anticipate and respond to needs and demands for both policy and science. Governance comprises the formal and informal rules and procedures for operation and integration among the numerous actors at the interface of science and policy. Co-production specifies the mechanisms by which diverse stakeholders and knowledge types are integrated and recognized in SPI activities. Learning represents the intention and capacity of the SPI to gain insights from what works and what does not work as it carries out its tasks. The findings show that across SPIs, patterning of the three components varies.

Users also downloaded

Showing related downloaded files

No results found.