D. Norse, J.B. Tschirley Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 82 2000 15–26 17
an article by Hamilton in which he puts forward an argument for more “relevance to world issues” and
one by Huebert, who argues that the “building blocks” of basic scientific knowledge must be much stronger
before taking on global modelling and policy relevant research Hamilton, 1999; Huebert, 1999. Clearly
both have valid points of view.
Global change research has a vital role to play in addressing questions such as — in what timeframe
and spatial scale will global changes occur? Will it be short or long-term? Will it be global or regional in
terms of physical and socio-economic impacts? What are the levels of uncertainty regarding the time scale
or geographic impact? This is especially important where there is need for proactive or precautionary
policy actions which may be required years be- fore the negative consequences of global change are
apparent.
The Food and Agriculture Organisation FAO of the United Nations contribution to and use of global
change research is only justified in terms of its rele- vance to its mandated responsibilities for food and
agriculture. These include, e.g., threats to food security and hence FAO’s early contributions to climate change
research and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC. The remainder of this paper draws on
the FAO experience with policy led research to widen the arguments for closer links between research and
policy making. First, by considering where science fits in a policy context. Second, by outlining the compo-
nents of policy analysis and implementation. Third, by suggesting principles for policy relevant science.
And finally, by suggesting research opportunities and how global change and terrestrial ecosystem GCTE
partnerships could achieve closer alignment with the policy formulation processes.
2. Science in a policy context
Global change research as it relates to food and agricultural policy is a relatively recent activity.
Through the 1960s most research was focused on national or regional issues of a short-term and narrow
technical nature. However, the publication of Limits to Growth Meadows et al., 1972, the Stockholm
Conference in 1972, the World Food Conference in 1974, UNCED in 1992 and the World Food Summit
in 1996, to name just a few, increased awareness of the global dimensions of food and agriculture.
Today, many of us live, eat, and speak globally. And yet, beyond the stream of assessment reports that
utilise the same limited data and information sources, we are still far from understanding important global
change processes in terrestrial ecosystems. Compared to the atmospheric and ocean disciplines, terrestrial
science is far behind in its ability to carry out policy relevant research. This is due to many factors, includ-
ing institutional constraints, but looming large is the simple fact that human beings inhabit the land and
their environmental, social and economic interactions are extremely complex.
The policy context of science and research is set by its role in guiding and informing debate — issues
such as destruction of the ozone layer, the effects of toxic chemicals, climate change and both the experi-
mental and commercial use of genetically modified organisms GMOs. Policy relevant science often
fosters public understanding and support for major political decisions. It is therefore essential to provide
early warning of emerging issues.
There are a number of factors that inhibit the use of science in policy formulation:
• Misconceptions about the nature of natural resource
management NRM problems. In the 1970s, e.g., it
was mistakenly argued that groundwater contami- nation by nitrates stemmed from the use of min-
eral fertilisers in high input production systems and that the solution was a switch to organic production
systems. It is now accepted that badly managed or- ganic manure applications can be just as polluting
as mineral fertilisers.
• Tendency to accept at face value public informa-
tion about environmental risks . It was common in
the 1970s and 1980s to read about overgrazing in sub-Saharan Africa and its consequences for de-
sertification and a southward shift in the Sahara desert. These statements were not scientifically well
founded but did have a strong influence on poli- cies and the use of financial resources for fencing,
watering and ranching enterprises. More rigorous analysis, taking place over a period of years and
with extensive use of high resolution remote sens- ing images, has demonstrated that the Sahara is
not “marching southwards”. The semi-arid range- lands of the Sahel are in a long-term dynamic
18 D. Norse, J.B. Tschirley Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 82 2000 15–26
equilibrium with rainfall Nicholson and Tucker, 1998, and overgrazing was not the major factor
in causing observed changes in the desert margins Behnke et al., 1993. Research revealed that suc-
cessful rangeland management depended as much on cultural and institutional factors as ecological
and technical ones. More than one billion dollars of development aid appears to have been directed
to symptoms rather than causes of change because of misunderstandings about the bio-physical and
socio-economic determinants of dryland producti- vity and degradation FAO, 1986.
3. Components of policy analysis and implementation
