EQUITY AND INCLUSION IN POLICY PROCESS (EquIPP) ANALYSIS Similar to the other funds studied, the Science Fund is analysed by using the EquIPP analysis. This fund

9.3 EQUITY AND INCLUSION IN POLICY PROCESS (EquIPP) ANALYSIS Similar to the other funds studied, the Science Fund is analysed by using the EquIPP analysis. This fund

is analysed based on nine (9) themes and seventeen (17) key actions. This analysis is based on four official documents and findings from a focus group discussion. The four documents are (i) Science Fund Guidelines, (ii) eScienceUser Manual, (iii) eScience Fund Application Form, and (iv) List of Recipients (2011, 2010).

9.3.1 Theme 1: Meaningful Participatory Policy Procedure

There are two key actions in Theme 1 which are a setup of appropriate participatory form (key action

1) and ensure the highest level of participation (key action 2). Based on Theme 1, it can be seen that MOSTI has encouraged and engaged with various stakeholders especially research institutes, government agencies, institutes of higher learning and private sectors to setup Research Management Centre. In terms of fund application procedure, there is a brief explanation about project evaluation by the Institutional Screening Committee, the Technical and Financial Evaluation Committee and the Fund Approval Committee at MOSTI. However, what is not clear is the project selection process as there is no specific explanation about project selection process written in any documents.

Based on the eligibility criteria, it is clear that it targets specific researchers and institutions. While this could be considered as restrictive, given the specific nature of the grant and its objectives, only researchers with the relevant expertise and credible institutions should be considered.

In terms of key action 2, to ensure the highest level of participation, MOSTI has conducted various talks, workshop and exhibition to promote this fund. For example, there are various talks and workshop conducted by MOSTI representatives on how to get research grants from MOSTI.

There appears to be an imbalance between the number of priority areas for the sciences and the social and human sciences. To further understand this, there is a need to analyse the list of successful grants (approved and completed). Initial analysis of 342 recipients of Science Fund for year 2010 and 2011 indicates that there were less than 10 recipients from social science and humanities. Most of the recipients were for ICT, biotechnology and S&T core researches. For 2011, there was only one grant recipient from social science and humanities with a research titled “Teaching as a Career: Comparative Study of Teacher Trainees ”. While in 2010, there were 8 recipients from social science and humanities related research. Based on the list of recipients, only 9 out of 342 recipients (or 2.6%) were from the social science and humanities – a clear imbalance. Although there is no data on the number of applicants from the social and human sciences, we can surmise that there are not that many from these disciplines compared to those from science-related fields. To enhance social inclusion, there is

a need to close the gap between priorities given to science-related fields and those for the social sciences and humanities.

9.3.2 Theme 2: Cross-sectoral and Intergovernmental Cooperation and Coordination

There are two key actions under Theme 2, which are to strengthen cross-sectoral cooperation (key action 3) and strengthen intergovernmental cooperation. This grant allows for cross-sectoral cooperation and grant transfer between organisations. This grant encourages different sectors to work together to produce integrated strategy and result on a specific priority area. According to MOSTI officers, there is continuous engagement with Research Management Centers (RMCs), other stakeholders, beneficiaries and evaluation committee in the Science Fund practices. The collaboration and industry linkages may be crucial in certain projects of Science Fund. MOSTI encourages collaboration to ensure a better research project with roles of collaborators clearly identified and a letter of Intent or MOA with collaborators must be submitted to MOSTI (Focus group discussion, 26 th October 2015). Based on the specific target group, this grant encourages different government levels There are two key actions under Theme 2, which are to strengthen cross-sectoral cooperation (key action 3) and strengthen intergovernmental cooperation. This grant allows for cross-sectoral cooperation and grant transfer between organisations. This grant encourages different sectors to work together to produce integrated strategy and result on a specific priority area. According to MOSTI officers, there is continuous engagement with Research Management Centers (RMCs), other stakeholders, beneficiaries and evaluation committee in the Science Fund practices. The collaboration and industry linkages may be crucial in certain projects of Science Fund. MOSTI encourages collaboration to ensure a better research project with roles of collaborators clearly identified and a letter of Intent or MOA with collaborators must be submitted to MOSTI (Focus group discussion, 26 th October 2015). Based on the specific target group, this grant encourages different government levels

cross cooperation and intergovernmental cooperation appear to be lacking.

9.3.3 Theme 3: Matching Social and Provision

Under Theme 3, there are two key actions which are: plan according to need (key action 5) and specify actions by which social needs will be addressed (key action 6). This grant is dedicated to match social needs and provision. There is a clear instruction on work plan and timelines. All proposals must have clear objectives, research background, socioeconomic objectives (SEO), fields of research (FOR), research approach, benefits of the project particularly on the output/product, human capital development, economic contribution and infrastructure contribution. It directly addresses the ‘local condition’ of a particular situation/group. There are five explicit socioeconomic objectives of this grant which are defense, economic development, society, environment and advancement of knowledge. There is an outline of transformative pathways in terms of output of a research project. While a number of these objectives can be directed towards enhancing social inclusion, it is not clear whether they are being done as there is no data to support that assertion.

In terms of research proposal, it must be specific with measurable research objectives as well as technically feasible. The outputs expected are prototype, patents, new/ improved process, and new method/ technique. It must also reflect the output of an applied research with potential industrial applications. This portrays that this fund focuses on the needs of the society but it is not clear whether the beneficiaries fall under the vulnerable groups, thus enhancing social inclusion.

The process of evaluation of the grant includes pitching. There is evidence of terms of reference (TOR), evaluation form and technical financial form. There is the adoption of participatory techniques to allow local experiences and tailor policy provision to real social needs.

9.3.4 Theme 4: Social Budgeting

There are three (3) key actions under this theme. Key action 6: specify actions by which social needs will be addressed. It should be noted that the strategic trust of NPSTI indicates the need for a “level playing field” and inclusiveness which is in keeping with meeting “social needs”. However, it is unclear to what extent the Science Fund has explicit projects, programs, and interventions to “level the playing field” or social needs.

In terms of key action 7, build equity considerations into budget, there is a comprehensive mechanism of due diligence of budget and expenditure. Based on the application form, there is a trace of sustainability and long-term commitment to funding. The form indicates three types of application – new research, modification of previous research and extension of existing project. However, there is no guarantee of a long-term commitment to fund and sustain after the completion of the 1 st phase.

For key action 8, minimise gaps between real and planned budgets, this grant has a comprehensive budget monitoring mechanism. There are two project reports to monitor the activities and budget of

a grant. Thorough budget assessment is compulsory as mentioned in 5.1 Science Fund ’s instruction. However, there is no evidence gathered to indicate s takeholders’ satisfaction.

9.3.5 Theme 5: Responsive and Flexible

Theme 5 consists of one key action, that is, to devise a responsive and flexible implementation plan. On this issue, it appears to be responsive and flexible. There is a specific project monitoring team assigned to each project and a regular review schedule and a clause for extension. The application process appears systematic with internal screening (AV), technical financial committee evaluation and Theme 5 consists of one key action, that is, to devise a responsive and flexible implementation plan. On this issue, it appears to be responsive and flexible. There is a specific project monitoring team assigned to each project and a regular review schedule and a clause for extension. The application process appears systematic with internal screening (AV), technical financial committee evaluation and

According to MOSTI officers (2015), the selection process adopts inclusive selection methodology with involvement of various stakeholders in the application, selection, monitoring and evaluation processes. This shows there is a responsive and flexible implementation plan with the requirement of the two specific research reports. The instruction of this grant is clear. It states that the progress report can be used to apply for changes in timeline/milestones. The key milestones also must be relevant. It must categorically quantify the various significant accomplishments of the projects in phases and should reflect the various major stages of progress in the project. It must have at least 2 milestones per calendar year.

9.3.6 Theme 6: Partnerships and Inter-Agency Cooperation

Under theme 6, there are two key actions which are to select the most appropriate implementation partners (key action 11) and actively encourage inter-agency cooperation (key action 12). This grant encourages partnership and inter-agency cooperation. This grant defines the collaboration as a form of sharing of expertise and research facilities. Based on interview with MOSTI officers (interview in 2015), there is continuous inter-agency cooperation. However, the method of selection and encouragement of inter-agency cooperation is not clearly stated. The involvement of civil society and community organizations is also not mentioned in the collaborator classification. There is no evidence of the measures taken as well as stakeholders’ satisfaction on processes and outcomes.

9.3.7 Theme 7: Multi-dimensional and Context Driven Performance Indicators

The performance indicator (key action 13) is specifically to evaluate the progress and performance of individual project based on the timeline and output. This is quite straight forward. While there is data on the successful proposals and completed research, there is no database on social inclusion since MOSTI database is specifically for STI information such as researcher’s name, field of research, facilities

and equipment, project, etc.

9.3.8 Theme 8: Data Fit for Purpose

There are two key actions under Theme 8, which are disaggregating data collection (key action 14) and collect qualitative and quantitative data (key action 15). There is data on the successful proposals and completed research. The descriptive quantitative data is available online. However, there is no evidence of qualitative data or of data disaggregation.

9.3.9 Theme 9: Comprehensive and Inclusive Dissemination System

Under Theme 9, there are two key actions, which are, sharing information with policy beneficiaries and sharing information with the policy community. Although this fund focuses on specific groups, its information is well disseminated through the website and is easily accessed by the target group. The information is also available through exhibitions such as National Conference & Exhibition (NICE), as well as awards such as National Innovation Award organised by MOSTI. These awards and conferences are quite inclusive as they are open to all categories – primary and secondary schools, grass-roots, university researchers and those from industries. In terms of information sharing, there is a comprehensive and inclusive dissemination system through research publications and outputs.