Publication: Knowledge and Innovation Management in the Policy Debate on Biofuel Sustainability in Mozambique : What Roles for Researchers?
Loading...
Files in English
334 downloads
Published
2011-10-07
ISSN
1947-4199
Date
2013-05-07
Editor(s)
Abstract
This paper explores the relationship between knowledge management (KM) and innovation management (IM) in policy processes. By describing and analysing the roles of researchers as knowledge and innovation managers in policy processes we also contribute to the debate on how researchers can enhance their effective contribution to policy processes. Empirical data for the paper were gathered between December 2008 and November 2010. During that period, two of this paper's authors conducted participatory action research whilst supporting the Mozambican inter-ministerial Subgroup Sustainability Criteria in developing a sustainability framework for biofuel production in Mozambique. We conclude that KM and IM are mutually reinforcing and inextricably bound: KM can provide the basis for engaging in IM activities or roles, which may -- consequently -- create an enabling environment for more effective KM in policy processes. The active embedding of researchers in policy processes an action-oriented research approach and systematic reflection can enable researchers to continuously determine what (combination of) KM and IM strategies or roles can enhance the actionability of research in, and the quality of the policy process. To do so successfully, a process-based research approach and strategic management of the boundary between research and policy are key.
Link to Data Set
Digital Object Identifier
Associated content
Other publications in this report series
Journal
Journal Volume
Journal Issue
Collections
Related items
Showing items related by metadata.
Publication Space for Innovation for Sustainable Community-Based Biofuel Production and Use: Lessons Learned for Policy from Nhambita Community, Mozambique(2011)This paper provides insights and recommendations for policy on the opportunities and constrains that influence the space for innovation for sustainable community-based biofuel production and use. Promoted by the Mozambican government, Nhambita community established jatropha trials in 2005. Initial results were promising, but crop failure and the absence of organized markets led to scepticism amongst farmers. We start from the idea that the promotion of community-based biofuel production and use requires taking interactions between social-cultural, biophysical, economic, political, and legal subsystems across different scales and levels of analysis through time into account. Our analysis demonstrates that heterogeneous farming strategies and their synergies at community level should be carefully assessed. Furthermore, national and international political and legal developments, such as the development of biofuel sustainability criteria, influence the local space in which community-based biofuel developments take place. We conclude that ex-ante integrated assessment and creating an enabling environment can enhance space for sustainable community-based biofuel production and use. It may provide insights into the opportunities and constraints for different types of smallholders, and promote the development of adequate policy mechanisms to prevent biofuels from becoming a threat rather than an opportunity for smallholders.Publication Product Innovation by Incumbent Firms in Developing Economies : The Roles of Research and Development Expenditures, Trade Policy, and the Investment Climate(Washington, DC: World Bank, 2007-08)A model of firm innovation illustrates the effects of the threat of imitation and product varieties on a representative firm's decision to invest in research and development to produce new product varieties. The model motivates two empirical questions: (1) Is research and development partially correlated with firms' propensity to introduce new products or product innovation in developing countries? (2) Do trade policies and the national investment climate affect firms' propensity for product innovation? The econometric evidence suggests that the answers are yes and yes, but the investment climate affects product innovation in a manner that is consistent with the presence of market failures and state capture. National trade-policy distortions appear to reduce the probability of product innovation, and the density of exporting firms at the national level also seems to positively affect the propensity to introduce new products by individual firms. The paper discusses some policy implications.Publication Sustainable Management of Agricultural Research and Technology Dissemination (SMARTD) : A Strategic Framework(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2008-06)Revitalizing agriculture is critical for rural Indonesia's economic prosperity. Historically, Indonesia's dramatic poverty reduction was driven by progress in agriculture and agriculture continues to be a potent driver of growth and poverty alleviation. Agricultural sector growth strongly induces non-agricultural sector growth in rural areas, particularly through demand for locally produced and services. Agricultural sector productivity growth (along with price changes) has remained the most important way out of poverty. To shift agriculture along these dimensions, Indonesia needs to transition from its current and ineffective public stance, growing subsidies and selective output protection, to a more aggressive provision of public goods and services that build support systems for farmers to achieve continuous productivity gains. This will require an enabling agriculture policy environment, significant improvement in the delivery of services, agricultural research and extension in particular, and supporting enabling investments, which will encourage small farmers to move to high value agricultural activities. This will boost employment and raise incomes in rural areas while creating a bigger rural market with greater trade and investment opportunities.Publication Sustainable Management of Agricultural Research and Technology Dissemination (SMARTD) : A Strategic Framework(Washington, DC, 2008-06)Revitalizing agriculture is critical for rural Indonesia's economic prosperity. Historically, Indonesia's dramatic poverty reduction was driven by progress in agriculture and agriculture continues to be a potent driver of growth and poverty alleviation. Agricultural sector growth strongly induces non-agricultural sector growth in rural areas, particularly through demand for locally produced and services. Agricultural sector productivity growth (along with price changes) has remained the most important way out of poverty. To shift agriculture along these dimensions, Indonesia needs to transition from its current and ineffective public stance, growing subsidies and selective output protection, to a more aggressive provision of public goods and services that build support systems for farmers to achieve continuous productivity gains. This will require an enabling agriculture policy environment, significant improvement in the delivery of services, agricultural research and extension in particular, and supporting enabling investments, which will encourage small farmers to move to high value agricultural activities. This will boost employment and raise incomes in rural areas while creating a bigger rural market with greater trade and investment opportunities.Publication Development of Biofuels in China : Technologies, Economics and Policies(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2012-10)China promulgated the Medium and Long-Term Development Plan for Renewable Energy in 2007, which included targets of 2010 and 2020 for various renewable energy technologies including biofuels. The 2010 biofuel targets were met and even surpassed except for non-grain fuel ethanol; however, there is debate on whether and how the country will be able to meet the 2020 biofuels target. This paper provides a resource and technological assessment of biofuel feedstocks, compares biofuel production costs from various feddstocks and technologies, and evaluates policies introduced in the country for the development of biofuels. The paper also presents the projections on the production of biofuels under various policy scenarios. The study shows that China can potentially satisfy its non-grain fuel ethanol target by 2020 from the technology perspective. But it will probably fall far short of this target without additional fiscal incentives as production costs of non-grain feedstock based biofuels are expected to remain relatively high. By contrast, the 2020 target of biodiesel production has a high probability of being achieved because the target itself is relatively small. With additional support policies, it could develop even further.
Users also downloaded
Showing related downloaded files
Publication Breaking the Conflict Trap : Civil War and Development Policy(Washington, DC: World Bank and Oxford University Press, 2003)Most wars are now civil wars. Even though international wars attract enormous global attention, they have become infrequent and brief. Civil wars usually attract less attention, but they have become increasingly common and typically go on for years. This report argues that civil war is now an important issue for development. War retards development, but conversely, development retards war. This double causation gives rise to virtuous and vicious circles. Where development succeeds, countries become progressively safer from violent conflict, making subsequent development easier. Where development fails, countries are at high risk of becoming caught in a conflict trap in which war wrecks the economy and increases the risk of further war. The global incidence of civil war is high because the international community has done little to avert it. Inertia is rooted in two beliefs: that we can safely 'let them fight it out among themselves' and that 'nothing can be done' because civil war is driven by ancestral ethnic and religious hatreds. The purpose of this report is to challenge these beliefs.Publication Design Thinking for Social Innovation(2010-07)Designers have traditionally focused on enchancing the look and functionality of products.Publication Governance Matters IV : Governance Indicators for 1996-2004(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2005-06)The authors present the latest update of their aggregate governance indicators, together with new analysis of several issues related to the use of these measures. The governance indicators measure the following six dimensions of governance: (1) voice and accountability; (2) political instability and violence; (3) government effectiveness; (4) regulatory quality; (5) rule of law, and (6) control of corruption. They cover 209 countries and territories for 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, and 2004. They are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 37 separate data sources constructed by 31 organizations. The authors present estimates of the six dimensions of governance for each period, as well as margins of error capturing the range of likely values for each country. These margins of error are not unique to perceptions-based measures of governance, but are an important feature of all efforts to measure governance, including objective indicators. In fact, the authors give examples of how individual objective measures provide an incomplete picture of even the quite particular dimensions of governance that they are intended to measure. The authors also analyze in detail changes over time in their estimates of governance; provide a framework for assessing the statistical significance of changes in governance; and suggest a simple rule of thumb for identifying statistically significant changes in country governance over time. The ability to identify significant changes in governance over time is much higher for aggregate indicators than for any individual indicator. While the authors find that the quality of governance in a number of countries has changed significantly (in both directions), they also provide evidence suggesting that there are no trends, for better or worse, in global averages of governance. Finally, they interpret the strong observed correlation between income and governance, and argue against recent efforts to apply a discount to governance performance in low-income countries.Publication Governance Matters VIII : Aggregate and Individual Governance Indicators 1996–2008(2009-06-01)This paper reports on the 2009 update of the Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) research project, covering 212 countries and territories and measuring six dimensions of governance between 1996 and 2008: Voice and Accountability, Political Stability and Absence of Violence/Terrorism, Government Effectiveness, Regulatory Quality, Rule of Law, and Control of Corruption. These aggregate indicators are based on hundreds of specific and disaggregated individual variables measuring various dimensions of governance, taken from 35 data sources provided by 33 different organizations. The data reflect the views on governance of public sector, private sector and NGO experts, as well as thousands of citizen and firm survey respondents worldwide. The authors also explicitly report the margins of error accompanying each country estimate. These reflect the inherent difficulties in measuring governance using any kind of data. They find that even after taking margins of error into account, the WGI permit meaningful cross-country comparisons as well as monitoring progress over time. The aggregate indicators, together with the disaggregated underlying indicators, are available at www.govindicators.org.Publication Government Matters III : Governance Indicators for 1996-2002(World Bank, Washington, DC, 2003-08)The authors present estimates of six dimensions of governance covering 199 countries and territories for four time periods: 1996, 1998, 2000, and 2002. These indicators are based on several hundred individual variables measuring perceptions of governance, drawn from 25 separate data sources constructed by 18 different organizations. The authors assign these individual measures of governance to categories capturing key dimensions of governance and use an unobserved components model to construct six aggregate governance indicators in each of the four periods. They present the point estimates of the dimensions of governance as well as the margins of errors for each country for the four periods. The governance indicators reported here are an update and expansion of previous research work on indicators initiated in 1998 (Kaufmann, Kraay, and Zoido-Lobat 1999a,b and 2002). The authors also address various methodological issues, including the interpretation and use of the data given the estimated margins of errors.