Centre for Research on Evaluation, Science and Technology (CREST)

Permanent URI for this community

https://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/96223

Browse

Browsing Centre for Research on Evaluation, Science and Technology (CREST) by browse.metadata.advisor "Cloete, Thomas Eugene"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The contribution of the Water Research Fund for Southern Africa (WARFSA) to knowledge production and policy in the SADC water sector
    (Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 2019-04) Elema, Nico Michiel; Mouton, Johann; Cloete, Thomas Eugene; Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences. Centre for Research on Evaluation, Science and Technology.
    ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) has been adopted by member states in the Southern African Development Community (SADC) as the process to best manage water resources, with research as a major component in the process. Moreover, it is increasingly a requirement for universities and research institutions to indicate the benefit of their research. With various universities and research institutions (and varying levels of resources) conducting water research in the SADC region, outputs from the Water Research Fund of Southern Africa (WARFSA) provides an opportunity to analyse the impact of such research, given the regional nature of the programme. Moreover, given that the WARFSA was implemented between 1999 and 2007, the time-lag provide an opportunity to analyse the contribution to knowledge production, and specifically the scientific (citation) impact and, given its mandate from the SADC ministers, policy uptake. However, as no mechanism was put in place to attribute and monitor economic, ecological and social benefits from the WARFSA, this was excluded from the study. Applying a mixed methods approach, various aspects relating to water research knowledge production and policy uptake of research were investigated, resulting in this thesis being divided into three parts. Part A framing the research project, Part B presenting a SADC water sectoral analysis and analysis of knowledge production in the SADC region, and Part C presenting results from the analysis of knowledge production and policy aspects of the Water Research Fund for Southern Africa (WARFSA). Research methodologies comprised a literature review to determine a theoretical framework, and an analysis of previous empirical studies on the scientific contribution of water research in the SADC region, and research on knowledge produced and citation impact. In addition, scientometric techniques were used to analyse citation data from water publications in the SADC region between 1980 and 2016, and knowledge produced from research projects funded through the WARFSA. Lastly, interviews were conducted with researchers and stakeholders involved in the WARFSA programme, to ascertain policy uptake from the WARFSA. As the study has shown, researchers affiliated with South African universities and research institutions have produced 84% of water research in the region, and for this reason, bibliometric data was first analysed to include citation data from all SADC countries, then South African citation data on its own, which was followed by SADC countries were South African citation data was excluded (referred to in the study as ‘SADC-ExSA’ countries). As already mentioned, one of the main findings from the study was that water research in the SADC region was mainly produced by South African researchers. However, on a per capita basis, researchers from Botswana, followed by the Seychelles and then South Africa, Namibia and Zimbabwe had produced the most water research. As most previous bibliometric studies were conducted on the South African water sector, findings from the analysis of citation data from South African researchers supported the previous bibliometric studies. The analysis of citation data from SADC-ExSA countries provided a clearer picture of the contribution the WARFSA programme has made to knowledge production in the region, especially when comparing citation data before and after the implementation period of WARFSA in the early 2000s. It was further evident that most of the 78 research projects funded through the WARFSA were implemented in SADC-ExSA countries, and benefited these countries most. If one were to consider only water research output in SADC-ExSA countries during the implementation period of WARFSA between 1999 and 2007, a significant increase is observed during this period. In addition, the study highlights the significance of the annual WaterNet/WARFSA/GWP SA symposium, which was initially presented along with WARFSA and continued after the initial two phases of the WARFSA. The study further highlighted the large contribution of external donor funding towards water research in especially SADC-ExSA countries, which some could argue borders on a dependency on external funding, when compared to more local support for water research in South Africa. In terms of the contribution of the WARFSA towards policy uptake, the study highlighted the gap between the research community and policymakers, the mixed involvement of practitioners and policymakers in the research projects and the positive role of intermediaries and knowledge brokers in the WARFSA-funded projects. Finally, the study highlighted the challenges in attributing research findings to policy relevance. In conclusion, this study recommends the potential adaptation of the HERG Payback framework to reflect ecological benefits resulting from research better. Moreover, such adaptations to the HERG Payback framework could strengthen future phases of the WARFSA to identify, monitor and report the benefits of research. In addition, such a monitoring function should be established outside research projects, to support research projects better.