Summary Report of the Joint Meeting IGC/Bureau SAC November 2010

Transcription

1 1 Distribution: Limited SHS-11/CONF.203/03b Original: English 10 TH SESSION OF THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL COUNCIL Paris, March 2011 Summary Report of the Joint Meeting IGC/Bureau SAC November The eight elected members of the MOST Intergovernmental Council Bureau, (MOST IGC President Minister Alicia Kirchner, Argentina; Rapporteur Prof. Virginia Miralao, Philippines and the regional six vice-presidents (Finland, Albania, Ecuador, Malaysia, Côte d Ivoire, Lebanon) met together with four of the six MOST Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC) members for their Joint 2010 Session from November 2010, at UNESCO Headquarters, Room XIV of the Bonvin Building. Prof. Charly Gabriel Mbock, anthropologist and MP of Cameroun, dean and vice-president of SAC represented the MOST SAC President, Prof. Nazli Choucri, MIT Boston who had sent apologies and a written message. 2. H.E. Ms Alicia Kirchner, Minister of Social Development of Argentina and MOST IGC President welcomed the participants to the joint session. 3. In her opening statement, Ms Pilar Alvarez Laso, Assistant Director-General for Social and Human Sciences (ADG/SHS) gave a vibrant tribute to the memory of H. E. Dr. Nestor Kirchner, 54th President of Argentina ( ), Secretary-General of UNASUR (Union of South-American Nations), and brother of the MOST IGC President, Minister Alicia Kirchner. Numerous GRULAC Ambassadors and representatives had joined the MOST IGC-SAC meeting for this tribute. Substance Presentations made during the Meeting 4. Ms Elizabeth Longworth, DADG/SHS and Director, Division of Social Sciences Research and Policy, Social and Human Sciences Sector (SHS/SRP) provided strategic background information on the reasons for MOST s creation in 1994, its re-orientation on research-policy linkages in 2004 and the feed-back from member states during consultations on 36 C/5 including the 185 EX Board Session. She explained that three evaluations tabled at the meeting were to serve as the canvas for a strategic discussion on MOST s future: - the Independent External Evaluation of UNESCO (IEE); - the IOS Evaluation of Strategic Programme Objective N 7; and - the statutory Formative Mid-Term Review of MOST-Phase 2 undertaken by an IOSselected external evaluator, Prof. Jorma Sipilä (Finland) in Ms Longworth highlighted positive features as well as disconnects and opportunities for improvement for MOST within the overall context of how an intergovernmental body can add value to UNESCO s work. Her proposals included the opportunity of new modalities and partnerships that capitalize on inbuilt assets and comparative advantages, as well as the concern with results-based management (RBM) and measurable results, geared to ensuring more efficiency and effectiveness of the programme.

2 6. Mr. Jean-Yves Le Saux, Director, Division of Programme Planning, Monitoring and Reporting, Bureau of Strategic Planning (BSP/PMR) explained the need to reinforce the capacities of UNESCO staff to build a common understanding on the core principles, notions and concepts of Results-based Management (RBM). More specifically, UN/UNESCO results identified by member states relate to the three main modalities of action of: (1) Policy Advice and policy dialogue aimed at concrete policy reform; (2) Related capacity development and technical assistance; and (3) Monitoring, reporting and benchmarking. 7. Mr Amir Piric, Head of Evaluation in the UNESCO Internal Oversight Service (IOS) presented two of the three evaluations tabled at the meeting. His first focus was on the Independent External Evaluation of UNESCO (IEE) that was undertaken by an 11- person- cross-regional team headed by Prof. Eliott Stern during the first half of Driven by the overarching question: How should UNESCO position itself to address the challenges of the twenty-first century and make the most of prospective opportunities? the IEE presents an in-depth analysis of the links between global challenges, UNESCO s mandate and the possibilities of UNESCO for its future positioning. 8. The evaluation of UNESCO s contribution to Strategic Programme Objective (SPO) 7: Enhancing research-policy linkages on social transformations of UNESCO s Medium Term Strategy (34 C/4, ) was undertaken by an external evaluator who was recruited by IOS in April 2010, with a view to assessing progress towards achieving the expected outcomes of SPO7 and how progress might be enhanced through improving programme policy, design and delivery. The evaluation report was made available on the UNESCO IOS website on 15 October 2010 and the annexes containing explanations on terms of reference and methodology on 29 November Professor Jorma Sipilä, Chancellor, University of Tampere, Finland, presented his Final Report on the Mid-Term Review of MOST-Phase 2 ( ) that he had undertaken in The Review was carried out following a request made by Member States during the 34th General Conference (2007), with the overall purpose to assessing the relevance of MOST Phase 2 objectives and activities against the needs and priorities of Member States, as well as the effectiveness of MOST Phase 2 activities in contributing to MOST Phase 2 s stated objectives and expected results. 10. The SPO7 evaluation report raised controversy among Member States. Salient points of the SPO7 evaluation include: MOST Challenges & Opportunities: -complex organisational arrangements for MOST; -concentration on policy nexus mechanism too abstract; -absence of a trans-disciplinary approach; -too many delivery mechanisms (conferences, tool, publications ) without demonstrated impact; -upscale capacity building in line with WSSR (e.g. strengthening national research systems, MOST summer schools); -need to balance regional approach with global outreach; -need for strengthening strategic partnerships. The SPO7 evaluation contains Recommendation 9: The time has come for redirecting and shaping a new MOST (with a new name there is no management of social transformations), instead of just trying to improve existing features. It is recommended to bring together some leading experts with senior management in a brainstorming session to lay the ground for something new, while preserving some of the positive aspects. Of course, this exercise must be seen in close 2

3 connection with an overall revision of the SHS strategy. Basically, there are two options: to exit MOST and start fresh, or to keep it and improve it considerably. The evaluators tend to believe that it would be more constructive to start with a new initiative benefiting from the lessons learned. 11. Professor Jorma Sipilä struck a different tone in his Formative Mid-Term evaluation on MOST-Phase 2. He emphasized the role of UNESCO in strengthening the social sciences and confirmed that a programme like MOST raises high expectation. He gave credit to Praiseworthy strategic choices MOST knows why it is needed Support to the most basic activities that may improve the capacity os social sciences and the R-P interaction. The main aim is to bring the fruits of social research to improve decision making MOST creates arenas for learning how to do it Participation of governments means potential for policy changes Comparative research, in particular, indicates that there are tested alternatives The indispensable role of face-to-face meetings MOST searches for the balance of the need of social research and its provision Breaking the North Atlantic domination Regionalism, multilingualism and direct access to research are all options for increasing the relevance of social research MOST studies the obstacles to fruitful R-P interaction Quality research on difficult issues MOST describes the condition of social sciences By financing ISSC with the marvellous outcome: World Social Science Report 2010 The following achievements and problems were singled out: Achievements : Engaged capable and committed staff (including persons elected to positions of trust) Adapted itself to changes in strategies, guidelines and the results of frequent evaluations Organized several international events which have increased understanding of the benefits of R-P interaction Included NGO s extending the R-P linkage in democratic direction Started different activities to increase regional and national capacities in the field of social sciences Become an international authority that may support national aims to improve research, education and R-P interaction Introduced the Multilingual Digital Library and the Online Policy Research Tool that is more than a database Supported the multilingual ISSJ and when resources decreased, initiated steps for successful outsourcing Problems: The majority of world social scientists do not know of MOST At least partly an outcome of the operational principles (regionalism, support to social research in developing countries) The task is hard: Social Sciences are not welcomed by all governments Social sciences flourish together with social capital and freedom of speech Negligible funding and governmental control impede the impact How to adapt to the quite different expectations of researchers and politicians Nowadays there is much interest on both sides, for different reasons 3

4 It may be difficult to raise interest in the research-policy linkage in itself but in the context of other politically important issues (now regionalized in MOST) Notorious lack of money in the programme The capacity of the headquarter unit does not any more correspond to programme needs and expectations Acquiring money from separate sources consumes essential resources A consequence: The Online Policy Tool has been almost abandoned 12. Future strategic direction of MOST. Lively discussions among IGC Bureau and SAC members as well as participants were informed by a range of substance presentations (attached): - 1)MOST Strategic vision: challenges and opportunities; - 2)UNESCO approach to Results-Based Management (RBM); - 3)Independent External Evaluation of UNESCO 2010 (IEE); - 4) Evaluation of Strategic Programme Objective N 7 on Research-Policy Linkages; carried out in 2010 by Ms C. von Montbart, former WB official, under an IOS contract; - 5)Formative Mid-Term Review of MOST-Phase 2 finalized by an IOS- selected external evaluator, Prof. Jorma Sipilä (Finland) in January ) SAC comments on the SPO7 evaluation report; -7) Strategic vision from SAC -8) Conclusions of the World Social Science Report; - 9) Intersectoral cooperation with the Natural Science Sector SC on National Science Policy Reviews and Building National Research System Capacity; - 10) MOST National Committees; -11) Presentation on Ministerial Fora of Social Development ; - 12) Videoprojection of the latest award ceremony of the Latin-American MOST Award for participative action research Mothers and Grandmothers of Plaza de Mayo, created by Minister Alicia Kirchner in 2008; -13) UNESCO s approach to Global Environmental Change and Climate Change; -14) Cooperation with the International Social Science Council (ISSC) on Global Environmental Change, including Climate Change; -15) Rethinking Social Transformations: Climate Change, Values, Power and Knowledge ; A concept note by the Working Group on Social Dimensions of Climate Change. A gracious contribution to MOST from the Research Council of Norway. 13. Debate. The resulting discussions from the presentations and materials dealt primarily with the methodology of the Evaluation and Review rather than the underlying messages identified in the evaluation, namely the perception that MOST needs improvement in achieving demonstrable impact. However, the meeting did reach some significant conclusions as to the proposal on the strategic direction of MOST. The SPO7 evaluation report was criticized by Scientific Advisory Committee members and MOST IGC Bureau members alike for its failure to differentiate between short term, medium term and long term results in the complex non-linear and long-term process of enhancing researchpolicy linkages. Several discussants qualified the methodological approach of SPO7 as biased and contradictory. They expressed their concern with a results-based management approach based on the assumption that all outcomes are direct and short-term; and that there are no long-term and indirect consequences ; and that phenomena that are difficult to measure have no importance. Professor Sipilä reminded the audience that the very existence of the public services is justified by indirect consequences. Member States also acknowledged activities of MOST that they consider to be productive. Minister Kirchner in her capacity as the Chairperson acknowledged the criticism of the evaluation method of SPO7. She called for building on the opportunity of the meeting and advice 4

5 5 provided by Prof. Sipilä in his formative mid-term review, with a view to setting directions for MOST s future. 14. Conclusion. The conclusion reached at the end of the meeting is based on a paper circulated by IGC President Alicia Kirchner and reads as follows: FUTURE STRATEGIC DIRECTION OF MOST (Dr. Alicia Kirchner proposal) OBJECTIVES Reinforcing the role of the MOST Programme as a bridge between research and policy, we suggest the following objectives: 1. Promote capacity development of the social sciences, especially in developing countries by focusing at the systemic level, taking advantage of national and regional research systems in order to facilitate the design and implementation of policies. 2. Encourage governments and policy-makers to improve the quality of policy and decision making by Demonstrating to decision-makers how social science research may benefit society Promoting participatory process that encourage accountability and transparency Strengthening the visibility of the MOST Programme and emphasising its significance for social science in the media ACTION To achieve these objectives, we will concentrate our actions on a select number of themes on Social Transformations aiming to support Member States in their responses to social transformations; promoting Sustainable Development, Democracy and Culture of Peace and non violence, particularly in the field of Conflict Prevention. 1. The strategic focus for the short and medium term will be on social inclusion. In particular, in the following dimensions: social development, education, labour, science and technology, environment. We will concentrate in themes such as Employment, Youth, and social investment. 2. The core strategic theme for the longer term should be: Social Transformations arising from global environmental change.