Sujata Gamage gave a brief overview as to the CPRsouth Conference. This included the objectives behind the Conference, and the Organization as a whole and the quality of the papers recieved.
She went on to say that successful applications make necassary the synergy between the technical and policy. Also how can you measure the inputs and outputs and it is supported by a wealth of literature. She went on to discuss the way different schools of thought measure the relevence of research done.
It was noted that the emphasis on citation does not always mean that it has been used in the most relevant areas. Rather it should be measured by the quality of the policy questions the research addresses.
In the policy world there is no concept of citation.
However, a difference should be drawn between policy papers and technical papers.
Rohan Samarajiva noted if policy briefs are necassary at all? and does it make any difference at all?
Sujata Gamage responsed saying that it need not be lengthy to be a good, dense document.
Rohan Samarajiva noted that there is a school that feels that policy makers require”short-bites” of information in policy briefs or packaged knowledge. however, they are often are limited in their substance. Policy documents are not groundbreaking.
If it comes from the right source the right data helps. But it needs to have a strong argumentand be novel.
Advocacy skills are necassary for research to make an impact. It is difficult for Universities and Research organizations to produce knowledge and disseminate it. This is where Organizations have a role to play.
Universities are used to create knowledge only for internal consumption. CPRsouth should intervene to get them to think differently, not just present their research.
One important question is whether LIRNEasia researchers found any of the research located via CPRsouth useful? Before asking practitioners whether the research is useful for organizations like LIRNEasia-type (bridging) organizations?
Rohan Samarajiva noted that the name of the author is useful because it denotes what their arguments maybe.
A suggestion was made that the concept of citations are only useful if they are on google. If not most researchers may not find the citation tool useful.
Chanuka Wattegama noted that a paper should be headed with an abstract. This is essential is selecting relevent papers.
Questions relating to CPRsouth:
Should it be archived elsewhere and use it as a catalogue? Should this be an option to look into? Should this be an option that we think of? Such as SSRN, Intute, etc. May be worth submitting some papers/ documents to.
The CPRsouth website should be a place where scholars can catalogue their work. So that will be a pool of knowledge in which to access as and when the need arises. It should be a place where scholars get exposure for their work.
Can CPRsouth be a platform to bring policy makers and academics together?
Rohan Samarajiva responded saying that this is indeed a difficult task. It is one of the objectives to try and bridge this divide but it need not always be achieved. However, if this is indeed strictly implemented it will edge out the young scholars componant.
Helani Galpaya noted that the young scholar componant is essential, and key to networking and identifying new academics.
Should the conference be a forum for upcoming experts to present their research? or should it be a place where they can come and improve on their policy-communication skills, etc.
How do we know the CPRsouth website has succeeded? When we reach X number of hits? or When LIRNEasia-type researchers find it useful?
We should aim to be like the NRRI D-space website – more like a catalogue that will be easy to navigate and command.
Should the website have a fully open forum or a partially moderated?
Rohan Samarajiva suggested that all papers done by the authors that were chosen to attend the conference will be part of the network. Other authors will be able to submit papers subject to review by the excisting authors, LIRNEasia and the Board of Directors.
The website also allows users to rate and add comments against the articles.
It should also included Powerpoint presentations. As often presentations have specific knowledge that often proves to be crucial.
The basic quesiton is, should CPRsouth be a field building exercise (academics talking to academics) vs. developing a group of people who are capable of communicating policy-relevant research to policy makers clearly.
Comments are closed.