NN41, December 2008
The New Politics of Partnership: Peril or Promise?
Effective Research Partnerships
By Jon-Andri Lys, KFPE, the Commission for Research Partnership with Developing Countries, Bern & Marcel Tanner, Director of the Swiss Tropical Institute, Basel, & KFPE
Email: kfpe@scnat.chKeywords
Research partnerships
Summary
Successful partnerships are based on mutual interests and a shared vision and not on dependencies and aid-driven concepts. The strength lies in clearly identified roles and responsibilities in order to live the process of mutual learning for change harmoniously, with equitably shared risks and benefits.
Genuine research partnerships are effective if they are based on mutual interest and priority setting, trust, sharing of responsibilities, and a two-way learning process ? these are pre-requisites for success. They provide various forms of added value, compared to non-collaborative research, if carried out in a balanced way (RAWOO 2001 & KFPE 2006). These include mutual learning and training opportunities, mutual cultural exchange, and complementarities of expertise. In addition, research partnerships are considered a «door opener» whose primary comparative advantages include (KFPE 2006):
? Increased visibility and attractiveness, particularly for local actors
? Better access to new fields of research
? Reduced scientific isolation, including easier access to international scientific outreach, e.g. in peer-reviewed journals, and easier acquisition of international funding
? Easier access to communities and policymakers
? Better opportunities to give voice to delicate issues, in particular through external (independent) partners.
In reality, research partnerships still have a series of hurdles to overcome, particularly with regard to the problem of asymmetries ? the lack of balance between Northern and Southern partners (RAWOO 2001, KFPE 2006, Bradley 2008). Built-in asymmetries in research partnerships are seen at the level of funding, available capacities, public recognition, and support from own government and local or global networks. Such unequal power relations can make it difficult to build up trust ? which in turn impacts on the most important aspect of partnerships, the equitable sharing of roles, responsibilities and benefits.
Effective and equitable research partnerships greatly depend on awareness of the asymmetric situation and on the willingness of partners to achieve a more balanced situation. Experience shows that this is a long-term development. Very often it is possible only after a number of years to have a research partnership that is based on mutual trust and that responds to and takes account of the different and sometimes conflicting expectations and goals of the partners, and also fosters capacity development. This experience contrasts with the fact that funding of research projects is often limited to 2- 3 years and the fact that there is a lack of general funding resources for potential partners to explore before the project, which is especially important for collaboration among new partners.
According to Bradley (2008), North-South research and other partnerships are shaped foremost by the structure of the development funding system, and by the pressure and demands of donors for concrete and immediate results in terms of development relevance (Hatton and Schroeder 2007). Southern researchers emphasised in interviews (Bradley 2008) the need for partnerships that engage in more independent and theoretically demanding research. This is important for the evolution and independence of strong research institutions in the South. Clearly, research partnerships should not be part of the development framework alone, but need to be based on the scientific and technical cooperation that is in principle guided by ministries of science & technology in the North and South. This is the mayor way forward that guarantees an effective process of mutual learning for change without a great risk of being affected by wrong and/or wrongly perceived dependences.
Strong capacities are essential and should be the central aim when working with weaker partners. This requires training, further education, and development of curricula. Yet these elements are frequently possible only after years and, in particular, they also require political engagement at the local level. For example, the National Centre of Competence in Research (NCCR) North-South ? ?Research Partnerships for Mitigating Syndromes of Global Change?, a broad and long-term Swiss research partnership programme begun in 2002, has a very positive impact on capacity strengthening and development, particularly in places where institutional cooperation already existed and could be enhanced through specific projects (http://www.north-south.unibe.ch). Developing sustainable capacities always entails individual and institutional components and is closely guided by the principle that research sites need to be given the possibility ? through partnership ? to grow into internationally recognized centres (Withworth et al. 2008 [1]).
To promote and support the development of genuine research partnerships, the KFPE developed 11 principles (1998 [2]) and a list of different parameters and corresponding questions, which support equitable approaches (KFPE 2006). These 11 KFPE principles have proven to be ? through their wide applications in many contexts ? a fundamental prerequisite, not only for allowing mutually beneficial research partnerships, but also generating beneficial, measurable outcomes or impacts as shown by a recent analysis performed by different organisations (KFPE 2006).
North-South research partnerships are challenging. They are no longer a concept but a viable reality, despite the fact that they need time to install and develop as well as to integrate capacity strengthening and local commitment. Moreover, North-South research partnerships have developed distinct features that allow them to integrate effectively into the continuum from basic research and innovation to validation and implementation.
Successful partnerships are based on mutual interest and a shared vision and not on dependencies and aid-driven concepts. They are driven by mutual understanding of need-based, shared objectives. Finally their strength lies in arrangements with clearly identified roles and responsibilities, thus allowing a process of mutual learning for change in an equitable manner.
Footnotes
[1] J.A.G. Whitworth, G. Kokwaro, S. Kinyanjui, V.A. Snewin, M. Tanner, M. Walport, N. Sewaankambo 2008: Strengthening capacity for health research in Africa. The Lancet, Vol 372: 1-4
[2] KFPE 1998 (3d edition 2003): Guidelines for Research in Partnerships with Developing Countries: the 11 Principles. pp 56 (in 5 languages - http://www.kfpe.ch/key_activities/publications/guidelines.php
References
RAWOO 2001: North-South Research Partnerships: Issues and Challenges. Trivandrum Expert Meeting. Publication no. 22. pp 36.
D. Maselli, J.-A. Lys, J. Schmid 2006: Improving Impacts of Research Partnerships. KFPE 2006. Geographica Bernensia, pp 95.
M. Bradley 2008: On the agenda: North-South research partnerships and agenda-setting processes. Development in Practice. 18/6: 673-685.
M. Hatton and K. Schroeder 2007: Partnership theory and practice: time for a new paradigm. Canadian Journal of Development Studies 28/1: 165-170
Full contents of NORRAG NEWS 41.
Download the full issue of NORRAG NEWS 41 in pdf.