Dialogue between researcher and servers and building analytical capabilities for innovation in public policies

Daniel Caldera PhD student in Public Administration at the University of Lisbon

Marcus Bragain Public Policy (UFRJ) and completing a postdoctoral training at the Institute for Collegiate Health Studies (IESC/UFRJ)

Natalia Masako KogaHe holds a PhD in Political Science from the University of Westminster and specializes in Public Policy and Government Administration (EPPGG).

Themistocles Murilo de Oliveira Jrholds a Doctorate in Public Policy (UFRJ), is completing a postdoctoral training at the Army Command and General Staff School (ECEME) and is Director of Promotion, Mobilization and Innovation of the Brazilian Association of Public Administration (SBAP)

Much is said about the difficulties of public administration, especially those associated with social policy, in the end, in implementation. A recurring case of harm of all kinds to overcome our traditional inequality. In a diverse, unequal and large country, in a federal arrangement that mixes autonomy and dependence, in the face of the failures reported in the news, much is said that the problem lies in the lack of state capabilities of the entities.

State capacities, as defined by Pires and Gomides (2014), are characterized by the presence of arrangements that enable and demonstrate a political aspect to widen channels of dialogue and negotiation between social actors and the public sector, along with a technical and administrative aspect, based on structures and processes for building high-quality public policies. A concept that, in order to be logical, does not allow us to do without its two formative dimensions, and therefore requires a technical and well-established bureaucracy. What, unfortunately, we did not find, especially in small towns.

However, capacities are not only built with political formulation mechanisms and an administrative body. Wu, Ramesh, and Howlett (2018) point to a little explored and developed dimension, that of analytical capacity, which allows the identification, assimilation, production and dissemination of knowledge about and for public policies. It is essential to innovate and build appropriate solutions in multiple contexts, especially in the diversity of scenarios offered by the state, even if there is an insistence on a detailed degree of unification of national programs, with many. top down It’s very little Progressive.

In this sense, innovation is not a fad or a constant search for the new. For Cavalcante and Cunha (2017), innovation is justified by the growth of increasingly complex and dynamic problems (harmful problems), demanding better services at a lower cost, and more popular participation. Innovation is associated with the improvement of organizational processes, not being an end in itself, but a tool linked to public policy, which delivers services and goods to the citizen of the municipality, beyond the immediate electoral appeals for innovation.

This innovation cannot take place without research, without institutions and actors dedicated to in-depth study and knowledge production on relevant topics and which, when linked, create knowledge communities for discussion and research, in order to unite not only academic researchers, but also public service practices, in particular the emergence of The new professional figure in the public sector of the 21st century, with one foot in the office and the other in the university. Researcher Servant or Researcher Servant and Public Policy Analyst.

Haas (1992) suggests that a knowledge community is a network of professionals with recognized expertise and competence in a particular field, and a credible claim to policy-relevant knowledge within that field or subject area. The structure that is formed within the scope of public bodies, in the face of the daily implementation of policies, but also in universities and research institutes. And in Brazil in the twenty-first century, these nuclei, with some exceptions, are still so far from each other, they lack bridges of interaction.

It is necessary to highlight and promote practical initiatives that recognize, unite and strengthen these knowledge communities. Among the many experiences in this direction, we highlight cases of senior researchers participating in scientific advice to policy makers, such as in Germany, South Africa, the United States, India and the United Kingdom, to name a few. The European Commission has also developed a model for its community equipment based on this model.

In general, female and male researchers are invested in the mandates of Scientific Advisers, and are remunerated to pursue each ministry’s topics in an ad hoc manner and work under the leadership of the Chief Scientific Adviser to the government, providing scientific evidence for the advice of ministers, including building international relationships with scientific advisors and international thought leaders . In addition to the possibility of contributing subsidies to strategic government decision-making, participation has a financial counterpart and is covered by prestige and credibility in the academic curriculum.

An example of an initiative that seeks to unite researchers, scholars, practitioners and practitioners in Brazil is the experience of the Chief Scientist Project, which is being implemented in the state of Ceará, regulated by State Law No. 17378, January 4, 2021. This project is based on the partnership between the Cearense Foundation to support scientific and technological development (funcap) with the Federal University of Ceará (UFC) and the Ceara State Government. The project involves teams of researchers to develop activities in state government secretariats or bodies that are more strategic, in building solutions and promoting innovation, and influencing the quality of public policies delivered for education, in a classic example of a government initiative that builds constructive bridges in the relationship between these two knowledge communities (Braga et al ., 2022).

Another example of an initiative developed in Brazil refers to Revista da CGU. This scholarly journal, edited within the scope of the Controller General of the Federation, the federal government’s central body of internal oversight, has recently undergone a redesign of its policies and guidelines. As explained by Oliveira Jr., Caldera and Braga (2023), based on a project to promote that journal, notably driven by the initiative of civil servants who are also involved in postgraduate programs and research groups, strategies have been put in place clearly aimed at fostering a knowledge community that brings together practices, practitioners and researchers related to the fields of Knowledge about topics related to internal control.

In tune with this movement, the Brazilian Society of Public Administration (SBAP) created in 2022 the permanent thematic group GT-23, which aims to promote studies on the relationship between science and practice in the field of public administration. Entitled “Experiences in Public Administration: A Dialogue Between Academics and Practitioners,” this collection spirits It opens invitations to present papers and hold discussion sessions during the Brazilian Meeting of Public Administration (EBAP), the central event of SBAP, which serves as a space for discussion and bringing together knowledge communities, recording these initiatives and promoting the development of studies on the topic.

In a broader perspective, SBAP itself is a space of excellence where these communities meet, and may, in the future, be a model of civic organization that makes this connection between researchers and bureaucrats, and plays an instrumental role in this desire. This new figure is within the scope of governments, the researcher’s servant or the researcher’s servant and public policy analyst, who is looking for the academy and who can be a link between projects.

Such initiatives may be reflected, in the medium term, in improving the capabilities of the state, which is a feature of regional inequality in our federalism, which requires more than transfers of resources, but projects to stimulate local development, and to integrate dimensions. top down that it Progressivewhich relies on a specific dissemination of scientific knowledge applied to public policy, by building analytical capabilities, the central proposition of this article.

Building analytical capabilities through dialogue between researchers and servers that enhance research, knowledge production, and finally public policy innovation initiatives that effectively drive community improvements is no easy task. The arguments, concepts and examples presented in this brief article call for thinking that such change is possible, but at the same time it depends on the expression and commitment of actors from different fields, in a path that requires leadership, awareness of goals, alignment between visions and interests, and above all, flexibility. big.

References

Braga, c. Matos M, Cruz C, and Machado B. (2022). Senior Scholars Program: A Bridge Between Academia and Public Administration. Ninth Brazilian Meeting of Public Administration, São Paulo / SP. https://sbap.org.br/ebap/index.php/home/article/view/759

Cavalcante, P. & Cunha, B. (2017). It is necessary to innovate in government, but why? In P. Cavalcante, M. Camões, B. Cunha & W. Severo. Innovation in the Public Sector: Theory, Trends and Cases in Brazil (pp. 15-32). Ippia. https://repositorio.ipea.gov.br/handle/11058/8086

Haas, b. (1992). Introduction: Knowledge Societies and International Policy Coordination. global organizationAnd 46(1), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300001442

Oliveira Jr., T.; Caldera, D, and Braga, M. (2023). Bureaucracy toward Science: Practitioners Interact with Researchers. X Brazilian Meeting of Public Administration, Brasilia / DF. https://sbapeventos.com.br/media/270320230933122.pdf

Pires, R. & Gomide, A. (2014). Comparative analysis: implementation arrangements and policy outcomes. In A. Gomide & R. Pires. State capabilities and democracy: Institutional Arrangements for Public Policies (pp. 351-379). Ippia. https://repositorio.ipea.gov.br/handle/11058/3098

Wu X, Ramesh M, Howlett M (2018). Policy capacity: conceptual framework and core components. In: Wu, X., Howlett, M., and Ramesh, M. (eds) Policy Capacity and Governance. Studies in the political economy of public policy. Palgrave Macmillan. This painful: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54675-9_1