Abstract
The recently adopted United Nations’ Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030 has a much greater emphasis on science compared with other global policy frameworks. It builds on the idea that science and evidence are essential for effective policy-making to improve lives, livelihoods and health. It was the first UN landmark agreement of the year 2015, the other two being the Sustainable Development Goals (agreed September 2015) and the Climate Change Agreements (agreed December 2015). This article explores key synergies across these agreements that are articulated in the Sendai Framework to support joint policy-making. The article outlines the opportunities and challenges for scientific research and its translation into policy and practice; proposes scientific activities for developing Disaster Risk Reduction science, and makes suggestions for how to take these forward into the 2015–2030 period. This article is published as part of a thematic collection dedicated to scientific advice to governments.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 16016 |
| Journal | Palgrave Communications |
| Volume | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2016 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:Reforming incentive systems. Aligning scientific research with real problems faced by decision makers will be crucial to addressing the complex problems of the twenty-first Century (Carabine, 2015). Yet, traditional systems for incentivising and evaluating academics (such as the number of peer-reviewed journal article) are not designed to reach audiences that are nontechnical or outside the relevant scientific discipline. This can, therefore, discourage the integration of research across disciplines and minimize engagement with decision maker priorities. While some efforts have been made by providing funding to support projects that bring science to non-technical audiences (Wellcome Trust, 2016), long-term efforts are needed to align incentive and reward systems with the objective of improved science dissemination and uptake into decision-making and ensuring the research community meets the real needs of societies. For example, research funders might require applicants for research grants to systematically provide evidence that their research is in demand from decision makers (Jones, 2012).
