Expert group review at IRD: objectives and methods
p. 159-162
Texte intégral
1The Institut de recherche pour le développement (IRD) is a French public scientific and technological institution operating under the joint authority of the French Ministry of Higher Education and Research and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
2Concerning its missions as a public scientific and technological institution, IRD works to ensure the “development of a capacity for public policy expertise and support […], conducted to meet societal challenges, and social, economic, and sustainable development needs” (article L 112-1 c bis of the Research Code).
3Since 2001, it has been devoted to this mission to benefit the countries of the South and the French tropical overseas territories in the form of collective scientific expertise called an “Expert Group Review”.
4An expert group review is carried out on major questions that interest the countries of the South and their development, through a partnership approach involving co-construction with a policy sponsoring authority. Through the global, interdisciplinary approach they adopt to analyse the most recent scientific knowledge on the subject and the local context, they help produce a consolidated vision of the challenges and lead to accurate conclusions and recommendations.
Expert group review at IRD: a special instrument
5Fundamentally, an expert group review is an exercise in transposing scientific knowledge to the sphere of decision-makers and leaders. In short, it interests those whose function is, within their institution, to take decisions or organise decisions for the benefit of the community: ministries, agencies, or sub-regional or international organisations. At the request of the sponsoring authority and in response to a list of initial questions, the expert group review is intended to provide a consolidated, global, and complete vision of the challenges raised by a given issue, leading to the production of a series of conclusions and recommendations.
6Thus designed, it always translates into:
- a contractual relationship with the sponsoring authority on the basis of a list of initial questions and ad hoc financing;
- the definition of a line of questioning with multiple challenges and a global or regional scope, which a disciplinary approach could not address alone;
- the establishment of a North-South balanced, interdisciplinary college of experts from various scientific communities and research institutions, recruited for their individual knowledge and their reputation on the topic under study;
- the production of a summary of all available scientific and technical knowledge promoted by combining approaches;
- the formulation of conclusions and recommendations intended to enlighten decision-making processes or public action.
7The expert group review is carried out in close relation with decision-making processes or mechanisms, most often in the domain of “public policies” under national governments or sub-regional authorities. In this way, it is different from the production of scientific knowledge in the strict sense. The independence and joint responsibility of the college of experts must be able to work together with the requirements of the sponsoring authority and meet the short dead-lines for submitting deliverables.
8An original instrument for promoting research and support for public policies, it truly contributes to “making research speak”, by anchoring it in a context in which it is clearly in response to a demand.
Directing the project: criteria and method
9At the beginning stage, the request expressed or identified must be investigated, then specified to lead to the formalisation of a clear order. When this step has been achieved, the IRD Innovation, Expertise and Development Service expands the examination of the project and engages it in the “expert group review” process in light of the three main criteria typically adopted:
- clear identification of the requester’s need and the decision-making processes involved;
- recourse to a summary of scientific and technical knowledge to enlighten, evaluate, and analyse the existing challenges deemed central and essential to the public policies in question;
- existence of sufficient literature (scientific, published or grey) on the topic and accessible data.
10These points are verified in advance as much as possible, by cross-checking information, exploiting sources, and establishing direct contacts on site. If one of these criteria is not met, IRD reserves the right not to continue with the project.
Conducting the expert group review
11As designed and implemented at IRD, the expert group review comes out of a well-tested, ISO 9001:2008-certified, methodological model. It relies on a set of standards, rules, and practices, which are regularly updated as work is produced.
12The IRD Expertise Innovation, Expertise and Development Service coordinates all operations in the “expert group review” process: general leadership of the process, recruitment of the experts, liaison with the steering committee, preparation of the three plenary meetings of the college of experts, organisation of missions, development of the document corpus, integrated management of the document production cycle, writing of the final report, translation, publication of the work in the dedicated collection. These successive phases are carried out in close relation with the sponsoring authority and the French diplomatic network, with logistical support from the IRD representative office in the country in question.
13All expert group reviews officially start upon signature of the agreement by the parties (sponsoring authority, backer, IRD). The agreements, recruitment, establishment of offices, working procedures, etc., are completed in the next period. The exact terms of the questions associated with the order are defined in the “initial workshop”, a time for in-depth discussions between the sponsoring authority, the invited partners, the experts convened, and where applicable, the various stakeholders. In fact, the goal is to state each party’s expectations explicitly and to clearly delimit what can be addressed from a scientific point of view and what should not be. Some questions or investigations, which are undoubtedly crucial in the eyes of the political decision-makers, cannot be addressed as is. Therefore, it is important to reformulate them, or even to dismiss them. The political context and the decision-making processes involved are, for their part, considered in full.
14Starting with the initial workshop and then the establishment of the college of experts, the work is conducted for a period of one year under the coordination of the president of the college and the associated research coordination staff, with support from the Expertise Innovation, Expertise and Development Service. A steering committee is also established at the initiative of the sponsoring authority. It is responsible for monitoring the progress of the work done by the college, informing it of any potential comments, and preparing the conditions for proper appropriation of the conclusions and recommendations stemming from the work. At the end of the expertise, the final report submitted to the sponsoring authority is presented at a public conference.
15Lastly, this report is published by the IRD Publisher in the Expert group review collection. The work, written in an accessible style and in a bilingual version, combines the summary and recommendations from the work by the college of experts. A USB key attached to the work also holds the full text of the contributions from the experts in an interactive presentation, for a more informed or interested audience.
Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Licence OpenEdition Books. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.
Substances naturelles en Polynésie française
Stratégies de valorisation
Jean Guezennec, Christian Moretti et Jean-Christophe Simon (dir.)
2006
L’énergie dans le développement de la Nouvelle-Calédonie
Yves Le Bars, Elsa Faugère, Philippe Menanteau et al. (dir.)
2010
La lutte antivectorielle en France
Didier Fontenille, Christophe Lagneau, Sylvie Lecollinet et al. (dir.)
2009
Le mercure en Amazonie
Rôle de l’homme et de l’environnement, risques sanitaires
Jean-Pierre Carmouze, Marc Lucotte et Alain Boudou (dir.)
2001
Diasporas scientifiques
Comment les pays en développement peuvent-ils tirer parti de leurs chercheurs et de leurs ingénieurs expatriés ?
Rémi Barré, Valeria Hernández, Jean-Baptiste Meyer et al. (dir.)
2003
La dengue dans les départements français d’Amérique
Comment optimiser la lutte contre cette maladie ?
Raymond Corriveau, Bernard Philippon et André Yébakima (dir.)
2003
Agriculture biologique en Martinique
Quelles perspectives de développement ?
Martine François, Roland Moreau et Bertil Sylvander (dir.)
2005
Lutte contre le trachome en Afrique subsaharienne
Anne-Marie Moulin, Jeanne Orfila, Doulaye Sacko et al. (dir.)
2006
Les espèces envahissantes dans l’archipel néo-calédonien
Un risque environnemental et économique majeur
Marie-Laure Beauvais, Alain Coléno et Hervé Jourdan (dir.)
2006
Les ressources minérales profondes en Polynésie française / Deep-sea mineral resources in French Polynesia
Pierre-Yves Le Meur, Pierre Cochonat, Carine David et al. (dir.)
2016
Le développement du lac Tchad / Development of Lake Chad
Situation actuelle et futurs possibles / Current Situation and Possible Outcomes
Jacques Lemoalle et Géraud Magrin (dir.)
2014