Shifting governance in STI: an analysis of the global governance institutions and their impact on South African policy

Abstract

Science, technology and innovation (STI) policy is increasingly part of global politics. This article develops the argument that the governance of STI policy shifted with South Africa's transition to democracy and its re-integration into the international system. The traditionally inward oriented policy field has undergone a shift in governance towards internationalisation. This paper assesses these changes and their impact on South Africa's policymaking processes. The discussion seeks to span two disciplines, international relations and economic research on innovation, recognising the role of intergovernmental organisations (IGOs) in domestic STI policymaking. We argue that the relationship between IGOs and national governments is two-sided and changes over time. The case of the South African government shows how it changed from the receiving end of the policy advice from IGOs towards an active force in shaping the international system with regard to STI, and pursuit of its own interests through spreading and setting up international norms. We hypothesise that these changes result from increasing governance capability and policy learning. These relationships between national and international actors and the role of international organisations in domestic STI policy formulation will be disentangled in this paper presenting two main findings. Firstly, the analysis of the global governance architecture in STI shows that international legalisation in STI has changed towards soft law mechanisms. In the early days of STI, international organisations focused mainly on regulating intellectual property rights (IPR), while today various UN agencies, OECD committees and Bretton Woods institutions seek to influence governments through rankings, reviews, policy advice, performance measurement, data collection and periodical surveillance. Secondly, during its process of reintegration into the international political system, the South African government demonstrated an evolution from exclusively receiving IGO's policy advice to increasingly becoming an initiator of international policy platforms in STI.

Keywords:

• South Africa
• science and technology
• foreign policy
• global governance
• soft law
• OECD
• United Nations

Notes

1. See e.g. Matecki B E, ‘Establishment of the International Finance Corporation: A case study’, International Organization, 10, 2, 1956, pp. 261–75 cited in Martin LL & BA Simmons, ‘Theories and empirical studies of international institutions’, International Organization, 52, 4, 1998, pp. 729–57.

2. Martin LL & BA Simmons, ‘Theories and empirical studies of international institutions’, International Organization, 52, 4, 1998, pp. 729–57.

3. Polakov-Suransky S, The Unspoken Alliance: Israel's Secret Relationship with Apartheid South Africa. Johannesburg: Jacana Media (Pty) Ltd, 2010.

4. This paper is one section of a PhD study on ‘Global Research Governance: Impacts on domestic STI policy in developing countries’. This comparative study looks at STI Policy in countries with high inequality and simultaneously medium technological progress (according to the World Development Science and Technology Indicators and the GINI Index). The study analyses modern STI policy facing two main challenges: firstly the reintegration in the global economy and secondly promoting STI for social development to overcome the inequality gap. The two countries selected for empirical research are South Africa and Brazil matching the criteria above. This paper is one contribution on the aspect of internationalization of STI policy.

5. Simon HA, ‘Bounded rationality and organizational learning’, Organization Science, 2, 1, 1991, pp. 125–34.

6. Goldstein and Keohane argue that ideas defined as individuals’ beliefs help to explain policy outcomes. They distinguish between three types of beliefs: world views, principled beliefs and causal beliefs. World views are those overall beliefs about human nature, ethics and culture. World views already suggest what Goldstein and Keohane call principled beliefs, those ideas that normatively distinguish from ‘right or wrong’, ‘good or bad’ and ‘just or unjust’. Causal beliefs are beliefs about causal relationships that usually derive from scientific research. Ideas that derive from research frequently turn into general wisdom and then the evidence for the causal relationship remains unquestioned. See Goldstein J & RO Keohane, ‘Ideas and foreign policy: An analytical framework’, in Goldstein J and RO Keohane (eds), Ideas and Foreign Policy: Beliefs, Institutions and Political Change. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1993.

7. Hirschman AO, The Passions and the Interests : Political Arguments for Capitalism Before Its Triumph. Twentieth anniversary edition. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.

8. Drori G & FO Ramirez, Science in the Modern World Polity — Institutionalization and Globalization. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003.

9. Dolowitz D & D Marsh, ‘Learning from abroad: The role of policy transfer in contemporary policy making’, Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 13, 1, 2000, pp. 5–24; Rose R, Learning from Comparative Public Policy — A Practical Guide. New York & London: Routledge, 2005; Evans M, Policy Transfer in Global Perspective., Hants, Burlington: Ashgate Publishing, 2004.

10. Chwieroth J, ‘Testing and measuring the role of ideas: The case of neoliberalism in the International Monetary Fund’, International Studies Quarterly, 51, 2007, pp. 5–30;Béland D, ‘Ideas, institutions, and policy change’, Journal of European Public Policy, 16, 5, 2009, pp. 701–18; Finnemore M, ‘International organizations as teachers of norms: The United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization and science policy’, International Organization, 47, 4, 1993, pp. 565–97.

11. Dolowitz D & D Marsh, ‘Learning from abroad: The role of policy transfer in contemporary policy making’, Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 13, 1, 2000, pp. 5–24; Rose R, Learning from Comparative Public Policy — A Practical Guide. New York & London: Routledge, 2005; Evans M, Policy Transfer in Global Perspective, Hants, Burlington: Ashgate Publishing, 2004.

12. Dolowitz D & D Marsh, ‘Learning from abroad: The role of policy transfer in contemporary policy making’, Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 13, 1, 2000, pp. 5–24; Rose R, Learning from Comparative Public Policy — A Practical Guide. New York & London: Routledge, 2005.

13. Stone D, Learning Lessons, Policy Transfer and the International Diffusion of Policy Ideas, in Working Paper. Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation, 9 February 2000.

14. The OECD has been very influential, e.g. in the education rankings Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) within the member countries (particularly Germany), but also their non-members and enhanced engagement partners (e.g. Brazil). See e.g. Martens K & C Balzer, ‘Comparing governance of international organisations — The EU, the OECD and educational policy’, in International Organisations and Policy Implementation, Joint Sessions, Workshop 1, European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR). Uppsala, Sweden, 13–18 April 2004.

15. Hall PA, Policy Paradigms, Social Learning and the State. Washington, DC: International Political Science Association, 1988, cited in Bennett C & M Howlett, ‘The lessons of learning: Reconciling theories of policy learning and policy change’, Policy Sciences, 25, 3, 1992, pp. 275–94.

16. Rose R, ‘What is lesson-drawing’, Journal of Public Policy, 11, 1991, p. 3–30, cited in ibid.

17. Rose R, ‘What is lesson-drawing’, Journal of Public Policy, 11, 1991, p. 3–30, cited in ibid.

18. Stone D & C Wright, The World Bank and Governance: A Decade of Reform and Reaction. New York: Routledge, 2007; Mytelka LK & K Smith, ‘Policy learning and innovation theory: An interactive and co-evolving process’, Research Policy, 31, 8–9, 2002, pp. 1467–79.

19. Abbot and Snidal emphasise the importance of ‘soft law’ in international governance. Most international law is ‘soft’, but it helps to prevent negotiations from failing and to gradually achieve legally binding agreements. ‘Soft law’ has very different shapes. Soft law mechanisms, as opposed to ‘hard law’, contain weaker legislations, exit clauses, less precision and obligation. International legalisation brings a number of trade offs with it. Governments are torn between the possible benefits of a binding legal agreement that suits their interests and the compromises on their state sovereignty. As governance patterns through soft law have less sovereignty costs, they are useful mechanisms to pave the way towards hard law and prevent negotiations to fail. ‘Convenants’ are those international agreements that express normative commitments of governments, rather than legally binding ‘contracts’ that are negotiated according to mostly material interests that states pursue. See Abbott KW & D Snidal, ‘Hard and soft law in international governance’, International Organization, 54, 3, 2000, pp. 421–56.

20. The Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (covering patents, trademarks, and industrial designs) in 1883, and The Berne Convention of 1886 (for copyright).

21. Sell S & C May, ‘Moments in law: Contestation and settlement in the history of intellectual property’, Review of International Political Economy, 8, 3, 2001, pp. 467–500.

22. TRIPS Plus Agreements are bilateral agreements on obligations in the sphere of intellectual property rights (IPR). Over decades, industrialised countries tried to raise the level of protection of IPR. Their attempts at the WTO remained unsuccessful because developing countries seek to have the TRIPS Agreement (trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights) reformed in the Doha Development agenda. As a result industrialised countries started to negotiate bilateral agreements undermining the mulitlateral framework. These agreements are known as TRIPS Plus Agreements or TRIPS Plus Standards. For further information see Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property, Competition and Tax Law, ‘From TRIPS Plus Free Trade Agreements to Fundamentally Reforming International Intellectual Property Law’, accessed 13 February 2011,<http://www.ip.mpg.de/ww/en/pub/research/researchprofile/mainfields/von_trips_plus_freihandelsabko.cfm>.

23. Standke K-H, ‘Sixty years of UN and UNESCO’, Science and Public Policy, 33, 9, 2006, pp. 627–46.

24. Standke K-H, ‘Sixty years of UN and UNESCO’, Science and Public Policy, 33, 9, 2006, pp. 627–46.

25. Samoff J, ‘Foreign aid to education: Managing global transfers and exchanges’, in Chisholm L & G Steiner-Khamsi (eds), South–South Cooperation in Education and Development. Cape Town: HSRC Press, 2009, pp. 123–56.

26. Crawford MF, CC Yammal, H Yang & RL Brezenoff, Review of World Bank Lending for Science and Technology 1980–2004. Science, Technology and Innovation Discussion Paper Series, Education Department Human Development Network. Washington, DC: World Bank, 2006.

27. Godin B, Measurement and Statistics on Science and Technology. Routledge Studies in the History of Science, Technology and Medicine, Krige J (ed.). London & New York: Routledge, 2005.

28. Marcussen M, ‘OECD governance through soft law’, in Mörth U (ed.), Soft Law in Governance and Regulation: An Interdisciplinary Analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2004, pp. 103–26; Marcussen M, K Armingeon & M Beyeler, ‘Multilateral surveillance and the OECD: Playing the idea game’, in Marcussen M, K Armingeon & M Beyeler (eds), The OECD and European Welfare States. Globalization and Welfare Series. Cheltenham & Northampton, MA: Elgar, 2004, pp. 13–31.

29. G8 Summit 2007, Heiligendamm Process, accessed 11 February 2011, <http://www.g-8.de/Content/EN/Artikel/__g8-summit/2007-06-08-heiligendamm-prozess__en.html>.

30. G8 Summit 2007, Heiligendamm Process, accessed 11 February 2011, <http://www.g-8.de/Content/EN/Artikel/__g8-summit/2007-06-08-heiligendamm-prozess__en.html> (accessed 11 February 2011).

31. Interview: Advisor to the Secretary, Ministry of Science and Technology (MCT), August 2009.

32. UNFCCC: Annex II Assessment of the Special Climate Change Fund, Draft Decision CP 16, accessed 13 February 2011, <http://unfccc.int/files/meetings/cop_16/conference_documents/application/pdf/20101204_cop16_ccf.pdf>.

33. Zelli F, ‘Conflicts among international regimes on environmental issues: a theory-driven analysis’. Dissertation. Tübingen: University Press, 2010.

34. Wilson D & R Purushothaman, ‘Dreaming with the BRICs: The path to 2050’, in Global Economics Paper 2003, Goldman Sachs.

35. Ramphele M, Laying Ghosts to Rest — Dilemmas of the Transformation in South Africa.Cape Town: Tafelberg, 2008, p. 35

36. When President Mandela appointed his ministers, he had to compromise as the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) had received 10% of the votes nationally and 50% in KwaZulu Natal in the elections in 1994. The first department in charge of governing S&T, the Department of Arts, Culture, Science and Technology (DACST), was subject to this compromise and led by IFP Minister Ben Ngubane from 1994–2002.

37. Updated lists on these agreements can be obtained from DIRCO. The main author received it during the interview with the Director of the Directorate Climate Change and Pollution Director Environment, Science, and Technology in the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO), May 2010.

38. Interview: Staff member of International cooperation in DACST (1996–2002), September 2010

39. Interview: Academics leading the processes of drafting the white paper and the green paper, April 2010.

40. Interview: Deputy Director-General: International Cooperation and Resources, DST, April 2010.

41. Interview: Director of the Directorate Climate Change and Pollution Director Environment, Science, and Technology in the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO), May 2010.

42. Gumede W, Thabo Mbeki and the Battle for the Soul of the ANC. London & New York: Zed Books, 2007.

43. Interviews: Deputy Director-General: International Cooperation and Resources, DST, April 2010; Deputy Minister of Science and Technology, DST; April and May 2010.

44. Interview: Consultant Sussex University and author of the OECD Review on Innovation Policy, South Africa 2007, September 2010.

45. Interview Deputy Minister of Science and Technology, DST; April and May 2010, Former Minister of Science and Technology, DST, September 2010.

46. Interview: Deputy Director-General: International Cooperation and Resources, DST, April 2010.

47. Turok B, The Evolution of ANC Economic Policy. Cape Town: New Agenda, 2008.

48. Information obtained from documents and an interview with a consultant to the World Bank Institute in the ‘skills, knowledge and innovation’ programme, Pretoria , May 2010.

49. Interview: Deputy Director-General: International Cooperation and Resources, DST, April 2010.

50. IBRD, Eskom Investment Support Project, ID: P116410 Project Documents available at <http://web.worldbank.org/external/projects/main?pagePK=51351038&piPK=51351152&theSitePK=40941&projid=P116410> (accessed 13 February 2011)

51. IBRD, Project Appraisal Report on a proposed loan in the amount of US$3,750 million to ESKOM Holdings Limited, guaranteed by Republic of South Africa for an ESKOM Investment Support Project, 19 March 2010, <http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2010/04/12/000112742_20100412110336/Rendered/PDF/534250R20101005914.pdf> (accessed 13 February 2011).

52. Cover Letter from Trevor Manuel (Ministry of Finance) to Dominique Strauss Kahn (IMF), <http://www.imf.org/external/np/omd/2009/govref/032409n.pdf>, and the Committee on IMF Governance Reform, Final Report, 24 March 2009, <http://www.imf.org/external/np/omd/2009/govref/032409.pdf> (accessed 13 February 2011).

53. Interview: Former Representative to the IMF, National Treasury, South Africa, September 2010

54. Naidoo D & A Pouris, Science and Technology Interactions in Africa and the Impact thereof on the South African System of Innovation, Report to the National Advisory Council on Innovation (NACI), Pretoria, 2009.

55. IBSA Trilateral Forum, The IBSA Trust Fund, <http://www.ibsatrilateral.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=29&Itemid=79> (accessed 13 February 2011).

56. Brueton R, ‘Zuma is proving to be more than just a “domestic president”’, in Diplomatic Pouch. Johannesburg: SAIIA, 2010.

57. Zuma J, ‘State of the Nation Address’, 3 June 2009, <http://www.presidency.gov.za/pebble.asp?relid=310> (accessed 13 February 2011).

58. DST, Innovation Towards a knowledge-based Economy — Ten-Year Plan for South Africa. Pretoria: Department of Science and Technology, 2008.

59. South Africa announced together with Brazil, China and India a joint strategy for the Copenhagen Climate Conference COP 15. The group formalised over the course of 2010 over four ministerial meetings in Delhi, Cape Town, Rio and Tianjin. See Olsson M, A Atteridge, K Hallding & J Hellberg, Together Alone? Brazil, South Africa, India, China (BASIC) and the Climate Change Conundrum. SEI, Policy Brief, 2010.