Scientists failing to communicate

I would like to agree with Dr. Otieno's sentiments that most scientists fail to communicate their findings locally because they are trying to compete with the rest of the world in citing their results in peer-reviewed journals. This is a shame since as Africans we should be more aware of the burden disease and poverty confer hence the motivation to alleviate it. However most scientists will even hide their results so that nobody else can 'copy' their research and hence publish before they do. We need to have our priorities set right so that the outcome of the science we engage in can be seen and felt in the masses.

In addition to publishing research findings in peer reviewed journals with high impact factors, researchers should have time and skill to write the major output of the research in local language understandable to the community. Media should also give appropriate place in their coverage for such writings. This is generally not happening in Nepal too.

Research results must reach the policy makers, the poor and marginalised for whom it is meant. However, scientists need to be assisted in and regularly reminded to communicate their work. In Zambia there are plans to institutionalize research communication through regular "short courses" for scientists, the media and others; and to conduct activities which sustain research communication through non-academic channels. Research funders should, apart from including budget lines for communication in research budgets, support such efforts. DFID, for instance, requires that a "good" percentage of its research budget goes towards communication. More should emulate this. In Zambia we need to know that half our soils are becoming useless, why, and what we can do to reclaim them and avoid further damage. Thanks Dr. Otieno, Carol and Bharat.

Recenly, I attended IAL7 Symposium, Thailand, where I made presentation on Trade and Traditional Utilizations of Lichens in Nepal Himalayas. My presentation was completely dependent on the local practices and local perception. The large volume of Lichens is being extracted haphazardly from Nepal. The care must be taken on this matter. I was the only one in that symposium, who presented there from the social point of views.

Why I am mentioning these all things here are if confernece, symposium and discussions are for the conservation, and if the conservation is for the people, the scientific communities must accept this fact and start their steps to conserve the resources in broad scale to address the local people livelihood. It is not worthy to invest millions of dollars to study a single lichen (or any other flora and fauna) species with less value. The scientific community must link science and society for the welfare of the community. Yes, we need pure research on the single species too, but that must link with the real conservation aspects.

The findings must be shared among the locals for the conservation, not only in peer reviewed and high factor journals.

For the scientific development, publications are must, but to address the local demand, communication in simpler ways are demanding.

Shiva Devkota, Nepal