Enhancing Research Mechanisms and Institutional Processes in Malaysia: A Case Study of Universiti Malaya (UM)

Malaysia’s research and development landscape has grown tremendously over the last decade. The growth of scholarly output in Malaysia has also risen significantly compared to countries such as China, Singapore and Australia. Malaysia has made it a target that research output and quality will increase through an expenditure of 1.3% of the GDP allocated to Research and Development (R&D). Thus far, Malaysia has achieved phenomenal growth within the research sector, with a four-fold increase in the number of citations and has generated approximately RM1.25 billion through 11% yearly growth in the number of patents from Malaysian Universities. This case study aims to provide, firstly, an overview of research governance in Malaysia, and secondly, a discussion of research governance practices at Universiti Malaya (UM). Data is obtained from the 11th Malaysian Plan (2016-2020) and linked to the Malaysian Transformation Program. The Malaysian Education Blueprint for Higher Education (2015-2025) launched in 2015 also outlined a comprehensive transformation for research in higher education programmes. In addition, other published documents on research governance practices by agencies providing research funding were also reviewed. This case study highlights best practices in research management and governance to strengthen and further enhance the current research management and governance in support of the Malaysian government’s initiative towards achieving a high-income nation status.

Governance of health research in four eastern and southern African countries

Background Health research governance is an essential function of national health research systems. Yet many African countries have not developed strong health research governance structures and processes. This paper presents a comparative analysis of national health research governance in Botswana, Kenya, Uganda and Zambia, where health sciences research production is well established relative to some others in the region and continues to grow. The paper aims to examine progress made and challenges faced in strengthening health research governance in these countries. Methods We collected data through document review and key informant interviews with a total of 80 participants including decision-makers, researchers and funders across stakeholder institutions in the four countries. Data on health research governance were thematically coded for policies, legislation, regulation and institutions and analysed comparatively across the four national health research systems. Results All countries were found to be moving from using a research governance framework set by national science, technology and innovation policies to one that is more anchored in health research structures and policies within the health sectors. Kenya and Zambia have adopted health research legislation and policies, while Botswana and Uganda are in the process of developing the same. National-level health research coordination and regulation is hampered by inadequate financial and human resource capacities, which present challenges for building strong health research governance institutions. Conclusion Building health research governance as a key pillar of national health research systems involves developing stronger governance institutions, strengthening health research legislation, increasing financing for governance processes and improving human resource capacity in health research governance and management.

Research Governance in Public University: Proposal of a Composite Index

This work aims to elaborate a governance composite index for research laboratories in public university. This index is composed by an indicator of responsible liberalism associating effectiveness and ethics, to which are added an organizational management indicator and a strategic management indicator. To achieve the above aim, several methods are used, such as adjusted data envelopment analysis and geometric mean to aggregate indicators to calculate the composite index, Vigier index to compute responsible liberalism indicator, and tools to measure the validity and the reliability of indicators. The findings show that the developed index can be applied in any context.

Re-invent Yourself! How Demands for Innovativeness Reshape Epistemic Practices

In the current research landscape, there are increasing demands for research to be innovative and cutting-edge. At the same time, concerns are voiced that as a consequence of neoliberal regimes of research governance, innovative research becomes impeded. In this paper, I suggest that to gain a better understanding of these dynamics, it is indispensable to scrutinise current demands for innovativeness as a distinct way of ascribing worth to research. Drawing on interviews and focus groups produced in a close collaboration with three research groups from the crop and soil sciences, I develop the notion of a project-innovation regime of valuation that can be traced in the sphere of research. In this evaluative framework, it is considered valuable to constantly re-invent oneself and take ‘first steps’ instead of ‘just’ following up on previous findings. Subsequently, I describe how these demands for innovativeness relate to and often clash with other regimes of valuation that matter for researchers’ practices. I show that valuations of innovativeness are in many ways bound to those of productivity and competitiveness, but that these two regimes are nevertheless sometimes in tension with each other, creating a complicated double bind for researchers. Moreover, I highlight that also the project-innovation regime as such is not always in line with what researchers considered as a valuable progress of knowledge, especially because it entails a de-valuation of certain kinds of long-term epistemic agendas. I show that prevailing pushes for innovativeness seem to be based on a rather short-sighted temporal imaginary of scientific progress that is hardly grounded in the complex realities of research practices, and that they can reshape epistemic practices in potentially problematic ways.

Governance of Health Research in Four Eastern and Southern African Countries

Background: Health research governance is an essential function of national health research systems. Yet many African countries have not developed strong health research governance structures and processes. This paper presents a comparative analysis of national health research governance in Botswana, Kenya, Uganda, and Zambia where health sciences research production is well established relative to some others in the region, and continues to grow. It aims to examine progress made and challenges faced in strengthening health research governance in these countries.Methods: We collected data through document review and key informant interviews with a total of 80 participants including decision-makers, researchers, and funders across stakeholder institutions in the four countries. Data on health research governance were thematically coded for policies, legislation, regulation, and institutions and analyzed comparatively across the four national health research systems.Results: All countries were found to be moving from using a research governance framework set by national science, technology and innovation policies to one that is more anchored in health research structures and policies within the health sectors. Kenya and Zambia have adopted health research legislation and policies, while Botswana and Uganda are in the process of developing the same. National level health research coordination and regulation is still hampered by inadequate financial and human resource capacities, which present a challenge for building strong health research governance institutions.Conclusion: Building health research governance as a key pillar of national health research systems involve developing stronger governance institutions, strengthening health research legislation, increasing financing for governance processes, and improving human resource capacity in health research governance and management.

Governing Researchers through Public Involvement

This paper focuses on recent developments in UK health research policy, which place new pressures on researchers to address issues of accountability and impact through the implementation of patient and public involvement (PPI). We draw on an in-depth interview study with 20 professional researchers, and we analyse their experiences of competing for research funding, focusing on PPI as a process of professional research governance. We unearth dominant professional narratives of scepticism and alternative identifications in their enactment of PPI policy. We argue that such narratives and identifications evidence a resistance to ways in which patient involvement has been institutionalised and to the resulting subject-positions researchers are summoned to take up. We show that the new subjectivities emerging in this landscape of research governance as increasingly disempowered, contradictory and fraught with unresolved tensions over the ethical dimensions of the researchers’ own professional identities.

Engaging publics in biobanking and genetic research governance - a literature review towards informing practice in India

Background: There is growing interest in advancing biobanking and genetic research in many countries, including India. Concurrently, more importance is being placed on participatory approaches involving the public and other stakeholders in addressing ethical issues and policymaking as part of a broader governance approach. We analyse the tools, purposes, outcomes and limitations of engaging people towards biobanking and genetic research governance that have been undertaken worldwide, and explore their relevance to India. Methods: Papers to be reviewed were identified through a targeted literature search carried out using ProQuest and PubMed. Retrieved papers were analysed with the R package for Qualitative Data Analysis using inductive coding and thematic analysis, guided by the Framework Method. Results: Empirical studies on public and community engagement in the context of biobanking and or genetic research show a predominance towards the end of the last decade, spanning 2007 to 2019. Numerous strategies—including public meetings, community durbars, focus group discussions, interviews, deliberations, citizen-expert panels and community advisory boards—have been used to facilitate communication, consultation and collaboration with people, at the level of general and specific publics. Engagement allowed researchers to understand how people’s values, opinions and experiences related to the research process; and enabled participants to become partners within the conduct of research. Conclusions: Constructs such as ‘co-production’, ‘engagement of knowledges’, ‘rules of engagement’ and ‘stewardship’ emerge as significant mechanisms that can address the ethical challenges and the governance of biobanking and genetic research in India. Given the inherent diversity of the Indian population and its varying cultural values and beliefs, there is a need to invest time and research funds for engagement as a continuum of participatory activity, involving communication, consultation and collaboration in relation to biobanking and genetic research. Further research into these findings is required to explore their effective employment within India

The state of health research governance in Africa: what do we know and how can we improve?

Background The developments in global health, digital technology, and persistent health systems challenges, coupled with global commitments like attainment of universal health coverage, have elevated the role of health research in low- and middle-income countries. However, there is a need to strengthen health research governance and create a conducive environment that can promote ethics and research integrity and increase public trust in research. Objective To assess whether the necessary structures are in place to ensure health research governance. Methods Employing a cross-sectional survey, we collected data on research governance components from 35 Member States of the World Health Organization (WHO) African Region. Data were analysed using basic descriptive and comparative analysis. Results Eighteen out of 35 countries had legislation to regulate the conduct of health research, while this was lacking in 12 countries. Some legislation was either grossly outdated or too limiting in scope, while some countries had multiple laws. Health research policies and strategies were in place in 16 and 15 countries, respectively, while research priority lists were available in 25 countries. Overlapping mandates of institutions responsible for health research partly explained the lack of strategic documents in some countries. The majority of countries had ethical committees performing a dual role of ethical and scientific review. Research partnership frameworks were available to varying degrees to govern both in-country and north–south research collaboration. Twenty-five countries had a focal point and unit within the ministries of health (MoH) to coordinate research. Conclusion Governance structures must be adaptive to embrace new developments in science. Further, strong coordination is key to ensuring comprehensiveness and complementarity in both research development and generation of evidence. The majority of committees perform a dual role of ethics and scientific review, and these need to ensure representation of relevant expertise. Opportunities that accrue from collaborative research need to be seized through strong MoH leadership and clear partnership frameworks that guide negotiations.