Benefits
1 in 5 people feel personally excluded from the benefits of science.
How far removed might people feel they are from the benefits of science?
Globally, distrust in science is moderately correlated (0.65 correlation) with saying science does not benefit the country. LMICs are 1.3 times less likely to say that science benefits most people in their country as compared to upper middle and high income countries. LICs are 1.5 times more likely to say that science benefits few people in their country as compared to HICs.
We found regional differences within Kenya and Malawi characterized by resource deprivation and poverty to be a greater predictor of feeling excluded from the benefits of science as compared to living in a rural or urban location or educational attainment.
Distrust is correlated with feeling excluded from the benefits of science.
Globally, distrust in science is moderately correlated (0.65 correlation) with saying science does not benefit their country.
High Income
Upper Middle Income
Lower Middle Income
Low Income
Q12 In general, would you say that you trust science a lot, some, not much, or not at all?
Q16. In general, do you think the work that scientists do benefits most, some, or very few people in this country?
Low income and lower middle income countries have lower relatability to the benefits of science and technology.
They are 1.3 times less likely to say that science benefits most people in their country as compared to upper middle and high income countries.
Low Income
Lower Middle Income
Upper Middle Income
High Income
Low income countries are 1.5 times more likely to say that that science benefits few people in their country as compared to high income countries.
Low Income
High Income
CASE STUDY
Malawi
Malawi experiences the biggest polarisation in the degree of perceived benefit from science. 49% of the respondents say the work that scientists do benefits “most of the citizens” and 32% of them say that the work benefits only a “few of the citizens".
The Southern third of the country is the most polarised of the three regions. It is also the most populated and the most economically developed - and home to the commercial and industrial capital of Malawi - Blantyre.
Photograph: Aditya Septiansyah on Unsplash
IMPLICATION
More experience with economic development does not necessarily translate to feeling that science benefits the region. There remains a lot more to be understood about what it means to feel that science benefits the country.
Respondents in low incomes countries are 1.3 times more likely to feel personally excluded from the benefit of science as compared to high income countries.
Low Income
High Income
We were tasked with exploring nine focus countries, In South Africa (37%), Malawi (32%) and Kenya (26%), the proportion of people who think that science benefits very few in the country is over double that of the other 6 focus countries.
CASE STUDY
South Africa
In South Africa, 45.7% of respondents do not think science benefits people like them or answer “don’t know”.
People living in the Capes are 16% less likely to feel that science personally benefits them vs those in KwaZulu Natal and Free State provinces.
The Capes are home to the Square Kilometer Array and Southern African Large Telescope project. A 2018 study, found that their existence made a difference to the perceptions and understanding of science for people who otherwise would not have (or only moderately) had exposure to science education.2
The Eastern Cape is South Africa’s poorest province.3 Around 880,000 of the mostly rural Eastern Cape’s people live in poverty and practising subsistence agriculture is common. Overall the province contributes 8% to the national GDP despite making 13.5% of the population. The Western and Northern Cape are more economically developed - highlighting a need for further research.4
It represents the average (24%) of lower middle-income countries where between 9% and 53% of people believe that science does not benefit themselves personally.
2. Guenther, L., Weingart, P., & Meyer, C. (2018). “Science is Everywhere, but No One Knows It”: Assessing the Cultural Distance to Science of Rural South African Publics. Environmental Communication, 12(8), 1046-1061.
3. "Mapping poverty in South Africa". southafrica-info.com. Retrieved 31 March 2020.
4. "Mapping poverty in South Africa". southafrica-info.com. Retrieved 31 March 2020.
Photograph: Matheo JBT on Unsplash
CASE STUDY
Kenya
In Kenya, nearly 1 in 4 people do not think science benefits people like them.
At a regional level, Kenyans living in the Nyanza province are 1.8 times more likely to feel that science personally benefits them vs those in North Eastern province. This regional difference can be attributed to the historic political isolation and marginalization, sociocultural practices (e.g., nomadic lifestyle, female genital mutilation), resource deprivation and poverty, harsh geographic conditions, and poor infrastructure in this arid region.
It is home to the Cushite communities, e.g., Somali, Borana, Rendille, and Gabra. The region is a vast land, very arid, including 62% of the arid and semi-arid lands in Kenya. Rain falls infrequently, usually only around April or October, and quite sporadically from year to year. The coefficient of variation of rainfall stands out as a major determinant of poverty.5 It is several hundred miles away from the main railway line, rendering the region as economically untenable (Okilwa 2009).
5. Okwi, P. O., Ndeng'e, G., Kristjanson, P., Arunga, M., Notenbaert, A., Omolo, A., ... & Owuor, J. (2007). Spatial determinants of poverty in rural Kenya. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(43), 16769-16774.
Photograph: Pete Lewis/Department for International Development
Photograph: DFID/Flickr
CONTEXTUAL CHALLENGE
Climate variabilities impact on livelihoods
Over 13 million pastoralists and agro-pastoralists rely on livestock for their economic well being, and live in the arid and semi-arid lands of Kenya. Approximately 2.7 million of them reside in the North Eastern province.6 Under climatic variability impacts, the pastoralists community has over the years been practicing various adaptation options. These include investments in livestock species resilient to drought; migration in search of pastures and water.7 But these strategies don’t always work and pastoralists aren’t able to cope with the fluctuations in climate - there are households that have become destitute due to the impact of dramatic weather events and have not been able to recover.8
6. 80% of the population are pastoralists
7. Okoti, M., Kung’u, J., & Obando, J. (2014). Impact of climate variability on pastoral households and adaptation strategies in Garissa County, Northern Kenya. Journal of Human ecology, 45(3), 243-249
How might science assist pastoralists struggling due to climate variability?
Photograph: Paul Odongo/MSF
CONTEXTUAL CHALLENGE
Science which serves displaced populations
The north eastern province is the site of a UNHCR refugee base hosting more than 200,000 registered refugees and asylum seekers. They are heterogeneous as a population and differ significantly in their personal history of access to healthcare, understanding of chronic conditions - while being susceptible to diarrheal diseases - which remains among the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in Dadaab.9 Ingenious and rigorously tested projects like the Home-Based Insulin Management - A training service to help educate Type 1 diabetes patients in how to manage their condition and a DIY cooling container to help store insulin at home without electricity - help ensure that health and dignity is maintained.10 According to UNHCR, Forcible displacement affected 70 million people in 2018 - which serves a reminder that is a critical issue for many people in the world.
9. Cetron, C. M., & Amoroso, M. S. (Eds.). (2014). Crossing borders: one world, global health. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 58(7), v-vi.
How might science assist displaced populations to maintain health and wellbeing?
Key Takeaway
Relatability to the benefits of science is determined by regional differences, geographical locations, economic conditions, literacy levels, access to media, age, cultural and religious predispositions. We found that regional differences in Kenya, Malawi and South Africa were the biggest predictor of the level relatability to the benefits of science.
Opportunity
Given these regional differences exist, How might science organize knowledge creation and its applications in a regional sense, so that the benefits are not just felt by certain parts of the country? Additionally, how might science better translate its benefits for those people in low resource settings?
The Lens of
Benefits
How near or how far removed might people feel they are from the benefits of science?
Some countries and regions experience lower reliability to the benefits of science and may feel personally excluded. This experience is correlated with distrust in science. Use this lens to understand how people feel about the distribution of the benefits of science to themselves and others, and how far away from science they feel as a result.
