Assessing Science - Policy Interfaces for Climate Adaptation and Disaster Risk Reduction in Africa: a comparative indicator-based analysis

Understanding how scientific knowledge informs climate change adaptation (CCA) and disaster risk reduction (DRR) policy remains a critical challenge across African governance systems. Science-Policy Interfaces (SPIs) are widely promoted to strengthen evidence-informed decision-making, yet systematic and comparative assessments of how they function in practice remain limited. This study develops and applies an indicator-based framework to assess SPI performance, empirically tested through 20 CCA and DRR initiatives implemented in Africa between 2008 and 2021.

Drawing on global literature on science - policy engagement, co-production, institutional governance, and knowledge systems, we developed a general analytical framework comprising 22 indicators organised across six domains, designed to capture core conditions underpinning effective SPIs across policy fields. The framework was applied to the CCA/DRR cases through standardised scoring of project documentation, complemented by exploratory Spearman’s rank correlation analysis and Principal Component Analysis (PCA), with cluster stability validated through bootstrap resampling. This mixed-method approach enabled examination of how SPI conditions in the selected case studies co-occur, interact, and form performance patterns.

Results show consistently strong performance in scientific contextual relevance, stakeholder engagement, international alignment, and capacity strengthening, indicating that participatory and context-sensitive practices were widely embedded across the initiatives. However, weaknesses were identified in sustainability-related dimensions, particularly exit strategies, monitoring and feedback mechanisms, long-term resourcing, equity (notably gender representation), and digital infrastructures.

Both correlation analysis and PCA reveal that SPI indicators cluster around three interdependent dimensions rather than linear pathways. A first, socially grounded dimension centres on intermediary capacity, highlighting the role of boundary actors in knowledge sharing and retention, with reflexive practices functioning as a two-way interface that builds understanding, supports uptake, and informs where further scientific input is needed. A second, institutional dimension brings together alignment with institutional policy frameworks and continuity-oriented mechanisms - including institutional capacity strengthening, monitoring arrangements, and exit strategies - emphasising the importance of institutional anchoring and planned continuity for SPI durability. A third, technical - operational dimension links the usability of outputs - timeliness, accessibility, and practical relevance - with policy uptake, showing that practical and accessible outputs are closely associated with policy influence.

Overall, the findings demonstrate that SPIs operate as integrated systems in which social capacities, institutional anchoring, and technical - operational conditions reinforce one another. Beyond DRR and CCA, the framework offers a transferable evaluation tool to support comparative learning and the identification of effective SPI practices across broader green transition initiatives.

Acknowledgements: This study was conducted within the framework of the Africa Regional Centres of Excellence (ArcX) Programme, an initiative of the EU-Africa Science, Technology and Innovation Partnership. The authors acknowledge the support of the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC) and the Directorate-General for International Partnerships (DG INTPA) for funding and institutional guidance provided through the ArcX Knowledge Management Mechanism. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the European Commission.