Not only state, in fact science also need to democratize itself. This was revealed in the Fourth PWYP Knowledge Forum (PKF), monthly discussion, entitled “Science, Technology, and Activism for Public Policy Improvement” last 12/2.

Sonny Mumbunan, one of speakers, underlined that science and public policy knowledge can be used as an instrument for problem solving in a specific scope. Science also can be used to influence the public policy making process.

This Environmental Economic Researcher of RCCC U, explained about 2 communities namely scientist community and policy maker community. Some people say that scientist and policy maker are separated, because they have different language, norm, and reward system. Scientist do systematic searching process with reliable and accurate understanding. In another side, the policy makers tend to give practical response toward existing policy problem.

Sonny further elaborated that today’s scientist tend to act as a “non-scientist”. In public policy making process, the scientists do not show their position as a scientist, because of the power influence.

The concrete example is the public policy related to climate change. The policy-taken shows that the experienced scientist tend to be tolerant or ease to deal with the power authority. It’s clearly seen in policy to decrease 2 degrees of greenhouse gases which is not ambitious nor coherent. And here, Sonny emphasized the need of democratize of science, when scientists take distance with power and give accurate recommendation based on science.

Quoting Simone de Beauvoir “I am incapable of conceiving infinity and yet I do not accept finity”, the second speaker, Irendra Radjawali, a specialist of Geographic Information System (GIS) and drone are questioning hyper reality (a condition beyond reality). According to him, today, many policies tend to be hyperrealist and not based on grass root.

Nowadays, we are offered with graphics on growth that lead us to the question, “Is that fact is real?” Thus, Radja emphasized that NGOs activist should not trapped in hyper reality related to their activism. The result of research and findings in advocacy should refer to the findings in grass root level.