Key messages There has been a huge expansion in research-policy engagement initiatives. These are mostly poorly described, specified, and evaluated. The lack of strategy may lead to significant harms (for example, increased competition, wasted time and resources). Future initiatives should draw on and build the existing evidence about what works. Background For over four decades, researchers have written about how evaluation and research evidence is routinely ignored by decision makers ( Weiss, 1993 ; Ham et al, 1995 ; Black and Donald, 2001
Key messages Nursing and health science researchers conduct a wide range of research-policy engagement activities. More impactful relationship-based strategies are largely the preserve of more experienced academics. Support and specific development would accelerate researchers’ policy impact capacity. Consistent use of terminology that better reflects the dynamic, indirect way in which evidence informs policy might be advantageous. Introduction Academic research is an important source of evidence for informing policymaking. There is increasing
In the field of ethnic relations the complex, often tortuous, interactions among academic researchers, research funders and those who use the research often result in social policy interventions that are poorly conceived and flawed in their implementation.
In this unique book, the contributors seek to develop a dialogue about the multiple constraints that skew research and its findings, and to kick-start a wider debate about the political context of current research and policy. In doing so, they aim to produce a renewed awareness of the current links between research and social policy in ethnic relations and to provide a critically reflexive basis for shaping interventions.
It will be of interest to academics working in higher and further education as well as to students at higher undergraduate and postgraduate level, and to a wide range of people working in ethnic relations policy fora.
Research by universities plays an increasingly important role in shaping education policy around the world yet there is much dissatisfaction with the ways that they share that work. This much-needed, original book analyses efforts and systems in nine countries to mobilize research knowledge, describing the various factors that support or inhibit that work. Beginning and concluding chapters offer analytical lenses for understanding these various elements across the cases. Together, this collection from a wide range of experienced contributors, provides an unprecedented international view of the way education research is produced and shared, and provides excellent signposts for improvement for researchers and those interested in more impact from research in education.
This book provides a timely and novel contribution to understanding and enhancing evidence use. It builds on and complements the popular and best-selling “What Works?: Evidence-based policy and practice in public services" (Davies, Nutley and Smith, Policy Press, 2000), by drawing together current knowledge about how research gets used and how this can be encouraged and improved. In particular, the authors explore various multidiscipliary frameworks for understanding the research use agenda; consider how research use and the impact of research can be assessed; summarise the empirical evidence from the education, health care, social care and criminal justice fields about how research is used and how this can be improved and draw out practical issues that need to be addressed if research is to have greater impact on public services. “Using evidence" is important reading for university and government researchers, research funding bodies, public service managers and professionals, and students of public policy and management. It will also prove an invaluable guide for anyone involved in the implementation of evidence-based policy and practice.
-world problems ( Moser and Fazey, 2021 ). Limitations The researcher-policy engagement process outlined in this paper was not formally studied because it was not anticipated, nor was it the focus of the research commission. It is acknowledged that this presents a limitation in terms of advancing theoretical knowledge in this field. However, the paper does provide novel insights into the less apparent, relational elements of knowledge transfer that are effective at influencing decision making, providing useful pointers for further study. Despite wide dissemination of the
(-maker) interaction, and shows how these may be navigated for a productive relationship. In tracing this evolving relationship the paper explores the differing notions of evidence and its multiple utility for policymakers. It offers a reflexive view of the nexus, and acknowledges the specific contextual factors that inform research-policy engagements. The discussion is organised in four sections. Section one posits key features of an analytical framework for understanding the nexus and argues for a broader and more nuanced conception of ‘evidence’ in facilitating the
Key messages Describe whether a research-policy intervention changed attitudes and behaviours of policymakers and researchers. Demonstrate how research-policy initiatives are operationalised. Illustrate the conditions to support evidence use in policymaking through an empirical experiment. Discuss lessons for future research-policy engagement. Introduction Using science to improve or create health policies is a multilevel process, which requires a good understanding of relationship building, behaviours, problems, actors, and results ( Davies
H.T.O. Davies ( 2007 ) Using Evidence: How Research Can Inform Public Services , Bristol : Policy Press . Oliver , K. and Boaz , A. ( 2019 ) Transforming evidence for policy and practice: creating space for new conversations , Palgrave Communications , 5 : 60 , doi: 10.1057/s41599-019-0266-1 . Oliver , K. , Hopkins , A. , Boaz , A. , Guillot-Wright , S. and Cairney , P. ( 2022 ) What works to promote research-policy engagement? , Evidence & Policy, Early View , doi: 10.1332/174426421X16420918447616 . Overlaet , B. ( 2022 ) A
48 48 18/01/2008 12:36:19 49 Evidence & Policy • vol 4 • no 1 • 2008 • 31-51 situating children in international development policy Jones, N. with Tefera, B. and Woldehanna, T. (2005) Research, policy engagement and practice: Reflections on efforts to mainstream children into Ethiopia’s second national poverty reduction strategy, Young Lives Working Paper 21, London: Save the Children UK, www.younglives.org.uk/publications/working-papers Keck, M.E. and Sikkink, K. (1998) Activists beyond borders: Advocacy networks in international politics, Ithaca, NY
