Achieving and Sustaining Evidence-Informed Policy Making: Effective Communication and Collaboration Can Go a Long Way

Warira, Diana; Mueni, Eunice; Lee, Marlene

doi:10.1177/1075547017710243

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Milat, Bauman, & Redman, 2015;Brownson et al, 2006). Since 2010, growing interest has focused on SSH research impact, including policymaking (Oliver et al, 2014;Warira et al, 2017) and specific policy fields like education (Lingard, 2013).…”

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…As research impact becomes an increasingly important part of scientific evaluation and funding, some scholars attempt to transmit knowledge directly to policymakers, practitioners, and other stakeholders (Warira et al, 2017). These activities are known as knowledge exchange, or "activities to increase the uptake of research" (Morton, 2015, p. 406).…”

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Universities include research impact in their mission statements and evaluation criteria, and go as far as to employ or designate knowledge exchange professionals (Knight & Lightowler, 2013). Policymakers work with scholars and knowledge brokers to use research for evidence-based policy (Bandola-Gill & Lyall, 2017;Warira et al, 2017) and to justify investments in research (Adam et al, 2018). The field of research impact evaluation assesses the progress of research toward uptake, use, and impact on society (i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Research and the real world: Analyzing the short- and long-term impact of knowledge transfer

Caves¹,

Lueling²

2021

Research Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge exchange interventions are an important driver of research impact. This study examines 5 years of intensive knowledge-exchange ‘reform labs’ in the field of education policy. Using qualitative analysis and a regression analysis approach applied to rich case data and quantitative results, we find that the reform labs have a significant impact on both participants and their reform projects in the short-term immediately after the event and in the medium term up to 5 years later. We also find evidence that the impact on individuals and projects drives broader social impact. We take a holistic approach to the knowledge brokerage of designing the reform labs and find that across contexts and project phases, but highly costly. In comparing the reform labs to best practices identified in the literature, we find evidence that knowledge exchange interventions of longer duration, with case-focused teamwork, and involving intensive researcher–participant interaction are more impactful. Additionally, we observe that diverse participants can drive impact and their needs must be considered.

show abstract

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Research and the real world: Analyzing the short- and long-term impact of knowledge transfer

Caves¹,

Lueling²

2021

Research Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

References

2020

Science for Policy Handbook

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge management for policy impact: the case of the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The European Commission's Joint Research Centre (JRC) employs over 2000 scientists and seeks to maximise the value and impact of research in the EU policy process. To that end, its Knowledge management for policy (KMP) initiative synthesised the insights of a large amount of interdisciplinary work on the 'evidence-policy interface' to promote a new skills and training agenda. It developed this training initially for Commission staff, but many of its insights are relevant to organisations which try to combine research, policymaking, management, and communication skills to improve the value and use of research in policy. We recommend that such organisations should develop teams of researchers, policymakers, and 'knowledge brokers' to produce eight key practices: (1) research synthesis, to generate 'state of the art' knowledge on a policy problem; (2) management of expert communities, to maximise collaboration; (3) understanding policymaking, to know when and how to present evidence; (4) interpersonal skills, to focus on relationships and interaction; (5) engagement, to include citizens and stakeholders; (6) effective communication of knowledge; (7) monitoring and evaluation, to identify the impact of evidence on policy; and (8) policy advice, to know how to present knowledge effectively and ethically. No one possesses all skills relevant to all these practices. Rather, we recommend that organisations at the evidence-policy interface produce teams of people with different backgrounds, perspectives, and complementary skills.

show abstract

Achieving and Sustaining Evidence-Informed Policy Making: Effective Communication and Collaboration Can Go a Long Way

Cited by 4 publications

References 5 publications

Research and the real world: Analyzing the short- and long-term impact of knowledge transfer

Research and the real world: Analyzing the short- and long-term impact of knowledge transfer

References

Knowledge management for policy impact: the case of the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About