KT-EQUAL/ CARDI
Workshop:
‘Lost in Translation’
23 June 2011
Communicating research results to
policy makers: A practitioner’s
perspective.
Structure
1. What do policy practitioners expect from
researchers?
2. The policy process - Implications for:
3. Communicating research results to policy makers
4. Opportunities for improving links between
research & policy practitioners
Better policy-making
agenda: Aims:
To improve the capacity to address strategic,
cross-cutting issues;
To promote innovation in the development &
delivery of policy;
To promote evidence-based policy making,
including the dissemination of relevant
information and research.
10 Features of Good
Policy Making
(OFMDFM, 2003)
Evidence-based
Joined up
Outward looking
Learns lessons
Innovative, flexible &
creative
Communication
Forward looking
Inclusive
Review
Evaluation
The policy process
(1)
May not always proceed as neatly as suggested;
No two policies will need exactly the same process;
Sources of policy making will vary from case to case;
Existing state of policy and its complexity will vary;
Policy process can be blown off course;
Implementation and evaluation stages can be neglected.
2. The Policy
Cycle
The Policy Cycle
Political Mandate
Policy Evaluation
Policy Maintenance
Policy Development
Policy Implementation
The Policy Cycle Contested Space
Political Mandate
Policy
Evaluation
Policy
Maintenance
Stakeholders:
statutory agencies,
NGOs, community,
business & other
interests
Policy
Development
Policy
Implementation
Factors Influencing Policy Making in
Government (Davies 2004)
Pragmatics &
Contingencies
Lobbyists &
Pressure
Groups
Experience
&
Expertise
Judgement
EVIDENCE
Resources
Habits &
Traditions
Values
The policy process
(2)
Time pressures
Use of in-house expertise at branch level
Role of economists / statisticians and other experts
Focus on ‘policy development’
Identified training needs
Policy networks at different levels – EU / Regional / Local
Communicating
research results to
policy makers
 Essential to develop & sustain a dialogue
 Language
 Make it policy relevant. Examples:
‘Patterns of demographic ageing and related aspects’;
‘Sustainable Regional development from Rhetoric to Practice’;
‘Social impact Assessment in Regional & Land Use planning’
 Nature of the policy process
Communicating
research results to
policy makers
 Theory & Practice
 Transfer of Learning
 Consider a variety of communication formats to promote
research findings: Examples:
‘Britain in 2011: Annual Magazine of the ESRC
Community newsletters / Alumni news / www.
 Think of How the research will be used and quoted.
 Early dissemination of research e.g. Working papers.
Communicating
research results to
policy makers
 Quality is important: Need for internal & external
validity.
 Policy cycle: how do the research findings relate to the
policy cycle? (see next slide).
 Facilitate collaboration & multi – disciplinarity.
 Utilise or develop policy networks.
Communicating
research results to
policy makers
 Perceptions: Consider how different research disciplines may be
perceived: (e.g. Economics / Sociology / Occupational Psychology /
Political Science / Public Health /Science / Law).
 Policy evaluation: Maximise utility of evaluation findings.
 Highlight innovation & creativity: identify the value added
contribution of the research. Define the policy challenge – make
clear the policy recommendations but outline the limitations of the
work.
Communicating
research results to
policy makers
Examples of research findings presented to policy
officials
 Fuel poverty
 Devolution in practice
 Implication of the ageing population
 Equality issues
 Early childhood disadvantage
Communicating
research results to
policy makers
CONCLUSIONS
 Identify policy implications of research findings in a
comprehensible way.
 Recognise the difficult choices policy makers have to make.
 Be clear on the key messages for policy makers and other key
stakeholders.
 Need for ongoing dialogue - from design to dissemination.
Communicating
research results to
policy makers
CONCLUSIONS continued.....
 Recognise the complexity of the policy process:‘…the complex
interplay between political interests, competing discourse and the
agency of multiple actors’.
 Enhancing communications skills for researchers
 Encourage the utilisation of research by policy practitioners
Improving the links between
research and policy
 Devolution - opportunity for differentiated policy making
 Professionalisation of policy making function
 Potential for collaborative approaches
 Dissemination of research results
 Engagement of specialist staff in policy process
 Utility of Research programmes
 Contribution to ‘joined up’ thinking
 Sustainable development agenda
A Policymakers
view of issues
policylink
www.ofmdfmni.gov.uk/policylink