A recipe for impact? Exploring knowledge requirements in the UK Parliament and beyond

Geddes, Marc; Dommett, Katharine; Prosser, Brenton

doi:10.1332/174426417x14945838375115

Cited by 25 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 17 publications

(24 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, a recent and substantial study examining the role of research in the UK Parliament revealed that although research in its broadest sense is useful for parliamentary work, academic research is ‘ not cutting through ’ [9]. The study revealed that challenges to the use of academic research included lack of accessibility and poor communication [9], which mirrored findings from an earlier study of eight UK parliamentary staff [10]. Yet there remains a gap in knowledge regarding the challenges and motivations for research professionals to engage with evidence-informed policy-making processes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Supporting evidence-informed policy and scrutiny: A consultation of UK research professionals

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Access to reliable and timely information ensures that decision-makers can operate effectively. The motivations and challenges of parliamentarians and policy-makers in accessing evidence have been well documented in the policy literature. However, there has been little focus on research-providers. Understanding both the demand- and the supply-side of research engagement is imperative to enhancing impactful interactions. Here, we examine the broader experiences, motivations and challenges of UK-based research professionals engaging with research-users relevant to policy-making and scrutiny in the UK using a nationwide online questionnaire. The context of the survey partly involved contributing to the UK Evidence Information Service (EIS), a proposed rapid match-making service to facilitate interaction between parliamentary arenas that use evidence and research-providers. Our findings reveal, at least for this sub-sample who responded, that there are gender-related differences in policy-related experience, motivations, incentives and challenges for research professionals to contribute to evidence-informed decision-making through initiatives such as the EIS. Male and female participants were equally likely to have policy experience; however, males reported both significantly broader engagement with the research-users included in the survey and significantly higher levels of engagement with each research-user. Reported incentives for engagement included understanding what the evidence will be used for, guidance on style and content of contribution, and acknowledgement of contributions by the policymaker or elected official. Female participants were significantly more likely to select the guidance-related options. The main reported barrier was workload. We discuss how academia-policy engagement initiatives can best address these issues in ways that enhance the integration of research evidence with policy and practice across the UK.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

Supporting evidence-informed policy and scrutiny: A consultation of UK research professionals

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Should academics help ‘co-produce’ knowledge and policy with others? Co-production is often hailed as the most useful way to promote research evidence in policy (Geddes et al, 2018) but, to do so in a meaningful way, researchers must cede control over the research agenda (Flinders et al, 2016; Matthews et al, 2017). There are reputational risks: it can prompt accusations of bias, partisanship, or partiality for one political view over another.…”

Section: Seeking Impact: When Safe Advice Meets Professional Dilemmasmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Should Academics Engage in Policymaking to Achieve Impact?

Cairney

Oliver

2018

Political Studies Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reviews the advice from the academic and ‘grey’ literatures to identify a list of dos and don’ts for academics seeking ‘impact’ from their research. From ‘how to do it’ sources, we identify consistent advice on how to engage effectively, largely because it is necessarily vague, safe, and focused primarily on individuals. We then consider the wider policymaking system in which actors make political choices and have unequal access to impact opportunities. We identify the effort it takes to have actual policy impact and how far academics should be expected to go to secure and take credit for it.

show abstract

“…The definitive publisher-authenticated version (doi:10.1057/s41293-018-0083-y) is available online at: https: //link.springer.com/article/10.1057/s41293-018-0083-y accordingly become an essential yardstick for justifying the allocation of public funds to pay for it, reflecting a shift 'from a state patronage to investment model' of research funding (Hammersley, 2014, p. 345). In the social sciences impact has typically been understood in terms affecting public policy, particularly in the context of the desire for more 'evidence-based' policy (Geddes et al, 2017).…”

Section: The Impact Agenda In Uk Higher Educationmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact agenda and the study of British politics

Hayton

2018

Br Polit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article attempts to discern the nature of impact in relation to the British politics sub-field of political studies. It reviews evidence from REF2014 to establish how political scientists working in this area understood, and tried to demonstrate impact. It critically appraises how the impact agenda is affecting how research into British politics is prioritised, undertaken and disseminated, and question whether this is a good thing for the sub-discipline. The implications of this for the shape of British politics research going forward are considered. While welcoming the possibility of a re-centring of scholarly attention on British politics, the article cautions against a retreat to the parameters of the British Political Tradition and the Westminster Model view.

show abstract

A recipe for impact? Exploring knowledge requirements in the UK Parliament and beyond

Cited by 25 publications

References 17 publications

Supporting evidence-informed policy and scrutiny: A consultation of UK research professionals

Supporting evidence-informed policy and scrutiny: A consultation of UK research professionals

How Should Academics Engage in Policymaking to Achieve Impact?

The impact agenda and the study of British politics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About