Use Of Research In Policymaking Research Articles

A landscape assessment of the activities and capacities of evidence-to-policy intermediaries (EPI) in behavioral health

BackgroundA significant gap exists between the production of research evidence and its use in behavioral health policymaking. Organizations providing consulting and support activities for improving policy represent a promising source for strengthening the infrastructure to address this gap. Understanding the characteristics and activities of these evidence-to-policy intermediary (EPI) organizations can inform the development of capacity-building activities, leading to strengthened evidence-to-policy infrastructure and more widespread evidence-based policymaking.MethodsOnline surveys were sent to 51 organizations from English-speaking countries involved in evidence-to-policy activities in behavioral health. The survey was grounded in a rapid evidence review of the academic literature regarding strategies used to influence research use in policymaking. The review identified 17 strategies, which were classified into four activity categories. We administered the surveys via Qualtrics and calculated the descriptive statistics, scales, and internal consistency statistics using R.ResultsA total of 31 individuals completed the surveys from 27 organizations (53% response rate) in four English-speaking countries. EPIs were evenly split between university (49%) and non-university (51%) settings. Nearly all EPIs conducted direct program support (mean = 4.19/5 [sd = 1.25]) and knowledge-building (4.03 [1.17]) activities. However, engagement with traditionally marginalized and non-traditional partners (2.84 [1.39]) and development of evidence reviews using formal critical appraisal methods (2.81 [1.70]) were uncommon. EPIs tend to be specialized, focusing on a group of highly related strategies rather than incorporating multiple evidence-to-policy strategies in their portfolios. Inter-item consistency was moderate to high, with scale α’s ranging from 0.67 to 0.85. Ratings of respondents’ willingness to pay for training in one of three evidence dissemination strategies revealed high interest in program and policy design.ConclusionsOur results suggest that evidence-to-policy strategies are frequently used by existing EPIs; however, organizations tend to specialize rather than engage in a breadth of strategies. Furthermore, few organizations reported consistently engaging with non-traditional or community partners. Focusing on building capacity for a network of new and existing EPIs could be a promising strategy for growing the infrastructure needed for evidence-informed behavioral health policymaking.

Realizing the Promise of Research in Policymaking: Theoretical Guidance Grounded in Policymaker Perspectives

This article explores growing pessimism among those scholars who wish to see rigorous research used more frequently to formulate public policy. That commonsense aspiration is threatened by the impoverished dialogue between the communities that conduct studies (researchers) and those that apply them to decisions (policymakers). To examine this disconnect, the authors advance community dissonance theory, which proposes that a better understanding in the research community of the inhabitants, institutions, and cultures of the policy community could increase communication and trust. Community dissonance theory extends earlier two‐communities theories by deconstructing the cultural impediments to optimal communication. Building on previous literature and supported with in‐depth interviews of state policymakers, this article examines professional culture and institutional culture (e.g., preferred decision‐making processes, interactional preferences, favored epistemological frameworks, dominant influence loops, salient goals, salient stakeholders). The article presents several frictions that occur when cultures clash, discussing their promise and peril for improving research use in policymaking.

The role of epistemic communities: local think tanks, international practitioners and security sector reform in Kosovo

ABSTRACT Security sector reform (SSR) in Kosovo remains complex and challenging. The existing approach is heavily driven by international agencies. This article addresses the question: What role is played by local research in Kosovo’s SSR? This study focuses on the challenges that local research poses to internationally led SSR in Kosovo, and the contribution that local researchers make to the decision-making of international practitioners. In Kosovo, local research organizations produce research analysing and critiquing international SSR and offering alternative approaches. The study builds on existing studies of epistemic communities and research use in policy-making and new evidence based on the author’s interview survey of researchers and policy-makers in Kosovo. The article argues that focusing on the interaction between local researchers and international policy practitioners provides valuable insight into the construction of Kosovo’s SSR. The study deconstructs the structures, processes and agencies at the heart of the local/international relationship. It explains how local research on topics of security, justice and rule of law, and its interaction with international practitioners, challenges international SSR and contributes to international SSR decision-making.

Organisational capacity and its relationship to research use in six Australian health policy agencies.

There are calls for policymakers to make greater use of research when formulating policies. Therefore, it is important that policy organisations have a range of tools and systems to support their staff in using research in their work. The aim of the present study was to measure the extent to which a range of tools and systems to support research use were available within six Australian agencies with a role in health policy, and examine whether this was related to the extent of engagement with, and use of research in policymaking by their staff. The presence of relevant systems and tools was assessed via a structured interview called ORACLe which is conducted with a senior executive from the agency. To measure research use, four policymakers from each agency undertook a structured interview called SAGE, which assesses and scores the extent to which policymakers engaged with (i.e., searched for, appraised, and generated) research, and used research in the development of a specific policy document. The results showed that all agencies had at least a moderate range of tools and systems in place, in particular policy development processes; resources to access and use research (such as journals, databases, libraries, and access to research experts); processes to generate new research; and mechanisms to establish relationships with researchers. Agencies were less likely, however, to provide research training for staff and leaders, or to have evidence-based processes for evaluating existing policies. For the majority of agencies, the availability of tools and systems was related to the extent to which policymakers engaged with, and used research when developing policy documents. However, some agencies did not display this relationship, suggesting that other factors, namely the organisation’s culture towards research use, must also be considered.

Framing research for state policymakers who place a priority on cancer.

Despite the potential for reducing the cancer burden via state policy change, few data exist on how best to disseminate research information to influence state legislators' policy choices. We explored: (1) the relative importance of core framing issues (source, presentation, timeliness) among policymakers who prioritize cancer and those who do not prioritize cancer and (2) the predictors of use of research in policymaking. Cross-sectional data were collected from US state policymakers (i.e., legislators elected to state houses or senates) from January through October 2012 (n=862). One-way analysis of variance was performed to investigate the association of the priority of cancer variable with outcome variables. Multivariate logistic regression models examined predictors of the influence of research information. Legislators who prioritized cancer tended to rate characteristics that make research information useful higher than those who did not prioritize cancer. Among differences that were statistically significant were three items in the "source" domain (relevance, delivered by someone respected, supports one's own position), one item in the "presentation" domain (telling a story related to constituents) and two items in the "timeliness" domain (high current state priority, feasible when information is received). Participants who prioritized cancer risk factors were 80% more likely to rate research information as one of their top reasons for choosing an issue on which to work. Our results suggest the importance of narrative forms of communication and that research information needs to be relevant to the policymakers' constituents in a brief, concise format.

Model Communities: A Vital Strategy to Implementing Policy and Environmental Change for Active Living and Addressing Health Equity in Suburban Cook County, Illinois

Active Living Research awarded the sixth annual Translating Research to Policy Award to the Model Communities Initiative of Suburban Cook County, Illinois (SCC). Model Communities is a local strategy designed and implemented to address obesity in SCC. The purpose of the award is to recognize innovative teams or individuals representing research, policy, or advocacy who have had success in catalyzing policy or environmental change of relevance to youth physical activity, sedentary behavior, and obesity prevention. The goal is to celebrate achievements, understand how success occurs, and share these stories so others will be inspired to improve the use of research in policymaking. The commentary that follows describes the work that is recognized by the award. Active Living Research commends the awardees on their successful participation in the policy process, and we recommend their approach as a model to others.

A Glass Half Empty or Half Full? On the Perceived Gap between Urban Geography Research and Dutch Urban Restructuring Policy

The Dutch urban restructuring policy, initiated in 1997, has generated much urban geography research. As with so many other fields, the associated debate has witnessed the perception of a gap between policy and research among both researchers and policymakers. Using four examples, this paper argues that this perception of a gap fails to reflect properly what is happening in the interchange between research and policy. Drawing on a broader typology of the use of research in policy-making (Stevens, 2007), the paper shows that the relationship is more complex and critically highlights the role of researchers herein. Moreover, ignoring or ‘cherry-picking’ of research by policymakers does not necessarily reflect a lack of relevance, which is a fundamental discussion within current geography research. The four discussed examples are: ambivalent outcomes of relocation research, the selection of renewal target areas, potential negative spillover effects on other areas, and the stubbornness of the concept of social cohesion in policy.

Reliability of a tool for measuring theory of planned behaviour constructs for use in evaluating research use in policymaking

BackgroundAlthough measures of knowledge translation and exchange (KTE) effectiveness based on the theory of planned behavior (TPB) have been used among patients and providers, no measure has been developed for use among health system policymakers and stakeholders. A tool that measures the intention to use research evidence in policymaking could assist researchers in evaluating the effectiveness of KTE strategies that aim to support evidence-informed health system decision-making. Therefore, we developed a 15-item tool to measure four TPB constructs (intention, attitude, subjective norm and perceived control) and assessed its face validity through key informant interviews.MethodsWe carried out a reliability study to assess the tool's internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Our study sample consisted of 62 policymakers and stakeholders that participated in deliberative dialogues. We assessed internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha and generalizability (G) coefficients, and we assessed test-retest reliability by calculating Pearson correlation coefficients (r) and G coefficients for each construct and the tool overall.ResultsThe internal consistency of items within each construct was good with alpha ranging from 0.68 to alpha = 0.89. G-coefficients were lower for a single administration (G = 0.34 to G = 0.73) than for the average of two administrations (G = 0.79 to G = 0.89). Test-retest reliability coefficients for the constructs ranged from r = 0.26 to r = 0.77 and from G = 0.31 to G = 0.62 for a single administration, and from G = 0.47 to G = 0.86 for the average of two administrations. Test-retest reliability of the tool using G theory was moderate (G = 0.5) when we generalized across a single observation, but became strong (G = 0.9) when we averaged across both administrations.ConclusionThis study provides preliminary evidence for the reliability of a tool that can be used to measure TPB constructs in relation to research use in policymaking. Our findings suggest that the tool should be administered on more than one occasion when the intervention promotes an initial 'spike' in enthusiasm for using research evidence (as it seemed to do in this case with deliberative dialogues). The findings from this study will be used to modify the tool and inform further psychometric testing following different KTE interventions.

Evaluación del impacto de la investigación en la política sanitaria: conceptos y casos concretos

A recent review shows that research has a greater impact on health policy than is often thought to be the case. Analysis of a range of concepts related to health policymaking and the use of research is useful to indicate why it can be difficult for research to make an impact and how the impact that does occur can best be assessed and possibly enhanced. Broadly defined, policymaking includes national legislation, decisions by local health-providing units and even clinical guidelines from professional bodies. There are diverse models of policymaking and of research use in policymaking, but research can generally provide both concepts and facts that can improve policies. The recent review concentrated on studies that assessed the impact made by health research programs in countries that include Catalonia, Canada and the United Kingdom. The examples were identified as having an impact on a range of clinical and other policies. The 'interfaces and receptor' model for assessing the impact of health research recognizes that research is most likely to make an impact when researchers and policymakers collaborate across the boundaries or interfaces between them and when the policymakers receiving the research findings, i.e. the receptor bodies, are organized to make use of these findings. This model can be used to show how to enhance the impact of research and examples from the United Kingdom and Mexico illustrate how it can be used to analyze and assess the use of research in policymaking.

Evidence-informed health policy 4 – Case descriptions of organizations that support the use of research evidence

BackgroundPrevious efforts to produce case descriptions have typically not focused on the organizations that produce research evidence and support its use. External evaluations of such organizations have typically not been analyzed as a group to identify the lessons that have emerged across multiple evaluations. Case descriptions offer the potential for capturing the views and experiences of many individuals who are familiar with an organization, including staff, advocates, and critics.MethodsWe purposively sampled a subgroup of organizations from among those that participated in the second (interview) phase of the study and (once) from among other organizations with which we were familiar. We developed and pilot-tested a case description data collection protocol, and conducted site visits that included both interviews and documentary analyses. Themes were identified from among responses to semi-structured questions using a constant comparative method of analysis. We produced both a brief (one to two pages) written description and a video documentary for each case.ResultsWe conducted 51 interviews as part of the eight site visits. Two organizational strengths were repeatedly cited by individuals participating in the site visits: use of an evidence-based approach (which was identified as being very time-consuming) and existence of a strong relationship between researchers and policymakers (which can be challenged by conflicts of interest). Two organizational weaknesses – a lack of resources and the presence of conflicts of interest – were repeatedly cited by individuals participating in the site visits. Participants offered two main suggestions for the World Health Organization (and other international organizations and networks): 1) mobilize one or more of government support, financial resources, and the participation of both policymakers and researchers; and 2) create knowledge-related global public goods.ConclusionThe findings from our case descriptions, the first of their kind, intersect in interesting ways with the messages arising from two systematic reviews of the factors that increase the prospects for research use in policymaking. Strong relationships between researchers and policymakers bodes well given such interactions appear to increase the prospects for research use. The time-consuming nature of an evidence-based approach, on the other hand, suggests the need for more efficient production processes that are 'quick and clean enough.' Our case descriptions and accompanying video documentaries provide a rich description of organizations supporting the use of research evidence, which can be drawn upon by those establishing or leading similar organizations, particularly in low- and middle-income countries.

Health systems research in Lao PDR: capacity development for getting research into policy and practice.

BackgroundLao PDR is a low-income country with an urgent need for evidence-informed policymaking in the healthcare sector. During the last decade a number of Health Systems Research (HSR) projects have been conducted in order to meet this need. However, although knowledge about research is increasing among policymakers, the use of research in policymaking is still limited.MethodsThis article investigates the relationship between research and policymaking from the perspective of those participating in HSR projects. The study is based on 28 interviews, two group discussions and the responses from 56 questionnaires.ResultsThe interviewees and questionnaire respondents were aware of the barriers to getting research into policy and practice. But while some were optimistic, claiming that there had been a change of attitudes among policymakers in the last two years, others were more pessimistic and did not expect any real changes until years from now. The major barriers to feeding research results into policy and practice included an inability to influence the policy process and to get policymakers and practitioners interested in research results. Another barrier was the lack of continuous capacity development and high-quality research, both of which are related to funding and international support. Many of the interviewees and questionnaire respondents also pointed out that communication between those conducting research and policymakers must be improved.ConclusionThe results show that in the case of Lao PDR, research capacity development is at a crucial stage for implementing research into policy and practice. If research is going to make a consistent impact on policymaking in the Lao health care sector, the attitude towards research will need to be changed in order to get research prioritised, both among those conducting research, and among policymakers and practitioners. Our findings indicate that there is awareness about the barriers in this process.

Examining the role of health services research in public policymaking.

Conceptual, methodological, and practical issues await those who seek to understand how to make better use of health services research in developing public policy. Some policies and some policymaking processes may lend themselves particularly well to being informed by research. Different conclusions about the extent to which policymaking is informed by research may arise from different views about what constitutes health services research (is it citable research or any professional social inquiry that can aid in problem solving?) or different views about what constitutes research use (is it explicit uses of research only, or does it also include tacit knowledge or the positions of stakeholders when they are informed by research and are influential in the policymaking process?). Some conditions may favor the use of research in policymaking, like sustained interactions between researchers and policymakers. Results from an exploratory study on the use of health services research by Canadian provincial policymakers illustrate these issues.

How do researchers influence decision-makers? Case studies of Mexican policies.

Though the problems translating or applying research in policy-making are legion, solutions are rare. As developing countries increase their capacities to develop effective local solutions to their health problems, they confront the research/policy dilemma. Yet few descriptive studies of research-policy links can be found from developing countries, and the relevance of European and North American models and data is questionable. We report the results of a descriptive study from Mexico of the relationship between health research and policy in four vertical programmes (AIDS, cholera, family planning, immunization). We interviewed 67 researchers and policy-makers from different institutions and levels of responsibility. We analyzed interviewee responses looking for factors that promoted or impeded exchanges between researchers and policy-makers. These were, in turn, divided into emphases on content, actors, process, and context. Many of the promoting factors resembled findings from studies in industrialized countries. Some important differences across the four programmes, which also distinguish them from industrialized country programmes, included extent of reliance on formal communication channels, role of the mass media in building social consensus or creating discord, levels of social consensus, role of foreign donors, and extent of support for biomedical versus social research. We recommend various ways to increase the impact of research on health policy-making in Mexico. Some of the largest challenges include the fact that researchers are but one of many interest groups, and research but one input among many equally legitimate elements to be considered by policy-makers. Another important challenge in Mexico is the relatively small role played by the public in policy-making. Further democratic changes in Mexico may be the most important incentive to increase the use of research in policy-making.

Organizational context, sponsorship and policy research output

Over the last several decades a significant capacity to produce policy research has been institutionalized across government and academe and around their borders. Diverse organizational settings and sponsors yield a wide array of forms of policy research and analysis. Yet little is known about the influence of organizational context and sponsorship on research output. Implications for knowledge accumulation and the use of research in policy-making also are uncertain. In this study a random sample of 1,291 cases of policy research and analysis from 1975–1990 and the organizational conditions surrounding their production is described. Log linear analysis suggests that organization and sponsorship are directly related to the type and breadth of research performed. A considerable range of two-way interactions link specific producer and sponsor types to characteristics of research output.

Policy Studies and Social Policy in Britain

ABSTRACTThe recent debate about the establishment of a ‘British Brookings’ involved a number of fundamental issues which were not brought out. In fact the idea that the British policy-making process should be made more ‘rational’ through the development of what are sometimes called policy studies is not new. It has roots in the Heyworth Report on social studies, which recommended greater use of social research in policy-making, and in the Fulton Report on the civil service, which argued for more policy-planning. These two approaches may now be seen as basically the same, and the problem as one of changing the relationship between social science and (social) policy. However, past analyses of this relationship attribute difficulties to quite different causes and hence yield a variety of prescriptions for reform. It is argued here that the policy studies which are needed must avoid the disciplinary fragmentation of the social sciences as well as that of the current administrative structure, that they must encompass research both for policy and on policy, and that they must seek their own conceptual structure, and in addition that certain organizational requirements follow from this.