Power – Integration and Implementation Insights

Tips for influencing government policy with research

December 5, 2023

By John Thwaites

Considering three questions can help researchers interested in better use of evidence in government policy making:

how is evidence used by politicians?
why is best evidence not always followed?
what can be done to improve the likelihood that evidence will inform policy?

How evidence is used by politicians

It is useful to start with an appreciation that politicians look to many forms of evidence other than academic research, including the grey literature, government reports, reports from Royal commissions, various other forms of expert evidence (including the politician’s favourite expert), the experience of citizens, anecdotal evidence, reports from interested parties produced by consultants, the media and Google searches.

Co-producing knowledge: Phases, issues and the td-net toolbox

October 17, 2023October 10, 2023

By Sibylle Studer and Theres Paulsen

authors_sibylle-studer_theres-paulsen — 1. Sibylle Studer (biography)
2. Theres Paulsen (biography)

What are the steps involved in co-producing knowledge in transdisciplinary research? What tools are available to help knowledge co-production and for what purpose should they be used?

Based on our experiences with the td-net (Network for Transdisciplinary Research) toolbox, we discuss how knowledge co-production can be organized along an ideal type of a transdisciplinary research process.

Phases and key issues of co-production

In developing the td-net toolbox, we used the following four phases of knowledge co-production, which require an iterative, rather than linear, approach:

Six lessons for connecting evidence to policy and practice in the Global South

August 8, 2023July 11, 2023

By Fréjus Thoto

How can the ecosystem of evidence use in policy and practice work better in Global South countries such as Benin?

Here I provide six lessons drawn from activities undertaken by the African Center for Equitable Development (ACED), a non-profit think-and-do tank, located in Benin, West Africa. Our focus has been on the food and nutrition security sector.

Lesson 1: Access to policy-relevant evidence is still a big challenge

There is still much work to do in order to ensure that timely and policy-relevant evidence is produced and accessible to users. We have developed a national platform to consolidate and display the available statistical data, research findings, and evaluation findings. However, a platform alone is not enough, and research agenda setting, research-policy dialogues and other strategic activities are required.

Lesson 2: Involve governments at all levels in evidence-informed policymaking processes

Understanding diversity primer: 4. Power

June 23, 2022May 12, 2022

By Gabriele Bammer

primer_diversity_4

How can an understanding of diversity in power improve research on complex societal and environmental problems? What are the different ways in which diversity in power plays out?

Simply put, there are currently two common ways in which power is taken into account in research on complex societal and environmental problems:

those working with marginalised stakeholders, or otherwise committed to giving everyone involved in the research an equal voice, often seek to eliminate differences in power
those who seek to use their research to change policy or practice generally attempt to find ways to influence those with the power to make those changes.

Stakeholder engagement primer: 10. Advanced skills

January 7, 2022December 16, 2021

By Gabriele Bammer

primer_stakeholder-engagement_10

Once researchers understand the basics of stakeholder engagement, what else is it useful for them to know? What additional concepts, methods and processes are helpful additions to their skill set so that they can engage more effectively?

Two areas for building additional skills are considered here:

Understanding and managing power and control
Working effectively with multiple stakeholders.

These areas are ripe for consolidation of existing knowledge and experience, as well as of useful tools. Here only some considerations are sketched out, drawing predominantly on key contributions to the i2Insights blog.

Understanding and managing power and control

Leadership and the hidden politics of co-produced research

December 21, 2021December 7, 2021

By Catherine Durose, Beth Perry, Liz Richardson and Rikki Dean

authors_catherine-durose_beth-perry_liz-richardson_rikki-dean — 1. Catherine Durose (biography)
2. Beth Perry (biography)
3. Liz Richardson (biography)
4. Rikki Dean (biography)

What are the hidden politics of seeking to co-produce research with stakeholders? What kinds of leadership are common in co-produced research? What trade-offs does each kind of leadership make in addressing issues such as being directive, inclusive, innovative, accountable, open to what emerges and sharing power?

The hidden politics of co-production in research

The hidden politics of co-production in research involves tensions and debates about:

1. The purposes of scientific work.
Co-production brings together people, not only with different expertise, but also with different purposes for being involved, which can range from achieving more effective policy and practice outcomes to delivering social justice and empowering those experiencing disadvantage.

Stakeholder engagement primer: 3. Selecting stakeholders

December 21, 2021October 28, 2021

By Gabriele Bammer

primer_stakeholder-engagement_3

Given that most research projects will not have the funding or time to involve all stakeholders who have been identified as potential contributors, what criteria are useful for selecting those to be invited to participate? How can those identified be assessed against the criteria?

Four criteria for selecting stakeholders are:

their legitimacy
their real and potential power
the urgency they assign to the problem
practical considerations.

Legitimacy

Legitimacy can usefully be examined along the following four dimensions:

Three ways research perpetuates injustices

April 13, 2021April 6, 2021

By Barış Bayram

author_barıs-bayram — Barış Bayram (biography)

Why is it hard to recognise the full value of a new idea, research finding or other innovation? Why do people fail to properly appreciate other people or things most of the time? Can this help explain why injustices persist?

There is no “invisible hand” that allocates rewards according to capabilities or performance, including ensuring that academic research or social interactions are recognised in terms of scientific or ethical merits.

There are three main patterns causing what I call “unjust appreciation”:

lack of intellectual development to determine values, merits and deserts (ie., just rewards)
cognitive biases and social biases, especially related to status and groups
tribalism, along with power and conflict considerations that rely on cost-benefit analysis.

Fifteen characteristics of complex social systems

May 31, 2021March 17, 2020

By Hamilton Carvalho

Author - Hamilton Carvalho — Hamilton Carvalho (biography)

What is it about complex social systems that keeps reproducing old problems, as well as adding new ones? How can public policy move away from what I call the Mencken Syndrome (in reference to a quotation from American journalist Henry Mencken) – that is, continually proposing clear and simple solutions to complex social problems – that are also wrong!

With this goal in mind, I have compiled a list of fifteen major characteristics of complex social systems based on the system dynamics and complexity sciences literatures, as well as my own research.

Negotiations and ‘normative’ or ‘ethical’ power

January 3, 2022June 26, 2018

By Lena Partzsch

What can we learn from international relations about how ‘normative’ or ‘ethical’ power can be used in successful negotiations, for example, for pathways to sustainability? Here I build on Ian Manners’ (2002) concept of “Normative Power Europe”. He argues that the European Union’s specific history “pre‐disposes it to act in a normative way” (Manners 2002: 242) based on norms such as democracy, rule of law, social justice and respect for human rights. I explore the broader ramifications of the normative power concept for empirical studies and for practical negotiation and collaboration more generally.

First, the concept of normative power implies that the spread of particular norms is perceived as a principal policy goal, whether that relates to foreign policy, environmental policy or other kinds of policy.

Structure matters: Real-world laboratories as a new type of large-scale research infrastructure

August 24, 2021June 12, 2018

By Franziska Stelzer, Uwe Schneidewind, Karoline Augenstein and Matthias Wanner

What are real-world laboratories? How can we best grasp their transformative potential and their relationship to transdisciplinary projects and processes? Real-world laboratories are about more than knowledge integration and temporary interventions. They establish spaces for transformation and reflexive learning and are therefore best thought of as large-scale research infrastructure. How can we best get a handle on the structural dimensions of real-word laboratories?

What are real-world laboratories?

Real-world laboratories are a targeted set-up of a research “infrastructure“ or a “space“ in which scientific actors and actors from civil society cooperate in the joint production of knowledge in order to support a more sustainable development of society.

Although such a laboratory establishes a structure, most discussions about real-world laboratories focus on processes of co-design, co-production and co-evaluation of knowledge, as shown in the figure below. Surprisingly, the structural dimension has received little attention in the growing field of literature.

Overcoming structure as the blind spot

We want to raise awareness of the importance of the structural dimension of real-world laboratories, including physical infrastructure as well as interpretative schemes or social norms, as also shown in the figure below. A real-world laboratory can be understood as a structure for nurturing niche development, or a space for experimentation that interacts (and aims at changing) structural conditions at the regime level.

Apart from this theoretical perspective, we want to add a concrete “infrastructural” perspective, as well as a reflexive note on the role of science and researchers. Giddens’ use of the term ‘structure’ helps to emphasize that scientific activity is always based on rules (eg., rules of proper research and use of methods in different disciplines) and resources (eg., funding, laboratories, libraries).

The two key challenges of real-world laboratories are that:

both scientists and civil society actors are involved in the process of knowledge production; and,
knowledge production takes place in real-world environments instead of scientific laboratories.

Three schools of transformation thinking

June 9, 2021September 5, 2017

By Uwe Schneidewind and Karoline Augenstein

authors_uwe-schneidewind_karoline-augenstein — 1. Uwe Schneidewind (biography)
2. Karoline Augenstein (biography)

‘Transformation’ has become a buzzword in debates about sustainable development. But while the term has become very popular, it is often unclear what is meant exactly by ‘transformation’.

The fuzziness of the concept can be seen as a strength, giving it metaphoric power and facilitating inter- and transdisciplinary cooperation. However, this fuzziness means there is also a danger of the transformation debate being co-opted by powerful actors and used strategically to impede societal change towards more sustainable pathways.