Guest Blog: Improving the impact of development research through better communication and uptake

In this post our guest blogger Elin Gwyn, a research analyst from OMAFRA, speaks to her experience attending the “Improving the impact of development research through better communication and uptake” workshop in London.  Over to Elin!

Elin Gwyn

On a frosty morning on November 29 I found myself crossing Westminster Bridge, looking down at the boats on the Thames, walking towards Big Ben, and heading towards a two day workshop entitled: Improving the impact of development research through better communication and uptake.  This event was co-sponsored by the British Department for International Development (DFID), UK Collaborative on Development Sciences (UKCDS) and the Australian Aid Program (Ausaid), and brought together research communications and uptake experts, knowledge intermediaries and funders from the international development arena.

So there I was, a research analyst from the Research and Innovation Branch of the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) connecting the work I do in Ontario (Canada) on knowledge translation and transfer, with other experts on the subject matter who work in the international development field.  The common thread was that we’re all interested in finding ways to get the knowledge generated from research into practical use as quickly as possible for the improvement of the economy, society and the environment. 

This workshop provided us with an opportunity to share best practice and to learn how we could all enhance our efforts to achieve greater impact. The context I work in at OMAFRA, is research for action (also known as knowledge translation and transfer for policy, programs and economic opportunity).  The methods used to do similar work in international development can provide insight and be modified for use in other areas.  The workshop represented a tremendous opportunity to participate in the rich international conversation and to link it to my work in Canada.

During the workshop we discussed the need to facilitate the translation of research and evidence into policy (broadly defined), and to synthesize research and make it meaningful for the specific context in which it is to be used.  The need to do this proactively in order to capitalize on opportunities that arise that may bring it to the attention of decision makers was also highlighted.  Many workshop participants identified the need for involving stakeholders/research users in the research project as being a key to successful research uptake.  Storytelling in many forms was spoken about as being essential for research uptake, yes even (or especially) in the policy field.

So in the following text, I will attempt to summarize an amazing two days of conversations and presentations, insights and learnings. 

Within the workshop we explored the international development approaches and resources that currently exist to do research communications and uptake and how we can use these resources to be as successful as possible in implementing research to policy transition.

The following are a few definitions to clarify the discussion:

• Research communication and uptake is about linking research to policy so it is used and valued. Research or evidence for policy was the general accepted core activity though policy was defined very broadly (i.e. change in practice could be considered a policy).  
• A  knowledge intermediary (KI) can be a person or an organization who/that links research or evidence to policy.  Knowledge broker (KB) is another term for KI, though KI is more commonly used in the international development world.  Traditionally journalists and librarians have been considered as the main forms of KI but now this term is understood to have a wider inclusion of activities and occupations. Organizations (like SciDev.net) too play an important agency level role in the sharing of research.

The ongoing discussions reinforced for me, the idea that research communication and uptake involves complicated processes and is difficult to do, and that sharing best practice and learning from one another is extra important. We all move research into action in different ways, contributing at various points throughout the process of knowledge generation to knowledge use.  We may (or may not) be comfortable defining ourselves as KI, KB or simply acknowledge that we are doing research communications.  We might also see to the work we do as bridging the gap between research and practice (or research uptake), and/or between research and policy development.   The World Knowledge Café session of the workshop provide examples of some current approaches to accomplish these goals:

• Training for developing countries scientists
• Providing access to research journals (INAP) (PERii)
• Support for researchers to publish in peer reviewed journals (PERii)
• Access to information sharing opportunities (Evidence and Lessons from Latin America,Global Development Network)
• Farmer to farmer knowledge sharing for innovation (social innovation) (Prolinnova)
• Data bases of resources of information (Practical Action)
• Websites to share knowledge resources (i.e. www research4development.info, SciDev.net)
• Training journalists to effectively communicate science and research results (BBC World Trust) and providing other supports to share research findings (WRENmedia)
•  Linking journalist to researchers (IPS Africa, PANOS)
•  Supporting organizations to disseminate information effectively (CIARD)

Many of these approaches also contribute to capacity building, increasing the ability of the community (i.e., research users, policy makers, journalist, knowledge intermediaries,) to access and communicate research information. The differences between the North/South dialogue were most evident in this area (capacity building). In the North research knowledge is valued, journalist have access to it (in theory) and opportunity to communicate it. The approaches used by knowledge intermediaries in the south, the modes and channels of communications and uptake can provides insights for the north. For example,

• Overseas Development Institute (ODI)- (UK’s independent think tank) – a is wonderful source of knowledge and experience to help me do my knowledge translation and transfer work for the policy stream.  They have two approaches that I hope to consider in my work RAPID (Research and Policy in Development Program) and ROMA (RAPID Outcome Mapping Approach).
• The Research for Development website – www.research4development.info – is an online information portal which is describe as “sharing research findings and knowledge, one location for reports, newsletters, policy briefs, images, data and publications as well as how to section to support researchers to communicate their research and make it accessible  and other topics including “using intermediaries, knowing your audience, working with the media, and the value of monitoring and evaluation techniques”

The international conversation about how to efficiently move research into practice is ongoing.  This past October I also had the opportunity to attend the KT/KB Workshop, in Montreal (discussed in other posting of Nicole’s Blog by various guests here, here and here). This workshop was a knowledge exchange and networking event involving representatives from several different sectors (including environment, agriculture and health). This marked the first time this group came together (in Canada) to share experience (best practice) and explore the role of KT/KB in strengthening science-policy linkages. 

Two different workshops on two different continents a month apart addressing very similar topics:  how to get research in to use in policy; and defining the emerging the role of knowledge intermediaries/ brokers in this transition.  Part of my role in all of this was to provide links and insight between the two forums that would allow the group to build upon the lessons learned in the Canadian workshop (To find out about what was accomplished at the Montreal KT/KB workshop visit the ResearchImpact website). To this end, I had the opportunity to address the London workshop to share some of the ongoing dialogue and outcomes that came out of Montreal.

The dust is still settling from both of these workshops. The discussions are still ongoing (thanks to blogs/forums like this).  These workshops demonstrate a clear interest within the community to learn from one another internationally, to explore best practice, how to measure and understand/communicate impact (metrics), and to further explore/understand the KI/KB role (functions/processes) in a more systematic way.  This was seen as the next steps towards enhancing this emerging discipline.

It was wonderful to attend the London workshop, to participate in the conservations and to help provide the link with what was done in Montreal.  It was an excellent opportunity to connect with KI/KB practitioners from the UK and internationally, to find out who is doing what with what success in the international development context, and to consider how I can apply these insights in my work in Canada.

 A special thank you to the British High Commission for enabling me to attend this event, to DFID and Ausaid for inviting me, and to OMAFRA for supporting me going.