{"title":"Bringing research into policy: understanding context-specific requirements for productive knowledge brokering in legislatures","authors":"Maria Karaulova, Jakob Edler","doi":"10.1332/17442648y2024d000000027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nKnowledge brokering is suggested as an instrument to improve productive use of research in policy organisations. Previous research asserted that research utilisation is dependent on dynamics of knowledge exchange in institutional settings, but these claims have not received substantial empirical attention (Saarela et al, 2015; Akerlof et al, 2019; MacKillop et al, 2020). Viewing knowledge brokering as the involved role, three specific challenges are identified: high legitimacy requirements for the brokered knowledge and the broker; the need to cater for a wide range of topics, audiences and uses; and the need to compete with other evidence suppliers.\n\n\nThe research question of the article is: how do legislative knowledge brokers navigate context-specific knowledge transfer challenges presented by their institutional context?\n\n\nAn in-depth interpretive case study of the UK Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology. The analysis includes interviews with parliamentary actors, shadowing and participant observation.\n\n\nThe results substantiate the challenges of legislative knowledge brokering in the UK context and inductively identify a further challenge of demonstrating impact. Legislative knowledge brokers employ multiple strategies to navigate the challenges: co-shape and adhere to the norms of impartiality, mobilise external expertise, collaborate with in-house and external research support actors, employ anticipation techniques, build broker chains, seek understanding of own role and impact.\n\n\nThe article contributes to the understanding of knowledge brokering as a context-dependent role. The conclusions discuss influence of knowledge brokers’ work remit and positionality in deploying strategies to overcome the legislative challenges.\n","PeriodicalId":434142,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"29 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/17442648y2024d000000027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Knowledge brokering is suggested as an instrument to improve productive use of research in policy organisations. Previous research asserted that research utilisation is dependent on dynamics of knowledge exchange in institutional settings, but these claims have not received substantial empirical attention (Saarela et al, 2015; Akerlof et al, 2019; MacKillop et al, 2020). Viewing knowledge brokering as the involved role, three specific challenges are identified: high legitimacy requirements for the brokered knowledge and the broker; the need to cater for a wide range of topics, audiences and uses; and the need to compete with other evidence suppliers.
The research question of the article is: how do legislative knowledge brokers navigate context-specific knowledge transfer challenges presented by their institutional context?
An in-depth interpretive case study of the UK Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology. The analysis includes interviews with parliamentary actors, shadowing and participant observation.
The results substantiate the challenges of legislative knowledge brokering in the UK context and inductively identify a further challenge of demonstrating impact. Legislative knowledge brokers employ multiple strategies to navigate the challenges: co-shape and adhere to the norms of impartiality, mobilise external expertise, collaborate with in-house and external research support actors, employ anticipation techniques, build broker chains, seek understanding of own role and impact.
The article contributes to the understanding of knowledge brokering as a context-dependent role. The conclusions discuss influence of knowledge brokers’ work remit and positionality in deploying strategies to overcome the legislative challenges.
知识中介被认为是提高政策组织研究成果利用率的一种手段。以往的研究断言,研究成果的利用取决于机构环境中的知识交流动态,但这些说法并未得到大量的实证关注(Saarela et al, 2015; Akerlof et al, 2019; MacKillop et al, 2020)。文章的研究问题是:立法知识经纪人如何应对其机构环境带来的特定背景下的知识转移挑战?研究结果证实了在英国背景下立法知识中介所面临的挑战,并归纳出了在展示影响力方面所面临的进一步挑战。立法知识经纪人采用多种策略应对挑战:共同塑造并遵守公正规范、调动外部专家、与内部和外部研究支持人员合作、采用预测技术、建立经纪人链条、寻求对自身角色和影响的理解。文章的结论讨论了知识经纪人的工作职责和地位在部署克服立法挑战的战略中的影响。