Research use and publishing diversity: The role of organisation research publishing for policy and practice

IF 2.1 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Amanda Lawrence
{"title":"Research use and publishing diversity: The role of organisation research publishing for policy and practice","authors":"Amanda Lawrence","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12563","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <p>Digital technologies have enhanced the capacity for organisations across many sectors to produce, publish, and disseminate research in a variety of formats, and a great deal of it is sought and used in public policy and practice-related research, yet this diversity is often overlooked in studies of research use. While the need for diverse research sources and formats for public policy and practice is increasingly acknowledged, there have been few studies which articulate and categorise what this diversity looks like in practice, and how research is filtered and selected based on genre, source, and other facets. This article reports on a large-scale online survey and semi-structured interviews with research users across multiple sectors in Australia on the materials they access and use for policy and practice work. The results indicate that research users are active information seekers who require online access to diverse genres and formats produced by a range of sources and sectors. However, respondents also faced many barriers to research use, including the cost of subscriptions for academic journals, discoverability of reports and data, poor management of publications by organisations including government, and the time required for filtering and evaluation. Based on these findings I argue that policy research requires a far greater variety of genres and sources than is generally recognised with implications for the way research use and the research publishing system is understood and managed in Australia.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Points for practitioners</h3>\n \n <div>\n <ul>\n \n <li>Policy research and implementation requires diverse online sources and resources from multiple sectors, including reports, discussion papers, evaluations, and data, produced by organisations (grey literature), as well as journals and books.</li>\n \n <li>However, this paper finds there are major barriers to discovery, filtering, and access to diverse research publications for practitioners, resulting in poor productivity and policy outcomes.</li>\n \n <li>To improve the use of evidence for policy and practice, we must invest in efficient discovery, access, and management systems for diverse research publications.</li>\n </ul>\n </div>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1467-8500.12563","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8500.12563","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Digital technologies have enhanced the capacity for organisations across many sectors to produce, publish, and disseminate research in a variety of formats, and a great deal of it is sought and used in public policy and practice-related research, yet this diversity is often overlooked in studies of research use. While the need for diverse research sources and formats for public policy and practice is increasingly acknowledged, there have been few studies which articulate and categorise what this diversity looks like in practice, and how research is filtered and selected based on genre, source, and other facets. This article reports on a large-scale online survey and semi-structured interviews with research users across multiple sectors in Australia on the materials they access and use for policy and practice work. The results indicate that research users are active information seekers who require online access to diverse genres and formats produced by a range of sources and sectors. However, respondents also faced many barriers to research use, including the cost of subscriptions for academic journals, discoverability of reports and data, poor management of publications by organisations including government, and the time required for filtering and evaluation. Based on these findings I argue that policy research requires a far greater variety of genres and sources than is generally recognised with implications for the way research use and the research publishing system is understood and managed in Australia.

Points for practitioners

  • Policy research and implementation requires diverse online sources and resources from multiple sectors, including reports, discussion papers, evaluations, and data, produced by organisations (grey literature), as well as journals and books.
  • However, this paper finds there are major barriers to discovery, filtering, and access to diverse research publications for practitioners, resulting in poor productivity and policy outcomes.
  • To improve the use of evidence for policy and practice, we must invest in efficient discovery, access, and management systems for diverse research publications.

Abstract Image

研究用途和出版多样性:组织研究出版在政策和实践中的作用
数字技术已经增强了许多部门的组织以各种形式生产、出版和传播研究的能力,其中大量数据被用于公共政策和与实践相关的研究,然而这种多样性在研究中经常被忽视。虽然越来越多的人认识到公共政策和实践需要多样化的研究来源和形式,但很少有研究阐明和分类这种多样性在实践中是什么样子的,以及如何根据类型、来源和其他方面筛选和选择研究。本文报告了一项大规模的在线调查和半结构化访谈,调查对象是澳大利亚多个部门的研究用户,了解他们在政策和实践工作中获取和使用的材料。研究结果表明,研究用户是活跃的信息寻求者,他们需要在线访问由一系列来源和部门产生的各种类型和格式。然而,受访者在研究使用方面也面临许多障碍,包括学术期刊的订阅成本、报告和数据的可发现性、包括政府在内的组织对出版物的不良管理,以及过滤和评估所需的时间。基于这些发现,我认为政策研究需要比通常认识到的更多样化的类型和来源,这对澳大利亚的研究使用方式和研究出版系统的理解和管理产生了影响。政策研究和实施需要来自多个部门的各种在线资源和资源,包括由组织(灰色文献)生成的报告、讨论文件、评估和数据,以及期刊和书籍。然而,本文发现,从业者在发现、过滤和获取各种研究出版物方面存在主要障碍,导致生产力低下和政策结果。为了改善政策和实践中证据的使用,我们必须投资于各种研究出版物的有效发现、获取和管理系统。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
9.10%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Aimed at a diverse readership, the Australian Journal of Public Administration is committed to the study and practice of public administration, public management and policy making. It encourages research, reflection and commentary amongst those interested in a range of public sector settings - federal, state, local and inter-governmental. The journal focuses on Australian concerns, but welcomes manuscripts relating to international developments of relevance to Australian experience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信