Looking for evidence of research impact and use: A qualitative study of an Australian research-policy system

IF 2.9 4区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Robyn S Newson, L. Rychetnik, L. King, A. Milat, A. Bauman
{"title":"Looking for evidence of research impact and use: A qualitative study of an Australian research-policy system","authors":"Robyn S Newson, L. Rychetnik, L. King, A. Milat, A. Bauman","doi":"10.1093/reseval/rvab017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Current assessments of research impact have been criticized for capturing what can be easily counted not what actually counts. To empirically examine this issue, we approached measuring research impact from two directions, tracing forwards from research and backwards from policy, within a defined research-policy system (childhood obesity prevention research and policy in New South Wales, Australia from 2000 to 2015). The forward tracing research impact assessment component traced a sample of 148 local research projects forward to examine their policy impacts. Of the projects considered, 16% had an impact on local policy and for a further 19%, decision-makers were aware of the research, but there was no evidence it influenced policy decisions. The backward tracing component of the study included an analysis of research use across three policy initiatives. It provided a more nuanced understanding of the relative influence of research on policy. Both direct uses of specific research and indirect uses of research incorporated as broader bodies of knowledge were evident. Measuring research impact from both directions captured the diverse ways that research was used in decision-making. Our findings illustrate complexities in the assessment process and in real-life policymaking trajectories. They highlight the role that timing of assessment plays in perception of impacts and difficulties attributing longer-term impacts to specific research. This study supports the use of models where politics and complex system dynamics shape knowledge and its influence on decision-making, rather than research being the primary driver for policy change.","PeriodicalId":47668,"journal":{"name":"Research Evaluation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvab017","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Current assessments of research impact have been criticized for capturing what can be easily counted not what actually counts. To empirically examine this issue, we approached measuring research impact from two directions, tracing forwards from research and backwards from policy, within a defined research-policy system (childhood obesity prevention research and policy in New South Wales, Australia from 2000 to 2015). The forward tracing research impact assessment component traced a sample of 148 local research projects forward to examine their policy impacts. Of the projects considered, 16% had an impact on local policy and for a further 19%, decision-makers were aware of the research, but there was no evidence it influenced policy decisions. The backward tracing component of the study included an analysis of research use across three policy initiatives. It provided a more nuanced understanding of the relative influence of research on policy. Both direct uses of specific research and indirect uses of research incorporated as broader bodies of knowledge were evident. Measuring research impact from both directions captured the diverse ways that research was used in decision-making. Our findings illustrate complexities in the assessment process and in real-life policymaking trajectories. They highlight the role that timing of assessment plays in perception of impacts and difficulties attributing longer-term impacts to specific research. This study supports the use of models where politics and complex system dynamics shape knowledge and its influence on decision-making, rather than research being the primary driver for policy change.
寻找研究影响和使用的证据:对澳大利亚研究政策体系的定性研究
目前对研究影响的评估被批评为捕捉了可以容易计数的内容,而不是实际计数的内容。为了实证研究这个问题,我们在一个明确的研究政策体系内,从两个方向来衡量研究影响,从研究向前追溯,从政策向后追溯(2000年至2015年,澳大利亚新南威尔士州的儿童肥胖预防研究和政策)。前瞻性研究影响评估部分追踪了148个地方研究项目的样本,以检查其政策影响。在考虑的项目中,16%的项目对当地政策产生了影响,另有19%的项目决策者知道这项研究,但没有证据表明它影响了政策决策。该研究的后向追踪部分包括对三项政策举措的研究使用情况的分析。它对研究对政策的相对影响提供了更细致的理解。直接使用具体研究和间接使用作为更广泛的知识体系的研究都是显而易见的。衡量两个方向的研究影响,可以捕捉到研究在决策中的不同使用方式。我们的研究结果说明了评估过程和现实决策轨迹的复杂性。他们强调了评估时间在感知影响方面的作用,以及将长期影响归因于具体研究的困难。这项研究支持使用政治和复杂系统动力学塑造知识及其对决策影响的模型,而不是将研究作为政策变化的主要驱动力。
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
Research Evaluation
Research Evaluation INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
18.20%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Research Evaluation is a peer-reviewed, international journal. It ranges from the individual research project up to inter-country comparisons of research performance. Research projects, researchers, research centres, and the types of research output are all relevant. It includes public and private sectors, natural and social sciences. The term "evaluation" applies to all stages from priorities and proposals, through the monitoring of on-going projects and programmes, to the use of the results of research.
×
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