Do we need “more research” or better implementatio

Authors: Janet G Hering

Publish Date: 2015/06/10

Volume: 11, Issue: 2, Pages: 363-369

PDF Link

Abstract

“More research is needed” is an iconic catchphrase used by scientists worldwide Yet policy and management decisions are continually being made with variable levels of reliance on scientific knowledge Funding agencies have provided incentives for knowledge exchange at the interfaces between science and policy or practice yet it remains the exception rather than the rule within academic institutions An important step forward would be the establishment and professionalization of knowledge brokering ie as a complement to existing technology transfer and communications departments This would require an explicit commitment of resources by both funding agencies and institutions Many academic scientists are genuinely interested in the applications of their research This interest could be stimulated by providing support for the process of knowledge brokering and by integrating the natural social and engineering sciences to address broad policy and practicerelevant questionsContinuing concern is expressed in government administrations and funding agencies that policymaking and management do not benefit sufficiently from the knowledge generated by publically funded science Chapman et al 2010b EC 2013 Holmes and Scott 2010 McNie 2007 PahlWostl et al 2011 Van Enst et al 2014 This is particularly important in the environmental field in which most policies and management relate to public goods eg natural resources Since externalities and market failures are commonplace in cases of public goods key roles for government and regulation are recognized This has led to substantial public funding for science that could or should contribute to policymaking and resource management decisions although science is of course only one of many inputs into decisionmaking Choi et al 2005 Cullen 1990 An estimated 450 waterrelated projects have been supported by European funding yet it was noted in the 2012 Roadmap for Uptake of EU Water Research in Policy and Industry http//wwwhydroscanbe/uploads/b117pdf that “Unfortunately the dissemination and uptake of the results of these projects is limited” Recognizing the need to improve the uptake of research into regulation specifically the Water Framework Directive the water directors of the EU and associated States funded an ad hoc sciencepolicy interface SPI activity with the goals of identifying relevant available research as well as research gaps and improving the transfer and usability of research EC 2013These concerns and issues are not new and many of the possible remedies identified echo past recommendations Cullen 1990 In the interest of formulating a path toward effective knowledge exchange at the interfaces of science with policy and/or practice referred to herein collectively as SP2I it is worthwhile to review briefly the key impediments and measures that have been previously been identified Although this paper focuses mainly on the academic perspective cooperation with nonacademic partners is essential to effective knowledge exchangeThree key impediments to effective knowledge exchange relate to the accessibility relevance and timeliness of research In the first case research outputs which generally appear in the peerreviewed scientific literature are not written in a way that is accessible to managers and/or policy makers In the second case research fails to provide usable information that is needed for policy and/or management decisions And in the third case even relevant and accessible research outputs may not be available at the time when they would be needed as input to decisionmaking for policy and/or management Choi et al 2005 Kirchhoff et al 2013 Martini et al 2013 Opwanya et al 2013 Sarewitz and Pielke 2007 Cultural mismatches between scientists and decisionmakers have also been identified in particular that scientists seek to draw recommendations from the weight of the evidence while policy makers often seek evidence to support favored policy solutions Cullen 1990 These are exacerbated by the lack of personal contact between members of these groups Choi et al 2005 as well as by the persistence of linear models of knowledge transfer Calow 2014 Slob et al 2007 the disconnect with academic incentive systems Hering et al 2012 McNie 2007 and time conflicts with other professional obligations Pennell et al 2013These key impediments are easily understandable when they are considered in the context in which academic research is conducted Publications in the peerreviewed scientific literature are the “currency” of academia Despite the recent pushback against the tyranny of journal impact factors Bladek 2014 academic institutions have made scant progress in defining and applying alternative metrics for promotion and tenure The acquisition of funding for research is also often strongly tied to the applicant’s publication record The identification of research topics and the initiation of research projects are in the ideal driven by curiosity Zewail 2010 though the role of opportunity eg through application of new technology and pragmatic considerations of funding and career advancement cannot be ignored Critically for the application of research science and scientists are fundamentally oriented toward questions and new knowledge Firestein 2012 which implies that meaningful consideration of relevance is likely to receive insufficient attention in the setting of research agendas in the absence of external incentives Furthermore the cutting edge of research characterized by active debate among researchers and often of most interest to them does not usually provide the most useful and usable information for policy and management Hering et al 2014 Holmes and Scott 2010Schematic representation of knowledge brokering positioned as an iterative process of translation tailoring feedback and integration that allows information to be exchanged in both directions between scientific and technical experts and policy and decision makers

Keywords: