Sustainable Participation? Mapping out and reflecting on the field of public dialogue on science and technology

The field of public participation in issues relating to science, technology and the environment is booming. To date much effort has gone into developing new participatory approaches and their evaluation, while most of what we know comes from individual case studies of engagement. This report builds on one of the first ever studies of public participation experts, their networks, roles and relations, to present a broader analysis of the UK public dialogue field as a whole. It draws on a recent project that involved 21 of the UK’s leading thinkers, practitioners, and policy makers in this area reflecting on the following critical questions. • What is the nature of participatory governance networks and the roles and relations of different actors within them? • Who counts as an expert on public participation and how are these meanings changing over time? • What are the implications of increasing institutionalisation, commercialisation and professionalisation of public dialogue? • To what extent are UK science and policy institutions learning about and learning from public dialogue? Taken together, these insights indicate that the field of public dialogue on science and technology has reached a critical moment and highlight a series of challenges and recommendations for its future sustainability

APS200 project – the place of science in policy development in the public service

The report aims to achieve better government outcomes through facilitating the effective use of scientific input in policy development in the public service. The Australian Public Service (APS) is increasingly tasked with solving complex policy problems that require significant input from science in order to address them fully and appropriately. Policy making within the APS needs to be based on a rigorous, evidence‐based approach that routinely and systematically draws upon science as a key element. The Australian Government’s investment in science, research and innovation capacity supports a long‐term vision to address national challenges and open up new opportunities. This investment is also significant, with the Commonwealth providing $8.9 billion to support science, research and innovation in 2012‐13. There is an opportunity to harness this investment to address complex societal challenges, by ensuring that scientific research and advice is more effectively incorporated in the development of evidence‐based policy. There is an opportunity for policy makers to make better use of the science capacity provided by our science institutions, including publicly funded research agencies and other science agencies, universities, Cooperative Research Centres and Medical Research Institutes. There is also an opportunity to capitalise on the willingness of scientists to contribute their research results to the policy making process

Science advice to governments: diverse systems, common challenges

This briefing paper formed the basis of discussions at the 'Science Advice to Governments' summit, which took place in Auckland, New Zealand from 28-29 August 2014, and was attended by science advisors and policymakers from 48 countries

Assessment of Sustainability Governance in Higher Education Institutions - a Systemic Tool using a Governance Equalizer

The paper aims to add to the discussion on sustainability governance in higher education institutions by examining the role of sustainability assessment and introducing an assessment tool inspired by systemic thinking and centered on a ‘governance equalizer’. It discusses recent research and argues that the complexity inherent in sustainability governance remains to be addressed adequately. While a number of models and frameworks have been proposed, most of them remain caught between narrow, management-oriented approaches on the one hand, and rather abstract approaches that provide little guidance for improving the field on the other. Sustainability assessment tools represent a potential way to bridge this gap. While there are existing tools which include issues of sustainability governance, these are often limited to aspects that are easily quantifiable and neglect more complex aspects. Against this background, the article proposes an alternative tool to assess sustainability governance in higher education institutions. The tool is based on a multi-case study in Germany and has been tested in a series of workshops. Drawing on the concept of a ‘governance equalizer’, it focuses on the functional requirements of sustainability governance in five dimensions - politics, profession, organization, knowledge, and the public—and how they are addressed by the HEI. The tool raises the level of abstraction in order to capture complexity, but at the same time keeps sight of governance structures, processes, instruments, and practices. It combines clearly defined criteria that are assessed using carefully developed maturity scales with a focus on stakeholder participation and knowledge

Conceptualising the research–practice–professional development nexus: mobilising schools as ‘research-engaged’ professional learning communities

This paper argues the need for coherent, holistic frameworks offering insightful understandings as well as viable, connected and synergistic solutions to schools in addressing pressing problems arising from the acknowledged gaps between research, practice and professional development. There is a need to conceptualise a comprehensive conceptual framework that rationalises, constructs and connects salient professional development concepts and practices fit for purpose in twenty-first-century schools. Specifically, three themes conceptualise existing problems faced by schools and their possible solutions: first, bridging the research–policy–practice gap by mobilising knowledge more effectively through knowledge producers and consumers working collaboratively; second, valuing and integrating both tacit knowledge and academic coded knowledge; and third, raising the professionalism and reflectivity of teachers and leaders. However, a new organisational and human infrastructure is needed to enable these solutions to be realised in school practice. Arguably, three responses are critical to this challenge of knowledge mobilisation; all are achievable through the powerful unifying concept of the ‘research-engaged school’. The three responses are: research engagement on the part of all teachers and leaders; creating schools and school networks as professional learning communities; and adopting a workable methodology (namely, research–design–development) for teachers and leaders to put research into practice and tailor innovations to specific school contexts

The utilisation of health research in policy-making: Concepts, examples, and methods of assessment

Chapter 1: Introduction and Background • The importance of utilising health research in policy-making, and therefore the need to understand the mechanisms involved, is increasingly recognised. Recent reports calling for more resources to improve health in developing countries, and global pressures for accountability, draw greater attention to research-informed policy-making. • For at least twenty years there has been recognition of the multiple meanings or models of research utilisation in policy-making. It has similarly been long recognised that a range of factors is involved in the interactions between health research and policy-makers. • The emerging focus on Health Research Systems (HRS) has identified additional mechanisms through which greater utilisation of research could be achieved. Assessment of the role of health research in policy-making is best undertaken as part of a wider study that also includes the utilisation of health research by industry, medical practitioners, and the public. Chapter 2: The Nature of Policy-Making, Types of Research and Utilisation Models • Policy-making broadly interpreted includes national health policies made by government ministers and officials, policies made by local health service managers, and clinical guidelines from professional bodies. In this report, however, the main focus is on public policy-making rather than that conducted by professional bodies. The utilisation of health research in policy-making should eventually lead to desired outcomes, including health gains. Research can make a contribution in at least three phases of the policy-making process: agenda setting; policy formulation; and implementation. Descriptions of these processes, however, can over-estimate the degree of rationality in policy-making. Therefore, the analysis is informed by a review of the full range of policy-making models. These include rational and incrementalist models. • Various categories of research are likely to be used differently in health policy-making. Applied research might be more readily useable by a policy system than basic research, but health policy-makers tend to relate more willingly to natural sciences than social sciences. When research is based on the priorities of potential users, and/or is research of proven quality, this increases the possibility that it will be translated into policies. There also appears to be a greater chance of research being used in clinical policies about delivering care to patients, than in national policies on the structures of the health service. • Models of research utilisation in policy-making start with a link to rational or instrumental views of policy-making, and include descriptions of how commissioned research can help to find solutions to problems. Other models relate to an incrementalist view in which policy-making involves a series of small steps over a long period; research findings might gradually cause a shift in perceptions about an issue in a process of ‘enlightenment’. Interactive models of research utilisation stress the way in which policy-makers and researchers might develop links over a long period. Research can also be used symbolically to support decisions already taken. Chapter 3: Examples from Previous Studies • A study of health policy-making in two southern African countries illustrates how policy-making processes can be analysed. It addresses agenda setting, policy formulation and implementation. The methods used included documentary analysis and key informant interviews. • Many previous studies of research utilisation can provide lessons for future assessments. Two broad approaches can be identified. Some studies start with pieces, or programmes, of research and examine their impact. Others consider policy on a particular topic and assess the role of research in the policy-making. There are advantages and drawbacks in each approach, and overlaps between them. • To facilitate comparison, studies of research utilisation are best organised around a conceptual framework. Despite that, the influence of contextual factors in different settings makes it difficult to generalise. • The two methods used most frequently, and usually together, come from the qualitative tradition: documentary analysis and in-depth interviews. Questionnaires, bibliometric analysis, insider knowledge and historical approaches have all been applied. A few recent studies have attempted to score or scale the level of utilisation. • The examples suggest there is a greater level of utilisation and final outcomes in terms of health, health equity, and social and economic gain than is often assumed, whilst still showing much underutilisation. There is considerable variation in the degree of utilisation, both within and between studies. Chapter 4: Key Issues in the Analysis of Research Utilisation in Policy-Making • Increasing attention is focusing on the concept of interfaces between researchers and the users of research. This incorporates the idea that there are likely to be different values and interests between the two communities. • In relation to utilisation, the prioritisation debate revolves around two key aspects: whether priorities are being set that will produce research that policy-makers and others will want to use, and whether priorities are being set that will engage the interests and commitment of the research community. • Interactions across the interface between policy-makers and researchers are important in transferring research to policy-makers. This fits especially well with the interactive model of utilisation. Actions by individual researchers can be useful in generating interaction, but it is desirable to consider the role of the HRS in encouraging or facilitating interactions, networks and mechanisms at a system-wide level. The HRS could provide funding and organisational support for various items including: long-term research centres; research brokerage/translator mechanisms; the creation of official committees of policy-makers and researchers; and mechanisms for review and synthesis of research findings. • There is increased recognition of the significance of policy-makers in their role as the receptors of research. In relation to the perspective of policy-makers there is a spectrum of key questions. These range from whether relevant research is available and effectively being brought to their attention, to whether they are able to absorb it and willing to use it. The HRS has a responsibility, especially in the early parts of the spectrum, but the wider health system also has a responsibility to create appropriate institutional mechanisms and ensure there are staff willing and able to incorporate relevant research. • More attention should be given to the role of incentives, both for researchers to produce utilisable research, and for policy-makers, at the system or individual level, to use it. The assessment of utilisation becomes a key issue if rewards are to focus on relevance as well as research excellence. • An appropriate model for assessing research utilisation in policy-making combines analysis of two issues: the role of receptors and the importance of actions at the interfaces. An emphasis on the role of the receptor is necessary because ultimately it is up to the policy-maker to make the decisions. Any assessment of the success of the HRS in relation to utilisation must accept that the wider political context is beyond the control of the HRS, but consider the activities of the HRS, within its given context, to enhance the utilisation of research by increasing the permeability of the interfaces. Chapter 5: Assessment of Research Utilisation in Health Policy-Making • The reasons for assessing the utilisation of research in policy-making include: advocacy, accountability, and increased understanding. For the World Health Organization there could be a role in conducting such assessments with the aim of providing evidence of the effective use of research resources. This could support advocacy for greater resources to be made available for health research. It is important that the purposes of any assessment are taken into account in planning the methods to be used. • Previous studies demonstrated the difficulties of making generalisations about specific factors associated with high levels of utilisation. To address this in any cross-national WHO initiative involving a series of studies in a range of countries, it would be desirable to structure all the studies around a conceptual framework (such as the interfaces and receptor framework considered here) and base the studies in each country on common themes. These could include policies for the adoption of multi-drug therapy for treating leprosy, and for the equitable access to health services. • Analysis of documents and semi-structured interviews would be appropriate methods in each study assessing the role of research in policy-making on a specific policy theme. Questionnaires could also have a role. These approaches would provide triangulation of methods and data-sources and should also provide material to help identify the relative importance, in relation to the level of utilisation recorded, of the HRS mechanisms described in the previous analysis. The types and sources of research used, and reasons for their use, should also be recorded and attempts made to correlate them with the previous priority setting approaches. It is expected that each study will produce its own narrative or story of what caused utilisation in the particular context, but the data gathered could also be applied to descriptive scales of the level research utilisation. The four scales could cover the consistency of policy with research findings, and the degree of influence of research on agenda setting, policy formulation, and implementation. • The findings from the assessments in each participating country should be collated. For each policy theme or topic the analysis would compare two sets of data: the scales for level of research utilisation in each country, and the contextualised lists of the HRS activities and other mechanisms and networks thought to be important. Although the account here has focused on research impact on policy-making, the evaluations would be stronger as part of a wider analysis covering research utilisation and interactions with practitioners, industry and the public. • Given appropriate and targeted topic and country selection, this approach is likely to meet the purpose of using structured methods to provide examples of effective research utilisation. The approach should contribute towards enhanced understanding of the issues and could provide the basis of an assessment tool which, if used widely in countries, could lead to greater utilisation of health research.Research Policy and Co-operation (RPC) Department of the World Health Organization, Geneva; UK Department of Health’s Policy Research Programme; Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research from the governments of Norway and Sweden; World Bank and International Development Research Council of Canad

Stakeholder identification in the requirements engineering process

Adequate, timely and effective consultation of relevant stakeholders is of paramount importance in the requirements engineering process. However, the thorny issue of making sure that all relevant stakeholders are consulted has received less attention than other areas which depend on it, such as scenario-based requirements, involving users in development, negotiating between different viewpoints and so on. The literature suggests examples of stakeholders, and categories of stakeholder, but does not provide help in identifying stakeholders for a specific system. In this paper, we discuss current work in stakeholder identification, propose an approach to identifying relevant stakeholders for a specific system, and propose future directions for the work

Strengthening America's Best Idea: An Independent Review of the National Park Service's Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Directorate

NRSS requested that an independent panel of the National Academy conduct a review of its effectiveness in five core functions, its relationships with key internal stakeholders, and its performance measurement system. Among other things, the National Park Service's Natural Resource Stewardship and Science Directorate (NRSS) is responsible for providing usable natural and social science information throughout the National Park Service (NPS). NRSS leadership requested this review of the directorate's performance on five core functions, its relationships with key internal NPS stakeholders, and its performance measurement system.Main FindingsThe panel determined that NRSS is a highly regarded organization that provides independent, credible scientific expertise and technical information. The panel also found that NRSS and NPS have additional opportunities to advance natural resource stewardship throughout the Service. If implemented, the panel's eight major recommendations will: (1) help the Service respond to the parks' environmental challenges while raising public awareness about the condition of these special places; (2) strengthen NRSS as an organization; (3) promote scientifically based decision-making at the national, regional, and park levels; and (4) improve the existing performance measurement system