Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
18
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      How to bring research evidence into policy? Synthesizing strategies of five research projects in low-and middle-income countries

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Addressing the uptake of research findings into policy-making is increasingly important for researchers who ultimately seek to contribute to improved health outcomes. The aims of the Swiss Programme for Research on Global Issues for Development (r4d Programme) initiated by the Swiss National Science Foundation and the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation are to create and disseminate knowledge that supports policy changes in the context of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This paper reports on five r4d research projects and shows how researchers engage with various stakeholders, including policy-makers, in order to assure uptake of the research results.

          Methods

          Eleven in-depth interviews were conducted with principal investigators and their research partners from five r4d projects, using a semi-structured interview guide. The interviews explored the process of how stakeholders and policy-makers were engaged in the research project.

          Results

          Three key strategies were identified as fostering research uptake into policies and practices: (S1) stakeholders directly engaged with and sought evidence from researchers; (S2) stakeholders were involved in the design and throughout the implementation of the research project; and (S3) stakeholders engaged in participatory and transdisciplinary research approaches to coproduce knowledge and inform policy. In the first strategy, research evidence was directly taken up by international stakeholders as they were actively seeking new evidence on a very specific topic to up-date international guidelines. In the second strategy, examples from two r4d projects show that collaboration with stakeholders from early on in the projects increased the likelihood of translating research into policy, but that the latter was more effective in a supportive and stable policy environment. The third strategy adopted by two other r4d projects demonstrates the benefits of promoting colearning as a way to address potential power dynamics and working effectively across the local policy landscape through robust research partnerships.

          Conclusions

          This paper provides insights into the different strategies that facilitate collaboration and communication between stakeholders, including policy-makers, and researchers. However, it remains necessary to increase our understanding of the interests and motivations of the different actors involved in the process of influencing policy, identify clear policy-influencing objectives and provide more institutional support to engage in this complex and time-intensive process.

          Related collections

          Most cited references37

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Participatory action research.

          F Baum (2006)
          This glossary aims to clarify some of the key concepts associated with participatory action research.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Generation of political priority for global health initiatives: a framework and case study of maternal mortality.

            Why do some global health initiatives receive priority from international and national political leaders whereas others receive little attention? To analyse this question we propose a framework consisting of four categories: the strength of the actors involved in the initiative, the power of the ideas they use to portray the issue, the nature of the political contexts in which they operate, and characteristics of the issue itself. We apply this framework to the case of a global initiative to reduce maternal mortality, which was launched in 1987. We undertook archival research and interviewed people connected with the initiative, using a process-tracing method that is commonly employed in qualitative research. We report that despite two decades of effort the initiative remains in an early phase of development, hampered by difficulties in all these categories. However, the initiative's 20th year, 2007, presents opportunities to build political momentum. To generate political priority, advocates will need to address several challenges, including the creation of effective institutions to guide the initiative and the development of a public positioning of the issue to convince political leaders to act. We use the framework and case study to suggest areas for future research on the determinants of political priority for global health initiatives, which is a subject that has attracted much speculation but little scholarship.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              How to engage stakeholders in research: design principles to support improvement

              Background Closing the gap between research production and research use is a key challenge for the health research system. Stakeholder engagement is being increasingly promoted across the board by health research funding organisations, and indeed by many researchers themselves, as an important pathway to achieving impact. This opinion piece draws on a study of stakeholder engagement in research and a systematic literature search conducted as part of the study. Main body This paper provides a short conceptualisation of stakeholder engagement, followed by ‘design principles’ that we put forward based on a combination of existing literature and new empirical insights from our recently completed longitudinal study of stakeholder engagement. The design principles for stakeholder engagement are organised into three groups, namely organisational, values and practices. The organisational principles are to clarify the objectives of stakeholder engagement; embed stakeholder engagement in a framework or model of research use; identify the necessary resources for stakeholder engagement; put in place plans for organisational learning and rewarding of effective stakeholder engagement; and to recognise that some stakeholders have the potential to play a key role. The principles relating to values are to foster shared commitment to the values and objectives of stakeholder engagement in the project team; share understanding that stakeholder engagement is often about more than individuals; encourage individual stakeholders and their organisations to value engagement; recognise potential tension between productivity and inclusion; and to generate a shared commitment to sustained and continuous stakeholder engagement. Finally, in terms of practices, the principles suggest that it is important to plan stakeholder engagement activity as part of the research programme of work; build flexibility within the research process to accommodate engagement and the outcomes of engagement; consider how input from stakeholders can be gathered systematically to meet objectives; consider how input from stakeholders can be collated, analysed and used; and to recognise that identification and involvement of stakeholders is an iterative and ongoing process. Conclusion It is anticipated that the principles will be useful in planning stakeholder engagement activity within research programmes and in monitoring and evaluating stakeholder engagement. A next step will be to address the remaining gap in the stakeholder engagement literature concerned with how we assess the impact of stakeholder engagement on research use. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s12961-018-0337-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                severine.erismann@swisstph.ch
                maria.amalia.pesantes@gmail.com
                david.beran@unige.ch
                andrea.leuenberger@swisstph.ch
                andrea.farnham@swisstph.ch
                mberger@uvg.edu.gt
                n.labhardt@unibas.ch
                fabrizio.tediosi@swisstph.ch
                akweongo@gmail.com
                ajoachim@ihi.or.tz
                jakob.zinsstag@swisstph.ch
                fritz.brugger@nadel.ethz.ch
                claire.somerville@graduateinstitute.ch
                kaspar.wyss@swisstph.ch
                helen.prytherch@swisstph.ch
                Journal
                Health Res Policy Syst
                Health Res Policy Syst
                Health Research Policy and Systems
                BioMed Central (London )
                1478-4505
                6 March 2021
                6 March 2021
                2021
                : 19
                : 29
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.416786.a, ISNI 0000 0004 0587 0574, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, ; Basel, Switzerland
                [2 ]GRID grid.6612.3, ISNI 0000 0004 1937 0642, University of Basel, ; Basel, Switzerland
                [3 ]GRID grid.11100.31, ISNI 0000 0001 0673 9488, CRONICAS Centre of Excellence in Chronic Diseases, , Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, ; Lima, Peru
                [4 ]GRID grid.8591.5, ISNI 0000 0001 2322 4988, Division of Tropical and Humanitarian Medicine, , University of Geneva and Geneva University Hospitals, ; Geneva, Switzerland
                [5 ]GRID grid.8269.5, ISNI 0000 0000 8529 4976, Centro de Estudios en Salud, , Universidad del Valle de Guatemala, ; Guatemala, Guatemala
                [6 ]GRID grid.410567.1, Department of Infectious Diseases and Hospital Epidemiology, , University Hospital Basel, ; Basel, Switzerland
                [7 ]GRID grid.8652.9, ISNI 0000 0004 1937 1485, School of Public Health, College of Health Sciences, , University of Ghana, ; Accra, Ghana
                [8 ]GRID grid.414543.3, ISNI 0000 0000 9144 642X, Ifakara Health Institute, ; Plot 463, Kiko Avenue Mikocheni, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
                [9 ]GRID grid.5801.c, ISNI 0000 0001 2156 2780, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich, ; Zurich, Switzerland
                [10 ]GRID grid.424404.2, ISNI 0000 0001 2296 9873, Gender Centre, , Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, ; Geneva, Switzerland
                Article
                646
                10.1186/s12961-020-00646-1
                7936421
                33676518
                27f34893-778a-428e-ac2e-85b5a85771e0
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 15 July 2020
                : 15 October 2020
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2021

                Health & Social care
                evidence-based policy-making,research for development
                Health & Social care
                evidence-based policy-making, research for development

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content84

                Cited by17

                Most referenced authors314