This research series is proudly brought to you by ANZSOG

Bridging the research policy gap


melbourne university

The low uptake of academic research by government agencies is a persistent issue. While this research is valued, it struggles to inform policy making. A common reason is the need for user-friendly communication of research evidence.

This brief is the first in a series from The Mandarin in partnership with the Australia and New Zealand School of Government (ANZSOG).Each fortnight, we will publish a research brief which distills academic and other research into an easy to read format that walks you through the main points.

At a glance

Professor Paul Boreham, Dr Adrian Cherney and Professor Brian Head from the University of Queensland conducted a study which identified a range of issues impeding the uptake of academic research in policy development. These issues widen the gap between research and practice. However this gap can be bridged with initiatives that improve research translation and facilitate engagement between academics and public servants.

Why it matters

Policy makers need access to robust and high quality research evidence when developing new policies and programs. As a major producer of research, the university sector has significant opportunities to influence policy and practice. But the different cultures, incentives and expertise of both institutions can affect the uptake of academic research.

Policy makers often complain that academic research is not timely or relevant to their needs while academics argue that practitioners ignore the research they produce. How true are these generalisations? And what can be done to improve the application of research to policy development?

The study

The project examined research use in Australian public sector agencies at the state and federal level. It looked at the processes and practices that facilitate and hinder research uptake as well as ways to bridge the research policy gap. The study involved surveying and interviewing researchers and public servants.

The public service survey:

  • targeted staff working in policy advice and development; research and evaluation; data collection or analysis; and service design and delivery.
  • included middle level to senior management.
  • included ten central agencies and eleven human services agencies.
  • had 2,084 public servants complete the survey with around two-thirds from state government.

The academic survey:

  • targeted researchers who had secured at least one Australian Research Council grant between 2001 and 2010 in the field of social and behavioural science.
  • was sent to 1,950 academic researchers, with 612 surveys completed (32 per cent response rate).

Interviews were conducted with 100 academics and 125 policy officials.

Findings: public sector

Colleagues and other federal or state government agencies were cited as the most important sources of research information while internal agency staff were the most frequently consulted source of policy information.

Although academic research is seen as valuable, it is not being used by the majority of staff in policy decision-making.

The barriers to research uptake were:

  • The need to translate research into a user friendly form
  • Academics lacking expertise in communicating their research to policy-makers
  • Difficulties in accessing full-text versions of academic articles and reports
  • Lack of opportunities to build relationships with researchers
  • Pressures of time, political priorities and urgent day-to-day issues taking precedence over long-term thinking.

Findings: academic researchers

The time needed to coordinate research work with government partners and the different research orientations was seen as problematic. Refereed journals were most important for presenting and/or discussing research.

Barriers to research uptake included:

  • Academic reward systems which do not adequately recognise dissemination
  • The academic requirement to publish
  • Substantial costs in translating research for non-academic users
  • Insufficient forums to bring together researchers with end users.

The bottom line

There are impediments to the uptake of research from the perspectives of both academic researchers and policy makers. These include incentives, communication and the different institutional cultures. The groups agree there is a need for research translation and opportunities to build relationships.

The project team suggested the following to improve the use and impact of academic research:

  • Making research accessible eg summary documents
  • Translating research findings into policy relevant results
  • Establishing networks to bring together academic researchers and policy makers.

Join the discussion

What ideas do you have to improve linkages between government and the academic sector to bridge the research policy gap? Comment below.


Want to read more?

The utilisation of social science research in policy development and program review – ARC Linkage Project Report, Institute of Social Sciences Research, University of Queensland, Project co-leaders: Professor Brian Head, Dr Adrian Cherney, Professor Paul Boreham

Are policy-makers interested in social research? Exploring the sources and uses of valued information among public servants in Australia – Brian Head, Michele Ferguson, Adrian Cherney and Paul Boreham, Policy and Society, Volume 33, 2014 – Issue 2

Perspectives of academic social scientists on knowledge transfer and research collaborations: a cross-sectional survey of Australian academics – Brian Head, Michele Ferguson, Adrian Cherney and Paul Boreham, Evidence & Policy, Volume 8, 2012 – Number 4

About the author
Premium

The essential resource for effective public sector leaders

Can you afford to miss the next briefing from Mandarin Premium? Sign up today.

Get Premium Today