Networks and evidence-based advocacy: influencing a policy subsystem

IF 1.8 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Evidence & Policy Pub Date : 2020-11-01 DOI:10.1332/174426420x15868720780747
N. Nichols, Jayne A. Malenfant, Kaitlin Schwan
{"title":"Networks and evidence-based advocacy: influencing a policy subsystem","authors":"N. Nichols, Jayne A. Malenfant, Kaitlin Schwan","doi":"10.1332/174426420x15868720780747","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Timely access to relevant and trustworthy research findings is an important facilitator of research use. But the relational aspects of evidence generation, mobilisation and use have been insufficiently explored.Aims and objectives: Our aim is to describe\n the strategic communicative and relational work of two intermediary organisations playing thought leadership roles within a large, heterogeneous and loosely configured network comprised of individuals and organisations from the following sectors: academia, frontline service delivery, philanthropic\n funding, advocacy organisations and government.Methods: The data for this project were generated as part of a study of the ways social science research influences policy, practice and systems-change processes. Proceeding from the standpoints of people who generate and/or engage\n with research in an effort to address homelessness in Canada, this article focuses on the intersections of research, strategic communication and policy making.Findings: Our findings suggest that strategic communication and knowledge exchange play integral roles in efforts to create\n evidence-based policy change. These communicative activities take the form of public-facing political and/or media engagement strategies, traditional knowledge mobilisation activities and continuous informal and timely exchanges of information between trusted allies.Discussion and conclusions:\n Our study reveals the importance of a heterogeneous network structure, with formal and informal alliances between individuals and organisations, as well as key intermediary organisations through which knowledge can be strategically mobilised within the network to serve policy change aims.\n Furthermore, our study suggests that interest in evidence-led governance is shifting the boundaries between research, advocacy and government action.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"16 1","pages":"639-659"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/174426420x15868720780747","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Background: Timely access to relevant and trustworthy research findings is an important facilitator of research use. But the relational aspects of evidence generation, mobilisation and use have been insufficiently explored.Aims and objectives: Our aim is to describe the strategic communicative and relational work of two intermediary organisations playing thought leadership roles within a large, heterogeneous and loosely configured network comprised of individuals and organisations from the following sectors: academia, frontline service delivery, philanthropic funding, advocacy organisations and government.Methods: The data for this project were generated as part of a study of the ways social science research influences policy, practice and systems-change processes. Proceeding from the standpoints of people who generate and/or engage with research in an effort to address homelessness in Canada, this article focuses on the intersections of research, strategic communication and policy making.Findings: Our findings suggest that strategic communication and knowledge exchange play integral roles in efforts to create evidence-based policy change. These communicative activities take the form of public-facing political and/or media engagement strategies, traditional knowledge mobilisation activities and continuous informal and timely exchanges of information between trusted allies.Discussion and conclusions: Our study reveals the importance of a heterogeneous network structure, with formal and informal alliances between individuals and organisations, as well as key intermediary organisations through which knowledge can be strategically mobilised within the network to serve policy change aims. Furthermore, our study suggests that interest in evidence-led governance is shifting the boundaries between research, advocacy and government action.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
网络和基于证据的倡导:影响政策子系统
背景:及时获得相关且值得信赖的研究结果是研究使用的重要促进因素。但是,证据生成、动员和使用的关系方面还没有得到充分的探索。目的和目标:我们的目的是描述两个中介组织在一个庞大、异质和松散的网络中发挥思想领导作用的战略沟通和关系工作,该网络由来自以下部门的个人和组织组成:学术界、一线服务提供、慈善基金、倡导组织和政府。方法:该项目的数据是作为社会科学研究如何影响政策、实践和制度变革过程的研究的一部分生成的。本文从那些为解决加拿大无家可归问题而进行和/或参与研究的人的立场出发,重点关注研究、战略沟通和政策制定的交叉点。研究结果:我们的研究结果表明,战略沟通和知识交流在创造循证政策变革的努力中发挥着不可或缺的作用。这些交流活动的形式包括面向公众的政治和/或媒体参与策略、传统的知识动员活动以及值得信赖的盟友之间持续的非正式和及时的信息交流。讨论和结论:我们的研究揭示了异质网络结构的重要性,个人和组织之间有正式和非正式的联盟,以及关键的中介组织,通过这些组织可以在网络中战略性地调动知识,为政策变革目标服务。此外,我们的研究表明,对证据主导治理的兴趣正在改变研究、倡导和政府行动之间的界限。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Evidence & Policy
Evidence & Policy SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
53
期刊最新文献
Breaking the Overton Window: on the need for adversarial co-production Examining research systems and models for local government: a systematic review Experiences and perceptions of evidence use among senior health service decision makers in Ireland: a qualitative study The critical factors in producing high quality and policy-relevant research: insights from international behavioural science units Understanding brokers, intermediaries, and boundary spanners: a multi-sectoral review of strategies, skills, and outcomes
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1