Hoop Ho ops? s? @UBC_GenEnt Making Research Count: Strategies - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Policy licy En Entrepr epren eneur eurship ship Pr Program gram Jump Ju mpin ing g Th Throug ough h Hoop Ho ops? s? @UBC_GenEnt

Making Research Count: Strategies and Expectations for Influencing Policy-Making in Complex, Dynamic Environments Spring 2015 GREAT Policy Entrepreneurship Program Overcoming Policy Barriers and Institutional Hurdles that Prevent Your Research from Achieving Its Full Impact Evert Lindquist, Director School of Public Administration University of Victoria Michael Smith Laboratories University of British Columbia 14 April 2015

Overview of Presentation • The Two-Community Formulation • The Modern Challenge: Research into Policy • Some Cautionary Observations • Relevant Frameworks & Literature • Levels and Types of Policy Influence • Implications of the Frameworks • Questions for Discussion

The Two-Community Formulation The World of Action The Academic Worlds Inquiry proceeds Demand for timely ? According to the Relevant data, research, norms and pace And analysis to inform of the disciplines decisions and to support Engineering versus the “ enlightenment function ” of research

The Two-Community Formulation Re-Considered The World of Action The Academic Worlds Inquiry proceeds ? Demand for timely According to the Relevant data, research, norms and pace And analysis to inform of the disciplines decisions and to support Frustrations emerging from scholars when advice is not acted on

The Modern Challenge: Research into Policy • The challenge of ‘ two communities ’ long a concern • Different cultures, time horizons, sense of possibilities • Policy-making systems are complicated, often opaque • Ministerial and top executive time is over-determined • Incredible volume of information converging on them • Policy challenges not the domain of any one department • Policy often ‘ catches up ’ to practice;  pace of change • Canadian “ PM ” government even more centralized • Political leaders less likely to take advice from officials • Governments see ‘ mandates ’ as the ‘ long campaign ’ • Research can challenge underpinnings of policy regimes • Groups now mobilize to discredit science-based findings

Some Cautionary Observations All institutions asked to show ‘ effectiveness ’ , which • means commercial, policy or community relevance • Risk: this can unnecessarily raise expectations • Inappropriate metrics for demonstrating influence • Like all performance regimes: displacement, diversion • Seeking short-term impact at the expense of longer- term influence & broader consensus in research field • Risk: can damage reputation of scholars, institutions • Key question: research license or to transmit findings Research can make a difference, challenges get surmounted, and new policies get adopted, but this requires strategy, readiness and reasonable expectations.

Conceptualizing the Challenge

Conceptualizing the Challenge with Practical Considerations in Mind There are pertinent literatures on… 1. Broad perspectives on knowledge utilization 2. Policy communities and networks: alternative views 3. Beyond research: different modes of policy inquiry 4. Agenda-setting and policy-making processes 5. Decision regimes: routine, incremental, fundamental

1. Knowledge Utilization: The Decision Community The ‘Third Community’ and the Network of Policy Actors Demand for timely, relevant data, research, and analysis to support and inform decisions Access to Policy Inquiry Private Public The Academic Worlds Commissions Policy shops Private Councils Task Forces Sector Legislative Sectors of Centre Departments committees Organization Research Centres Professional Schools Int. Groups Consultants Public - big firms Associations Inquiry proceeds according Sector - boutique to scholarly norms Think Tanks The Third Community Producing policy inquiry often proceeds in a very competitive environment

2A – Policy Communities and Networks: Alternative Views Special purpose organizations

2B – Policy Communities: Constellations of Hierarchies, Individuals, Power or Beliefs? Extent of Government Organization: Coordination and Capacity Low High Low State Pressure Direction Pluralism Extent of Societal Organization Corporatism Clientele Pluralism Concertation High

2C – Policy Communities as Belief Systems Other dynamics: - policy spillovers - new governments - international exemplars - flow of expertise Is your research associated with: - new agreements - associated with one coalition? - building new capacities? - developing new networks? - building brokering capabilities? Time horizons for policy change: modifying beliefs vs. external policy change

2D – Federal • Central agencies to coordinate, monitor and control across departments and agencies • Special task forces and secretariats out of the Privy Council Office (cabinet office) Government • Regular meetings between the Prime Minister and the Clerk of the Privy Council • Oversight and prodding from the Prime Minister’s Office to ministers and deputy ministers Organization • Weekly breakfast meetings of Clerk and Deputy Ministers • Re-grouping of programs and re-naming of ministerial portfolios • Cabinet meetings and sub-committees (Priorities &Planning Committee) • Interdepartmental ask forces to review & implement policies Transportation Portfolio Federal Cabinet TBS Finance Canada PMO PCO 3 Inter-Dept. 2 1 Task Force 4 PCO Coord. Secretariats

2E – Canada’s Intergovernmental Landscape L L NW Ontario Territories Quebec Government Nunavut Government L Yukon BC Government P Federal Government L Alberta Government L PEI Assembly of Government First Nations L Saskatchewan Government L Nova Scotia Government L Manitoba L L Government New Brunswick Newf./Labradour Government Government

3 – Beyond Research: Publication Activities Modes of Policy Inquiry Memos Reports Articles Books Briefs • basic research Web Sites • applied research • policy research Research Analysis Convocation Activities Workshops Seminars Data Conferences Information Briefings Generation Speeches E-connections What about social media, instant journals, factoids,

4 – Agenda-Setting and Public Policy Decisions! ? Policy windows… or critical junctures Policy Entrepreneurs Problems People & Policy Ideas & Rolling Agendas, Alternatives Governments The Intelligence and Public Policy Conventional Wisdom of Democracy Usable Knowledge Kingdon Lindblom Lindblom & Cohen

5 – Decision-Making Regimes and Implied Demands for Information Decision Regime Routine Incremental Fundamental Emergent No consensus – the field Policy base largely Core principles of Status of Consensus Intact is wide open and open to intact but marginal policy base open On the Policy Base development of a broad issues arise to scrutiny vision A few actors with All policymakers and A few policymakers with Number of Actors Relatively small responsibility to actors potentially affected a stake in the marginal Involved in Decision number at the outset implement policy by or concerned about a issue policy-makers significant change Processes Data that can inform Analysis on selected Information on fundamental Inquiry at a broad Type of existing routines, and issues – the method of variables, and that probes level for perspective, analysis to determine successive limited underlying assumptions. Information but work proceeds on comparisons for the when to switch to Will also require analysis, selective issues Sought issues at hand. other routines. data of considerable scope. Key implication for researchers concerns the extent to which their findings challenge the policy and administrative status quo. Different instruments? New policy regimes? New expertise required to assess merits of findings? From Lindquist (1988) What Do Decision Models Tell Us About Information Use? Knowledge in Society

Practical Implications

Types of Policy Influence…. Expanding Policy Capacities Broadening Policy Horizons  Improving the knowledge and data of certain actors  Providing opportunities for networking & learning  Supporting recipients to within the jurisdiction or develop innovative ideas with colleagues elsewhere  Improving capabilities to  Introducing new concepts communicate ideas to frame debates, putting  Developing new talent for ideas on the agenda, or research and analysis stimulating public debate  Educating researchers and others who take up new Affecting Policy Regimes positions with broader  understanding of issues Modification of existing programs or policies   Stimulating quiet dialogue Fundamental re-design of programs or policies among decision-makers  Establish new policy regime and programs So, “influence” is only one standard for judging success; what might be other indicators?