de Haas Billie, van der Kwaak Anke
Independent researcher, Piri Reisplein 42, 1057 KH, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Royal Tropical Institute, Mauritskade 63, 1092 AD, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Health Res Policy Syst. 2017 May 12;15(1):40. doi: 10.1186/s12961-017-0201-0.
The attention to and demand for stronger linkages between research, policy and practice are increasing, especially in fields concerned with sensitive and challenging issues such as sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR). The study described in this article was conducted in the Netherlands among actors working in international development, especially the domain of SRHR. It explores the perceived flow of knowledge between research, policy and practice, the perceived impeding factors, and suggested strategies for improvement.
A narrative literature review was performed and 28 key informants were interviewed between May and August 2015. Most interviewees were either active or passive members of Share-Net Netherlands, an SRHR knowledge platform. All interviews, which lasted 70 minutes on average, were recorded, transcribed verbatim and coded in MAXQDA.
Linkages between research, policy and practice are many and diffuse. The demands for and supplies of knowledge within and across the fields vary and do not always match, which is shown by participants' research purposes and approaches. Participants identified various barriers to strengthening knowledge flows, including a lack of familiarity with practices in other fields, power relations and the undervaluation of tacit knowledge. They suggested a more visible and concrete demand for and supply of knowledge, the development of a joint knowledge agenda, more opportunities for the interdisciplinary creation of knowledge, and the development of a system for learning and sharing knowledge.
This study shows the willingness to undertake, and the perceived advantages of, interdisciplinary dialogues and joint creation of knowledge to advance SRHR research, policies and practices. Whereas barriers to the flow of knowledge may maintain present understandings of knowledge and of whose knowledge is valid, enabling factors, such as interactions between research, policy and practice in knowledge-sharing activities, may challenge such perceptions and create an enabling environment for generating innovative knowledge and increasing knowledge use. Knowledge platforms are recommended to place more emphasis on sharing and documenting tacit knowledge through interdisciplinary dialogues, to address power relations and to set criteria for interdisciplinary funding.
加强研究、政策与实践之间联系的关注度和需求日益增加，尤其是在性与生殖健康及权利（SRHR）等涉及敏感且具有挑战性问题的领域。本文所述研究在荷兰针对从事国际发展工作的人员开展，特别是在SRHR领域。该研究探讨了研究、政策与实践之间知识的感知流动、感知阻碍因素以及改进的建议策略。
进行了叙述性文献综述，并在2015年5月至8月期间采访了28名关键信息提供者。大多数受访者是SRHR知识平台“荷兰共享网络”的活跃或被动成员。所有访谈平均持续70分钟，进行了录音、逐字转录并在MAXQDA中编码。
研究、政策与实践之间的联系众多且分散。各领域内部和之间的知识需求与供给各不相同，且并不总是匹配，参与者的研究目的和方法表明了这一点。参与者确定了加强知识流动的各种障碍，包括对其他领域实践缺乏了解、权力关系以及对隐性知识的低估。他们建议对知识的需求和供给更加明确和具体，制定联合知识议程，增加跨学科知识创造的机会，以及建立知识学习和共享系统。
本研究表明开展跨学科对话和联合知识创造以推进SRHR研究、政策和实践的意愿以及感知到的优势。虽然知识流动的障碍可能维持对知识以及何种知识有效的现有理解，但诸如研究、政策与实践在知识共享活动中的互动等促成因素可能挑战这种认知，并为产生创新知识和增加知识利用创造有利环境。建议知识平台更加注重通过跨学科对话分享和记录隐性知识，解决权力关系问题，并为跨学科资助设定标准。
