Carroll Nicola, Crawford Adam
University of Sheffield, UK.
University of Leeds and University of York, UK.
Evid Policy. 2024 Mar 8;20(4):421-439. doi: 10.1332/17442648Y2024D000000022.
The academic impact agenda and evidence-informed policy movement have formed dynamic incentives for engagement between universities and local authorities. Yet, in the competitive higher education landscape, research-intensive universities frequently gravitate towards global rather than local impacts, while local government resources are diminished. In this context, how can universities and councils collaborate effectively to inform solutions to complex policy issues?
This paper draws on data from a Review of Collaboration between researchers at the University of Leeds and officers at Leeds City Council, which explored factors that enable and constrain research-policy engagement. Where limitations of linear models of research-policy interaction are well documented, we consider how a 'community of practice' (CoP) approach might offer insights for accelerating civic knowledge exchange.
A CoP lens was applied in analysing data from a mapping exercise, survey and semi-structured interviews involving academics and council officers.
Examining research-policy engagement in terms of the 'domain', 'community' and 'practice' constituents of CoPs highlights the significance of interpersonal connections in forging 'boundary-crossing' collaborations that have spurred innovation in the city. Academics and officers commonly advocated enhanced inter-organisational processes whereby relationality is supported institutionally. Proposals are encapsulated in a model that conceptualises civic collaboration as a series of domain-specific CoPs supported by an inter-sectoral CoP performing vital 'boundary bridging' functions.
Drawing on experiences from one English city, we advance a framework which offers promising insights into integration of organisational and relational facilitators of research-policy partnerships in responding to municipal policy challenges.
学术影响力议程和循证政策运动为大学与地方当局之间的合作形成了动态激励。然而,在竞争激烈的高等教育格局中,研究密集型大学往往倾向于追求全球而非地方影响力,而地方政府资源却在减少。在此背景下,大学和议会如何有效合作,为解决复杂政策问题提供信息?
本文借鉴了对利兹大学研究人员与利兹市议会官员之间合作的审查数据,探讨了促进和制约研究与政策互动的因素。鉴于研究-政策互动的线性模型的局限性已得到充分记录,我们考虑“实践社区”(CoP)方法如何为加速公民知识交流提供见解。
运用实践社区的视角分析了来自一项映射活动、调查以及涉及学者和议会官员的半结构化访谈的数据。
从实践社区的“领域”“社区”和“实践”要素角度审视研究-政策互动,凸显了人际关系在促成推动城市创新的“跨界”合作中的重要性。学者和官员普遍主张加强组织间流程,以便在制度上支持这种关系。相关提议被纳入一个模型,该模型将公民合作概念化为一系列特定领域的实践社区,并由一个跨部门的实践社区提供支持,该跨部门实践社区发挥至关重要的“边界搭桥”功能。
借鉴英国一个城市的经验,我们提出了一个框架,该框架为整合研究-政策伙伴关系的组织和关系促进因素以应对市政政策挑战提供了有前景的见解。