This document discusses lessons learned about research impact and moving from research evidence to action. It notes that it took 28 years from Rachel Carson's initial research for partial action on her findings about pesticides. Moving research out of science and into journalism and advocacy was necessary. More recent lessons emphasize that the time from research to action is compressing. Engaging hearts and minds and understanding user incentives are important. Mass media and data sharing often facilitate impact. Ownership of issues sometimes shifts from research to other fields like journalism. Technical reports alone may not drive action; governments want safe experimentation and ideas. Quality engagement, trust, and competition can motivate action if done carefully. Patience and persistence are needed as change can be incremental.

1. Understanding Research
Impact
Cristina Rumbaitis del Rio
Regional Programme Manager, Action on Climate Today
March 9, 2016

2. This is what we usually mean….

3. A story of Science Impact

4. Source: http://www.rachelcarson.org/TimelineJS.aspx

14. Lessons:
• 28 years from first research
evidence to (partial) action
• It required moving out of
science and into journalism and
advocacy / activism
• Rachel Carson (and others) were
vilified in the process.

15. What now?

17. More recent lessons research impact
• Time horizon for moving from research to action are compressing
• We have better understanding of how people and organizations learn &
make decisions
• Engaging hearts and minds
• Selecttive use of evidence / bias
• Learn from failure as well as successes;
• Greater focus on the “user” “demand-side”; Rapid prototyping & user-oriented
design
• Understanding incentives and disincentives, preferences throughout the system
• Mass media, open data sharing is often a factor
• Often there is a shift in “ownership” of the issue from research to
journalism / advocacy/ activism /politics
• This is easier in some fields (e.g. health) more than others.

18. Lessons from Action on Climate Today (and beyond)
• Technical inputs ≠ reports
• Governments looking for ideas, safe experimentation, validation
& appreciation
• Quality, consistency of engagement & trust matter
• Competition can be a motivator for action (as long as it doesn’t
erode trust)
• Engaging political level can accelerate change, but you need to
proceed carefully, with clear eyed understanding of incentives,
alignment and misalignments.
• Engagement above and below (senior and junior levels)
• Patience & persistence, change is often quite incremental.
• Enduring partnerships for sustainability

19. Thank you!