Identify and overcoming barriers to research impact

1. Supporting mutual learning around impact
pathways and research to policy processes

2. An impact evaluation, undertaken in 2016, provided a thorough assessment of the impact of the ESRC-
DFID Joint Fund for Poverty Alleviation over the ten years.
What do we know about the barriers to impact?
ESRC's conceptual framework for impact assessment to inform the evaluation methodology, the study
recognises the complexities of the policy development process and the multifaceted nature of social
science impact. The study identifies critical barriers to engagement and uptake.
Learning from the REF: The non-academic impact of international development research in UK Higher
Education, Kings College London, UKCDS
Impact Initiative learning and outputs – events, engagement, synthesis across 150 projects

3. The Big Challenges
1. Engaging with non-academic audiences
2. Mutual learning for impact
3. Building networks and relationships
4. Incentives for engaging with policy and practice
5. Opportunities to respond to demand for evidence

4. • We will create dialogue by providing an outline of the issues and clear lessons for knowledge practitioners,
donors and researchers.
How can the Impact Lab help?
• Co-produce Learning Guides: Identification of replicable approaches to effective engagement in a particular
area identified as a potential barrier for impact.
• Share case studies: Joint Fund and RLO impact strategy successes and learning shared by research teams in
relation to increasing outreach and maximise research uptake and impact.
• Support you to contextualise lessons for local conditions, time, effort or funding.
“We want to support you to strengthen the efficacy of RLO research projects'
pathways to impact.”

5. Engaging with non-academic audiences
• Research subjects
• Professional groups
• Community members
• Political stakeholders
• Policy makers
• NGOs
• Activists
• Donors
• Media
• Weak existing relationships
• Limited opportunities to connect
• Limited understanding of
audiences priorities/attitudes
• Language and cultural barriers
• Funding
• Lack of incentives to engage

6. Engaging with non-academic audiences
• Plan engagement from the start – then structured and continuous
• Partner with non-academic actors to co-produce research
• Reach out to audiences in their own contexts
• Use right tools for each audience
• Identify and capitalise on policy windows
• Utilise networks and informal relationships

7. Mutual Learning for Impact
• Learning from research is a
significant enabler of
research impact.
• Mutual learning is an iterative
process which requires time and
space within research activities in
order to be fruitful.
• Lack of planning and/or lack of flexibility to
adapt the plan.
• Engagement with key individuals happens too
late
• Weak relationships with research users
• Ideology of policy actors may prevent
learning.

8. Mutual Learning for Impact
• Engage all stakeholders in learning early-on
• Collaborative, interactive events, workshops are conducive to stakeholder
learning
• Involve intermediaries in the communication process with policymakers
• Capacity building transfers valuable skills and builds confidence
• Advisory groups can develop ongoing learning about context and strategy

9. Building networks and relationships
• Review the quality of the relationships between you, your partners, and the key stakeholders
• Where relationships are weak, develop specific strategies to address
• Consider demand – how can your research help others be more effective?
• Focus events on building relationships to facilitate uptake and impact
• Actively manage relationships

10. Pathways Group Work Session
Group 1: Ethiopia, Ghana, Uganda [James/Eva] OTHER BUILDING
Group 2: DRC, Lesotho, Malawi, South Africa [Elizabeth/Pauline] OTHER BUILDING
Group 3: India [Hannah/Nidhi] THIS ROOM
Group 4: Bangladesh, Honduras, Pakistan [Anna/Ben] THIS ROOM

11. Thank you