Presentation by Dr. Rebecca Hanlin of The Open University UK, on getting knowledge into policy, during the training on The Art of Influencing Policy Change: tools and strategies for researcher, held by The Scinnovent Centre on 12th -14th February 2013 in Nairobi

1. Getting knowledge into policy: what works and
what doesn’t
Rebecca Hanlin
ESRC Innogen Centre
Open University

2. Group work (10 mins)
• What is the difference between knowledge
and research and evidence?
• How have you tried to get knowledge into
policy before?
• How (un)successful have you been and
why do you think that is?

3. Dependencies…

4. Depends on place in the policy
process

5. Depends on effort or luck (and
actor?)…
• Different theories of how policy and decision
making is made:
Knowledge levels
– Linear and rational models
– Bounded rationality/ satisficing models
Effort and luck
– Windows of opportunity
– Chaos theory and garbage can models
Effort and agency
– Street level bureaucrat

6. Depends on context
• Social
• Political
• Economic
• Networks and connections
= windows of opportunities type issues

7. But what is policy influence?
• Not just where in the process but also with
what… goes back to the knowledge/
research/ evidence question
• Also the how - mechanisms for
influencing*
• Change agents idea
ALL dependent on what trying to influence…

8. Types of policy influence
Type of policy influence Description Examples
IDEAS AND BOUNDARIES Influencing ‘policy •Putting an issue in the policy domain
horizons’ by influencing • Encouraging dialogue and networking
debate and policy • Improving the intellectual frameworks
thinking • Broadening the parameters of the
debate
TECHNICAL Influencing technical •Shaping specific features of policy or
aspects of programme programme design
design or • Reforming existing
implementation programmes/policies
PROBLEM AND SUCCESS Transforming policies • Influencing how the success or
DEFINITION and affecting the ‘policy problem is defined and how the impact
regime’ through is understood
fundamental design of • Engaging with the values and
policies ideology underpinning policy
CAPACITY AND PROCESS Building capacity and •Influencing how policymakers
changing the way approach decision-making
policymakers use • Influencing how they use
knowledge and evidence in the policymaking process
evidence • Supporting policymakers to develop
to make policy innovative ideas
• Supporting policymakers to

9. Not linear or exact process
• Alternative, unplanned consequences of
policy influence
• Negative and positive…
• Takes time and effort unless have window
of opportunity
• Being targeted is important… (building it in
to activity from the start – bringing in end
beneficiaries)

10. The context matters
Context scenario Description How should researchers’
respond?
Clear government demand Policymakers want knowledge and are Researchers need to build
ready to act on it relationships of trust with
They have the capacity to receive and policymakers and build a
use advice reputation for reliability
The policy window is wide open to
researchers
Government interest in The window of influence is partially Researchers should take
research but leadership is open leadership
absent The issue is considered as important Pay careful attention to
Structures to implement research communication between research
recommendations are missing and policy communities
Researchers need a plan of
implementation or a champion
amongst policymakers
Government interested in The significance of the issue is Researchers need to help build
research but with capacity acknowledge in the policy community capacity for concerting knowledge
shortfall But the necessary capacity for into policy and action
adoption/implementation is lacking They need to try and move the
Links between research and decision- issue up the ranks of decision-
making are generally weak making

11. The context matters...cont’d
Context scenario Description How should researchers
respond?
A new issue activates research but New issue captivates the Chances of success are improved
policymakers and uninterested imagination of researchers when researchers apply adroit
Policymakers are indifferent strategies of advocacy,
Political support for the new communication and education
idea/research is lacking within and beyond the policy
This is a high-risk context for community
researchers and their work
Government is disinterested or The window of influence is tightly Exercise patience and
hostile to research closed determination
Researchers are probably ahead of Recognize that influencing policy
their time or the policymakers are may demand long and systematic
not ready to engage with persuasion
implications of new research Things change, attitudes evolve;
preferences shift; needs arise and
realignments happen
Windows will open

12. How does research influence
policy?
• By expanding policy capacities
– Enhancing the policy community’s collective
ability to assess innovative ideas and analyze
research advice
• By broadening policy horizons
– Introducing new ideas into the policy agenda;
packaging information into ready-to-use formats;
fostering dialogue between researchers and
decision-makers
• By affecting decision regimes
– The quality of a policy is determined both by the
procedures of deliberation as well as its contents

13. Mechanisms of influence
• How can one influence? Discussion (10
mins)… precursor for the next 2 days of
activity
– What are the mechanisms, tools, strategies you can
adopt?
– Does it matter what research it is (idea, technical,
process approach etc.)?
– Does it matter who you are trying to influence?
– Does it matter who you are?

14. Q&A

15. Introduction to policy briefs
activity (25 mins)
• Two readings… if you haven’t read them (both)
over night; you’ll need to read one now
• Who has read what?
• Break you into 2 groups – each group will
concentrate on one paper
• You are going to use these to do an activity
around policy briefs – one of the most often used
mechanisms of trying to influence the policy
process.

16. Before starting… what are
policy briefs?
• Summaries of research findings, evidence that
you feel is of interest to a decision-maker
• Not technical language but understandable to
lay person
• Short, snappy, creative in format
• Specific to your target audience i.e. same
research findings could be written into 2-3
different briefs each for a different decision-
maker group

17. Group activity [1]
• In your two groups (15 mins):
– Decide what are the key messages to take
from the paper which you want to ‘sell’ to a
decision maker
– How have you made that choice? (what
decision-maker, how many messages, why
one and not another etc.)

18. Group activity [2]
• In your two groups (45 minutes):
– Write a one page policy brief that summaries the
key messages you have chosen
– Think about whether you want an introduction/
background section
– Think about how much of the research process
you want to discuss
– Think about how much detail on the results you
go into
– Think about how you convince a decision-maker
to want to know more?

19. Group activity [3]
• In your groups (20 minutes):
– Review the policy brief that was developed
from the research and:
• Identify the differences between the two
• List what you think works and what doesn’t in both
briefs now you have something to compare yours
to.
• Overall, which do you think is the best and why?

20. Group activity [4]
• In Plenary (30 minutes):
– How easy/difficult did you find writing the
brief?
– How easy/difficult did you find to reach a
compromise with your team mates?
– Report back your thoughts following the
comparison of the two briefs

21. Take home points
• Short summaries (could it be read over
breakfast?)
• Lay audience (could your granny
understand it?)
• Creative (I want to pick this up?)
• Interesting (I want to know more?)