QRPM2011 Conference Booklet

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH FOR
POLICY MAKING 2011

2ND ANNUAL

26 & 27 May 2011
Queen’s University Belfast
Belfast, U.K.

Qualitative Research for Policy Making 2011

Welcome from Merlien Institute

We would like to welcome you to today’s event. This international conference is
designed to bring together academics and practitioners to discuss best practices for
delivering and interpreting qualitative research for policy making

Your contact persons at this conference

Conference Director: Jasper Lim
Conference Chair: Robert Miller
Conference Assistants: Wendy Scott, Francesca Morosi

Below you will find a few administrative details for your information. Should you
have any queries or problems during the conference, please speak with the contact
persons.

PRESENTATIONS
The presentation slides and papers of this event can be viewed or downloaded for a
limited period of time from slideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/event/qrpm2011

BADGES
Badges have been provided to help you identify fellow participants and the speakers.
Easy identification also helps the conference staff when delivering messages. Please
return your badge to the registration desk at the end of the conference.

QUESTIONS
If you have any questions during the conference, please raise your hand and wait for
the speaker to address you. It would be helpful if you could announce yourself by
name and organisation before asking your question.

EVALUATION FORM
Towards the end of the conference, you will be provided with an Evaluation Form.
We would be grateful if you would take time to complete the form and return it to the
registration desk before you leave the conference.

2

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH FOR POLICY MAKING 2011
THURSDAY, 26 MAY 2011, Auditorium, McClay Library
08:15 Registration @ McClay Library Foyer
08:45 Opening words by Merlien Institute & Chair
Prof Robert Miller - Professor of Sociology - Queen’s University Belfast & ARK (UK)
Keynote Presentation 09:30 “Don’t ask, don’t tell” law: challenges in
09:00 Big machines and tangled knots: asking delivering qualitative findings to senior level policy
the right questions about social problems makers in the US Department of Defense
• Discussing how to make qualitative research • Looking at the anticipated impact on US military
attractive and relevant to policy makers service members and their families of repeal of the
• Identifying the comparative advantage of qualitative "don’t ask, don’t tell” law
data in identifying the processes behind social • Analysing a massive amount of qualitative data from a
problems variety of sources (town hall meetings, focus groups,
• Using the “big machine” and “tangled knot” in-box comments, on line dialogues)
metaphors to identify the most useful research • Developing a strategy to explain and deliver the
questions in generating actionable information findings to senior level policy makers in the Pentagon
Timothy Nelson - Lecturer in Social Policy, Harvard Susan G. Berkowitz - Senior Study Director
Kennedy School - Harvard University (US) Westat (US)

10:00 - 10:15 Joint Q&A Session

10:15 Money matters in low/moderate income 10:45 The key to policy advocacy: demonstrating
families and the gender implications of UK the power of collaborative qualitative research to
welfare reform deliver welfare benefits
• Drawing on research with low/moderate income • Discussion of longitudinal community-based PAR
couples to examine the UK government’s proposals project with lone mothers on social assistance and the
on welfare reform from a gender perspective policy challenges
• Discussing the value of qualitative research to • Demonstrating the power of qualitative research for
policy design and debates policy advocacy
• Evaluating the UK government’s performance in • Discussion of the multiple outcomes and their long
relation to gender assessment term policy implications
Fran Bennett - Senior Research Fellow Lea Caragata - Associate Professor, Faculty of Social
University of Oxford (UK) Work - Wilfrid Laurier University (Canada)
Sirin Sung - University Lecturer
Queens University Belfast (UK)
11:30 - 12:00 Coffee Break

12:00 Undertaking high quality and relevant 12:30 Archiving qualitative data for policy
qualitative research at a time of rapid healthcare research: meeting challenges and establishing best
reforms practices
• Addressing the significant challenges of keeping • Reporting findings from demonstrator project on
qualitative research relevant in times intense archiving qualitative data generated in the evaluation
change in the National Health Service in England of a complex community intervention initiative
• Describing our action research approach within a 2 • Discussing benefits and challenges of archiving
year ethnographic study of healthcare identified by researchers, funders and policy makers
commissioning in the course of the project
• Evaluating the tensions between study sites and • Describing the development and implementation of
policy environments that need to be identified and best practices in qualitative data archiving
managed within such an action research study Aileen O'Carroll - Manager - IQDA (Ireland)
Sara Shaw - Senior Fellow - Nuffield Trust (UK)

13:15 - 14:15 Lunch Break

3

THURSDAY, 26 MAY 2011, Auditorium, McClay Library

Brainstorming workshop
14:15 Building acceptance of qualitative methodologies: developing strategies to build academic
rigor and enhance methodological validity
In this workshop, delegates divided into teams will brainstorm strategies to mitigate effects of challenges and
build acceptance of qualitative methodologies among those who influence and make policy. At the end of the
workshop, team leaders will present their solutions to the audience.
Facilitated by Meena Chary - Assistant Professor - University of South Florida (US)


16:00 Evidence-based policy in Eastern 16:30 Qualitative research and policy making in
European countries: how can qualitative research Northern Ireland: barriers arising from lack of
become more legitimate for the policy makers? capacity, conceptualisation and consensus
• Discussing the significant overlap between the • Describing a multi-levelled policy process with little
policy makers and the academic community in joined up or collective decision-making
Romania • Identifying the lack of policy capacity in governance
• Assessing the impact of this overlap that could system with existing outputs reflecting little use or
dilute professional boundaries and gives birth to understanding of qualitative research
inappropriate “intimacy” between science and policy • Discussing how the absence of political consensus,
making flexibility and adoption of modernisation agendas has
• Discussing the unwillingness of policy makers in imposed constraints on use of qualitative research
Romania to get their decisions scrutinised by Derek Birrell - Professor of Social Administration and
science Policy - University of Ulster (UK)
Lavinia Maria Andrei - PhD Candidate
University of Bucharest (Romania)

17:15 Qualitative evidence of municipal service delivery protests: implications for South Africa
• Reflecting critically on the factors that contributed to the violent service delivery-related protests in 3 different
provinces in South Africa
• Discussing the socio-economic impact and long-term development challenges of these protests
• Illustrating the importance of registering early warnings signals and institutionalising mediation at municipal
level.
Sethulego Matebesi - Senior Lecturer and Department Chair
University of the Free State (South Africa)
17:45 - 18:00 Q&A Session

18:00 Closing remarks of day 1 from chair

19:45 Optional Networking Dinner
@ Nick’s Warehouse, 35-39 Hill Street, Central Belfast

4


FRIDAY, 27 MAY 2011, The Canada Room & Council Chamber, Lanyon Building
08:15 Morning coffee
08:45 Opening words by Merlien Institute & Chair
Sue Ziebland, Research Director, Department of Primary Healthcare - University of Oxford (UK)
Keynote Presentation
09:00 Delivering effective qualitative research 09:30 Research based knowledge for policy
for policy making in times of austerity decision making rounds: practical implications
• Discussing how qualitative research can make a • Evaluating research studies within the period of 2007-
distinctive contribution to different stages of policy 2009 ordered by Ministry of Education and Science
making and Ministry of Economy in Lithuania
• Utilising qualitative method to complement • Discussing coupling between research knowledge
information derived from quantitative methods creation process and policy rounds
• Arguing that in the age of austerity, it is important • Evaluating the research based knowledge in terms of
that all instruments should be used to avoid ill- transformation scenario content
advised policies Birut Mikulskien - Head of Department of
Giuseppe A. Veltri - Scientific Fellow, JRC, IPTS Management - Mykolas Romeris University
European Commission (Lithuania)


10:15 Timing is everything: balancing topicality, 10:45 Anticipating hot issues and producing
relevance and precision in delivering evidence- timely reports for policy makers to report to new
based policy-making developments
• Discussing the implications of selecting the right • Discussing recent experience in anticipating hot
timing for both data collection and research issues and developing research agenda around it
dissemination • Developing methods to make research reports timely
• Exploring the relationship between topicality, timing and accessible
and academic rigour • Implementing successful engagement strategy with
• Discussing the ethics concerning researcher and the media and policy makers in research results
policy maker relationships Susan J. Popkin - Director, Program on
Gráinne Kelly - Policy/Practice Coordinator, Neighbourhoods and Youth Development
INCORE The Urban Institute (US)
University of Ulster (UK)


12:00 The science-policy interface for 12:30 Seeing it from the other side: reflections on
biodiversity and ecosystem services: a knowledge transfer placement
opportunities for science to enter in policy • Discussing how academic research evidence fits into
environments the broader range of evidence that policy-makers
• Presenting research results of the analysis of have available to them;
science-policy interfacing in the area of biodiversity • Exploring how qualitative research evidence is
governance understood and evaluated by policy-makers
• Discussing an appraisal approaches that were • Identifying how best to present and communicate the
developed through interviews with policy-makers outcomes of qualitative research to a policy audience
and scientists in the field of biodiversity Natalie Armstrong - Lecturer in Social Science
• Evaluating the success of these approaches for use University of Leicester (UK)
in supporting policy-makers
Alice B. M. Vadrot - Research Fellow
Ronald J. Pohoryles - Director
ICCR (Austria)
13:15 - 14:15 Lunch Break
5

FRIDAY, 27 MAY 2011, The Canada Room & Council Chamber, Lanyon Building

Sponsored Presentation:
14:15 ATLAS.ti: A powerful workbench for analysing large bodies of textual, graphical, audio and
video data - Jörg Hecker - Director Business Operations - ATLAS.ti (Germany)

Brainstorming workshop:
14:30 Developing indicators of study quality in systematic reviews of qualitative research to inform
public health policy making
This workshop will use systematic reviews undertaken for the National Institute for Health and Clinical
Excellence (NICE) to illustrate the features that policy makers may wish to be appraised. It will use this as the
starting point for a discussion about the importance of distinguishing between the quality of research reporting
and the quality of research conduct and aim to establish agreement on some key reporting standards that
might be acceptable to authors, editors, reviewers and policy makers.
Facilitated by Ruth Garside - Senior Research Fellow - PenTAG, University of Exeter (UK)


16:15 Policy and history: discussing a typology 16:45 Supporting the application of Grounded
of qualitative approaches for policy making Theory qualitative studies for policy making
• Discussing what historians can add to mainstream • Identifying and discussing unique contributions
policy analyses Grounded Theory can offer to social policy
• Presenting a typology of approaches to history and development
policy • What are the challenges and opportunities of using
• Illustrating these approaches with examples from Grounded Theory for policy research and policy
historical work on health care policy, in particular development?
cancer and palliative care policy • Discussing future considerations for the application of
Ellen van Reuler - PhD Researcher qualitative research for social policy development
University of Manchester (UK) Anita Vaillancourt - Assistant Professor
Algoma University (Canada)

17:30 Closing remarks of Day 2 by chair and close of conference

This conference is proudly supported by:

6

Thursday 26 May - 08:45
From our chairperson
Opening remarks and speaker introductions

Robert L. Miller

Professor of Sociology

Queen’s University Belfast, UK

About Robert…
Robert Miller a Professor of Sociology at Queen’s University Belfast. He
studied at Duke University and the University of Florida and completed his
Ph.D. at the Queen's University of Belfast. His main sociological work has
been in the areas of social stratification & mobility and gender & political
participation. He has contributed to the social policy debate surrounding equal
opportunity issues in Northern Ireland - most notably with a highly
controversial study of religious discrimination in the Northern Irish Civil
Service that led directly to major reforms in that body. He presently has
returned to his long-standing interest in social mobility, only employing the
qualitative methods of family history and(auto)biographical research.

He has been involved with the European Sociological Association since its
founding having been its General Secretary 1997-99 and Chair of the ESA
Research Network 'Biographical Perspectives on European Societies. Robert
Miller is Convenor of the Masters in Social Research Methods and is Deputy
Director of ARK, a joint initiative of Queen's University and the University of
Ulster dedicated to making social science information more accessible to the
general public http://www.ark.ac.uk.

7

Timothy Nelson

Lecturer in Social Policy

Harvard Kennedy School, Harvard University (US)

Keynote Presentation:
Big Machines and Tangled Knots: Asking the Right Questions about
Social Problems
• Discussing how to make qualitative research attractive and relevant to
policy makers
• Identifying the comparative advantage of qualitative data in identifying the
processes behind social problems
• Using the “big machine” and “tangled knot” metaphors to identify the most
useful research questions in generating actionable information

Presentation abstract:
Policy makers are often eager to utilize research to tackle some of the most
intractable challenges facing society. Yet often academics, even those who
study social problems, do not formulate their research in ways which might be
most useful for policy interventions. Following Sparrow (2008), social
problems like father absence, early school leaving, gang violence, and ghetto
poverty can be thought of as “knots,” which in order to be undone must be
examined in all of their specificity. In a similar vein, following Becker (1988),
undesired outcomes can be conceived of as the result of the confluence of
regular social processes (the Big Machine) which produces them. By
identifying all of the necessary contributing components of the problem, social
scientists can pinpoint the ones most amenable to policy intervention.

Qualitative methods are uniquely equipped to address these tough challenges
because of their ability to get at complexity, understand context and overturn
false assumptions which often underlie existing programs and policies. I will
illustrate these points through several qualitative policy-relevant projects in the
United States.

About Tim…
Timothy Nelson is Lecturer in Social Policy. His research focuses on low-
income, non-custodial fathers, as well as congregational studies and African
American religion. His most recent publication is Every Time I Feel the Spirit:
Religious Experience and Ritual in an African American Congregation. His
next book is tentatively titled Marginal Men: Fatherhood in the Lives of Low
Income Unmarried Men (with Kathryn Edin and Laura Lein). Nelson received
his PhD in sociology from the University of Chicago in 1997 and has also
taught at Northwestern University and the University of Pennsylvania.

8

Susan G. Berkowitz

Senior Study Director

Westat, US

“Don’t ask, don’t tell” law: Challenges in delivering qualitative findings
to senior level policy makers in the US Department of Defense
• Looking at the anticipated impact on US military Service members and
their families of repeal of the "don’t ask, don’t tell” law
• Analysing a massive amount of qualitative data from a variety of sources
(town hall meetings, focus groups, in-box comments, on line dialogues)
• Developing a strategy to explain and deliver the findings to senior level
policy makers in the Pentagon

In May, 2010 Westat was awarded a contract to support the activities of the
Comprehensive Review Working Group (CRWG) established by the US
Secretary of Defense to examine the potential impact of repeal of the “don’t
ask don’t tell” law in effect since 1993. Along with conducting two large-scale
surveys, Westat researchers collected and analyzed a large amount of
qualitative data on Service member and spouse’s views on repeal from
sources including: town hall meetings, focus groups, in-box comments,
confidential on-line dialogues and open-ended survey comments. At the
outset, these were viewed less as “real” data collection efforts than as
opportunities to engage the force. Over time this view changed as Westat’s
qualitative analysis team, working with the CRWG, made a convincing
argument that these data were being subject to a rigorous, systematic, team-
based analytic process yielding unique, policy-relevant insights not available
from the survey results alone. This presentation will “tell the story” of the
qualitative component of this time-pressured, highly politically visible effort,
offering “lessons learned” for persuading policy makers of the importance and
utility of these often powerful qualitative data both for understanding the
potential impact of repeal and planning for its implementation.

About Susan…
Dr. Susan Berkowitz, a Senior Study Director at Westat in Rockville, MD, is an
expert in qualitative and mixed methods research. She has led several high-
profile qualitative studies whose results have informed policy-making for the
US Census Bureau, the Defense Manpower Data Center, and, most recently,
the Comprehensive Review Working Group. Dr. Berkowitz holds a Ph.D. in
Anthropology from the University of Michigan and a Postdoctoral Certificate in
Health Policy from the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. She is a
frequent presenter at national and international conferences, has published
widely and gives professional development workshops to varied audiences.

9

Fran Bennett
Senior Research Fellow
University of Oxford, UK
Sirin Sung
University Lecturer
Queen’s University Belfast, UK
Money matters in low/moderate income families and the gender
implications of UK welfare reform
• Drawing on research with low/moderate income couples to examine the
UK government’s proposals on welfare reform from a gender perspective
• Discussing the value of qualitative research to policy design and debates
• Evaluating the UK government’s performance in relation to gender
assessment
By law the UK coalition government must have regard to the impact of its
policies on women. This paper investigates to what extent this is influencing
debates about proposals for welfare reform, especially the ‘universal credit’. It
draws on one author’s experience of aiming to draw policy makers’ attention
to relevant findings from qualitative research (about how low-income couples
manage money and negotiate gender roles) - in particular those from a study
by both authors involving separate semi-structured interviews in 2006 with
men and women in 30 low/moderate income couples in Britain.
A major aim of this study - part of the Within Household Inequalities and
Public Policy research in the ESRC-funded Gender Equality Network
(www.genet.ac.uk) - was to facilitate analysis of welfare reform taking account
of gender roles and relationships within the household. The paper therefore
demonstrates how these and other similar findings can be used to examine
universal credit from a gender perspective.
The authors use this to explore two broader issues: the value of qualitative
research to policy design and debates, in particular as a supplement to
economic modelling; and the essential elements of a comprehensive gender
assessment of welfare reform to fully meet the equalities duty.

About Fran & Sirin…
Fran Bennett is a part-time Senior Research Fellow, doing teaching and
research at Oxford University. Her interests include gender, social security,
poverty and participation. She is also an independent consultant and writes
for the UK government and NGOs. She is joint editor of the on-line Social
Policy Digest for the Journal of Social Policy, and also of the Journal of
Poverty and Social Justice. Sirin Sung is Lecturer in Social Policy at Queen’s
University Belfast. Her main research interests include gender and social
policy, gender and employment, work-life balance policies, and gender and
benefits in East Asian countries and the UK. She is currently researching
gender and the welfare state in Korea; and work-family balance policies in the
UK and US, funded by the Leverhulme Trust.

10

Lea Caragata

Associate Professor, Faculty of Social Work

Wilfrid Laurier University, Canada

The key to policy advocacy: demonstrating the power of collaborative
qualitative research to deliver welfare benefits
• Discussion of longitudinal community-based PAR project with lone
mothers on social assistance and the policy challenges
• Demonstrating the power of qualitative research for policy advocacy
• Discussion of the multiple outcomes and their long term policy implications

“Lone Mothers: Building Social Inclusion” is a community university research
alliance (CURA) that involves academic researchers with community partners
including advocacy and service delivery organizations serving marginalized
and minoritized women as well as Toronto Employment and Social Services
(TESS), the fourth largest welfare delivery body in Canada and part of the City
of Toronto. This Canada-wide longitudinal study examines lone mother’s
experiences with work-for-welfare systems and the growing precarious labour
market with a combined focus on research and advocacy. The grounding of
the work in a feminist, participatory methodology is reflected in the recruitment
of lone mothers on social assistance hired and trained to work as Research
Assistants. These women brought their own experiences with poverty and
welfare systems to the project both through serving as an ongoing reference
group and through their additional participation as research participants and
as active participants in policy dialogues.
This paper describes how these multiple partners have been key to policy
advocacy directed to facilitating lone mothers’ access to post secondary
education, removal of punitive welfare provisions, gendering welfare delivery
and more general advocacy for improved welfare benefits and the needs of
these families for sustainable employment.
Also discussed are the effects of these collaborations on project partners as
feminist and participatory action research designs explicitly challenge the
power relations between researcher and participant which in itself has
important implications for policy research.

About Lea…
Dr. Lea Caragata teaches in the areas of social policy and community
development. Areas of research and specialization include marginalization
and oppression, most recently focused on labour market changes and welfare
state retrenchment. Dr. Caragata's academic work follows extensive practice
experience, including grassroots community organizing, social housing
development, public policy coordination, and public administration.

11

Sara Shaw

Senior Fellow

Nuffield Trust, UK

Undertaking high quality and relevant qualitative research at a time of
rapid healthcare reforms
• Addressing the significant challenges of keeping qualitative research
relevant in times intense change in the National Health Service in England
• Describing our action research approach within a 2 year ethnographic
study of healthcare commissioning
• Evaluating the tensions between study sites and policy environments that
need to be identified and managed within such an action research study

The NHS is going through a period of rapid and intense change. We explore
how an action research model has enabled us to address the twin challenges
of keeping qualitative research relevant and working with evolving
organisations. We draw on data from a two-year ethnographic study
investigating the process of commissioning high quality care for people with
long-term conditions.
The decision to establish a senior team combined with the location of the
project – at an independent health policy foundation – enabled team members
to act as ‘boundary spanners’, simultaneously engaging with the three study
sites and the policy environment. A ‘Chinese Wall’ allowed ‘researchers’ to
focus on data collection and analysis and ‘actioners’ to focus on working with
sites to address specific areas of healthcare commissioning (e.g. diabetic
podiatry).
Successfully enabling an action research approach has involved: (1)
balancing contributions to policy at the national and local levels; (2)
responding to action requests whilst offering action that we believe will be
most beneficial; and (3) keeping a clear analytical focus to the research
elements of the study while offering useful action. In doing so, our intention is
to convert the conclusions drawn from qualitative research into relevant and
actionable policy recommendations.

About Sara…
Sara Shaw is a Senior Fellow at the Nuffield Trust. Her background is in
medical sociology and policy studies. She has published widely on topics
including shaping national health research policy, critical approaches to policy
analysis and the organisation of primary care. Her current research interests
focus on healthcare commissioning and integrated care. In addition to her role
at The Nuffield Trust, Sara is also Senior Lecturer in Health Policy Research
at Queen Mary, University of London.

12

Aileen O’Carroll

Manager

IQDA, Ireland

Archiving qualitative data for policy research: meeting challenges and
establishing best practices
• Reporting findings from demonstrator project on archiving qualitative data
generated in the evaluation of a complex community intervention initiative
• Discussing benefits and challenges of archiving identified by researchers,
funders and policy makers in the course of the project
• Describing the development and implementation of best practices in
qualitative data archiving

Applied social, economic and evaluation research projects often generate
significant amounts of qualitative data. Yet, compared to quantitative data, the
conventions and requirements relating to archiving qualitative data, and
making it available for re-use, are less likely to be formalised at commissioner,
faculty or University level. This is despite qualitative data being considered an
indicator of methodological innovation and advancement. There are several
benefits to archiving both quantitative and qualitative data, including: avoiding
unnecessary duplication of research projects; permitting comparative studies;
tracking trends over time; improving methods for undertaking similar research;
and investigating new research questions. Archiving also permits the use of
data beyond the lifetime of a project. Archived data represents a valuable
resource for the advancement of scientific inquiry and promotes the use of
appropriate data in policy making at local and national levels.
This paper will report on the findings from a major demonstrator project on
archiving qualitative data generated in the evaluation of a complex community
intervention initiative. The paper will provide an overview of findings and
output from two strands of the project: (1) a consultation process that
identified concerns, perceived challenges and orientations towards qualitative
data archiving amongst researchers, policy specialists and data
commissioners; (2) the development of best practice guidelines for qualitative
data archiving in Ireland.

About Aileen…
Aileen O'Carroll is manager of IQDA. She liaises with researchers at the
beginning and end of the research process as to how best conduct qualitative
research with to a view to archiving the data produced. She has created a
catalogue of Irish Qualitative Research which can be accessed at the
www.iqda.ie. She lectured on research methods at University College Dublin.
Her own research work has involved the use of qualitative research methods,
time diaries, in analysing the organisation of working time.

13

Meena Chary

Assistant Professor, Government and International
Affairs

University of South Florida, US

Building acceptance of qualitative methodologies: developing strategies
to build academic rigor and enhance methodological validity

In this workshop, delegates divided into teams will brainstorm to mitigate
effects of challenges and build acceptance of qualitative methodologies
among those who influence and make policy. Delegates may want to include
issues such as academic rigor and methodological validity in their
discussions. At the end of the workshop, team leaders will present their
solutions to the audience.

About Meena …
Meena Chary holds a Ph.D. in Public Administration, as well as degrees in
Electrical Engineering, Economics and Management. She is a methodologist
and a public policy scholar researching in the areas of human rights and
information technology. She is part of the faculty of the Public Administration
Program within the Department of Government and International Affairs at the
University of South Florida in Tampa, Florida, USA.

14

Lavinia Maria Andrei

PhD Candidate, Faculty of Sociology and Social
Assistance

University of Bucharest, Romania

Evidence-based policy in Eastern European countries: how can
qualitative research become more legitimate for the policy makers?
• Discussing the significant overlap between the policy makers and the
academic community in Romania
• Assessing the impact of this overlap that could dilute professional
boundaries and gives birth to inappropriate “intimacy” between science
and policy making
• Discussing the unwillingness of policy makers in Romania to get their
decisions scrutinised by science

The article presents a general perspective upon the use of social research in
the policy process in Romania and tries to underline the regional similarities
across some Eastern European countries. What particularizes Romanian
social research and policy communities? How can research and especially the
qualitative and quasi-experimental methods become more legitimate for the
policy makers? The paper gives a few interesting answers in what regards
why the lack of legitimacy and cooperation between the two communities, and
tries to propose some solutions to overcome this situation and encourage
evidence based policy and practice in Romania and in the region. Policy and
research are, from a certain point of view, entangled, intimate even, and
professional turfs seem to be overlapping. Legitimacy of research is thus lost
in the process and social research becomes a mere argument in the political
debate. The primacy of quantitative over qualitative is also observed, though
different explanations come from different experts.
All in all, the paper concludes that better use of research into the policy
making process could lead to better governance and less arbitrary in the
decision making process. Democratic institutions are now expected to reform
their procedures and to move towards expert advice and scientific knowledge
gathering in support of their normative power. Romania could represent a
good example of how policy can shape into a functional process, but it could
also accept only the form, without acknowledging the content.

About Lavinia…
Lavinia is currently a PhD Candidate at the Faculty of Sociology and Social
Assistance at the University of Bucharest. In 2005 she was appointed as civil
servant in the Ministry of Economy. In 2006, she joined the Young
Professional Scheme, a one year intensive training program in public
management. She was later appointed as a Public Manager in the Ministry of
Economy and Finance. Since 2008, she teaches Public Policy at Bucharest
University in Romania.

15


Derek Birrell

Professor of Social Administration & Policy

University of Ulster, UK

Qualitative research and policy making in Northern Ireland: barriers
arising from lack of capacity, conceptualisation and consensus
• Describing a multi-levelled policy process with little joined up or collective
decision-making
• Identifying the lack of policy capacity in governance system with existing
outputs reflecting little use or understanding of qualitative research
• Discussing how the absence of political consensus, flexibility and adoption
of modernisation agendas has imposed constraints on use of qualitative
research

The paper argues that the formal policy making processes have made little
use of or taken cognisance of qualitative research. This can be evidenced
through the examination of consultation papers, commissioned reports,
equality impact assessments and Assembly committee reports. Three main
explanations can be suggested for the limited use of qualitative evidence in
the policy process. Firstly, the lack of policy making capacity in the Civil
Service and other public bodies and the limited presence and operation of
research institutes, policy units and networks. Secondly, the low level of
conceptual analysis and understanding displayed in government narratives
and discourses. Examples are quoted from the policy areas of health delivery,
integration of health and social care, educational achievement, social work,
user and public participation, and public sector reform Thirdly, the lack of
political consensus on many issues of social and public policy among
ministers and politicians. This has presented obstacles to change, to the
adoption of new and modernised agendas and promoted a lowest common
denominator approach to policy making. Northern Ireland experience
suggests that a range of political, ideological, communal and vested interests
has lead to the limited impact of qualitative research and also the non-
promotion of qualitative research.

About Derek…
Derek Birrell is a Professor of Social Administration and Policy in the School
of Criminology, Politics and Social Policy at the University of Ulster. He is the
author of the several books: ‘The impact of devolution on social policy’ and
‘Direct rule and the governance of Northern Ireland’. He is also the co-author
of the book ‘Social Work in Northern Ireland, Conflict and Change’ that is
published in 2011. His new books: ‘Comparing Devolved Governance’
(Palgrave Macmillan) and with Ann-Marie Gray ‘Adult Social Care’ (Policy
Press) will be published in early 2012.

16


Sethulego Matebesi

Senior Lecturer & Department Chair

University of the Free State, South Africa

Qualitative evidence of municipal service delivery protests: implications
for South Africa
• Reflecting critically on the factors that contributed to the violent service
delivery-related protests in 3 different provinces in South Africa
• Discussing the socio-economic impact and long-term development
challenges of these protests
• Illustrating the importance of registering early warnings signals and
institutionalising mediation at municipal level.

Social protests in South Africa were to a large degree responsible for making
the former black townships ungovernable. In 2004, a decade since the advent
of the new political dispensation, South Africa witnessed unrest of significant
proportions at local government level. This occurred despite the emphasis on
good municipal governance by the national government. The lack of capacity
to deliver on mandates, together with factors such as individual political
struggles, poor communication and ineffective client interface, are key
contributors to the surge in violent protests.
This study was conducted in four cities from three different provinces in South
Africa. The main aim of the study was to identify the reasons for the violent
protests and policy implications. Methodologically, this entailed 100 in-depth
interviews with community leaders, councillors and municipal and provincial
government officials. More than 300 community members (both protestors
and non-protestors) were interviewed by means of focus groups discussions.
This qualitative study is useful to policy makers and planners at all spheres of
government, including security services because it not only identified the
reasons for the protests, but also identified early warning signals and various
lessons on how to prevent or manage these events in future.

About Sethulego…
Sethulego is currently the Chairperson and Senior Lecturer in the Department
of Sociology and Research Associate at the Centre for Development Support,
both at the University of the Free State. He also serves as Council Member of
the South African Sociological Association and Editorial Associate for the
Journal for Development Studies. In general terms, his research has strong
focus on two areas: health systems research (tuberculosis and HIV and AIDS)
and developmental issues (community-based worker systems, and poverty
alleviation strategies). His recent empirical work has focuses on the service
delivery-related protests in South Africa.

17

Friday 27 May - 08:45
From our chairperson
Opening remarks and speaker introductions

Sue Ziebland

Research Director, Department of Primary Healthcare

University of Oxford, UK

About Sue…
Sue Ziebland is a University Reader in Qualitative Health Research and
research director of the Health Experiences Research Group, based in the
Department of Primary Health Care. She is also a research fellow at Green
Templeton College.

Sue’s background is in medical sociology, with increasing focus on qualitative
research approaches. Since completing her MSc in Social Research Methods
Sue has worked as a researcher in the academic, NHS and voluntary sectors
and has published over 100 papers and chapters in social science and health
publications. Sue was invited (by Ann McPherson) to be involved in the DIPEx
(now Healthtalkonline) projects when it was still at the kitchen table stage –
back in 1999. She spent a considerable (and perhaps not surprising) amount
of 1999 getting the projects through a national research ethics committee.
Since then Sue has worked closely with colleagues in the research group, on
the steering group and DIPEx charity to develop the methods used in the
projects and raise funding for the research.

Sue’s other research interests include people’s use of the internet for health
information and qualitative research methods (which she teaches at various
levels).

In 2010 she has started a 5 year NIHR programme on the use of patients’
experiences on the internet, working with some splendid colleagues in
Warwick, Northumbria, Sheffield and Stirling as well as Oxford.

18

Giuseppe A. Veltri

Scientific Fellow, JRC, IPTS

European Commission

Keynote Presentation:
Delivering effective qualitative research for policy making in times of
austerity
• Discussing how qualitative research can make a distinctive contribution to
different stages of policy making
• Utilising qualitative method to complement information derived from
quantitative methods
• Arguing that in the age of austerity, it is important that all instruments
should be used to avoid ill-advised policies
Qualitative research seeks to provide a better understanding of the
processes, context, rationales and motivations underlying social and
economic activity. Hence, qualitative research can make a distinctive
contribution to policy-making at all stages. It can help identify priority areas,
design policy interventions (examining what can be effective and successful),
and foresee unintended consequences. Insights from qualitative research are
also important for fine-tuning policy implementation and monitoring. In time of
public sector cuts, all available instruments should be used to avoid ill-advised
policies that fail to deliver or produce unintended negative results.
In policy-making, qualitative methodology is complementary to information
derived from quantitative methods. For example, qualitative methods are a
valuable tool against the outcome of Campbell’s law that affects quantitative
indicators used in policy-making. In other words, qualitative research can
complement quantitative indicators, monitoring their ‘health status’ and
showing when they have ceased to ‘measure’ what they were designed to do
(as proxies). In order to be effective, qualitative research should stress this
complementarily with quantitative research rather than oppose it, ensure
transparency and rigour in its procedures, and take into account policy
makers' needs and the context in which they must make their decisions.
About Giuseppe…
Giuseppe holds an MSc in Social Research Methods from the Methodology
Institute of the London School of Economics (LSE) and a PhD in Social
Psychology from the LSE. He is currently a scientific fellow at the European
Commission JRC Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS).
Before joining the IPTS, he has been a research associate at the Institut Jean
Nicod (Ecole Normale Supérieure) in Paris. He has taught extensively in the
fields of methodology of social research and social psychology. His research
interests focus on public opinion research, social representations, behavioural
economics and social psychology of economic life, and public understanding
of science.

19

Birut Mikulskien

Head of Department of Management

Mykolas Romeris University, Lithuania

Research based knowledge for policy decision making rounds: practical
implications
• Evaluating research studies within the period of 2007-2009 ordered by
Ministry of Education and Science and Ministry of Economy in Lithuania
• Discussing coupling between research knowledge creation process and
policy rounds
• Evaluating the research based knowledge in terms of transformation
scenario content
Effectiveness of research-based knowledge transfer in to public decision
making is not self-oriented or spontaneous action. The aim of this research
was to outline the managerial practical implications for the potential use of
research-based knowledge with the purpose to improve public policy decision
making. The investigation let us draw the main managerial framework, which
is based on threefold aspect, such as:
a.) The research content quality including transformation scenarios. Research
content must be shaped up in the form directly usable for policy decision
making without additional efforts and could be recognized as organic
prolongation of policy process or detached to policy round.
b.) The research process interaction with policy making rounds. If we consider
policy decision making process as round models, the research-based
knowledge could be created either during research own round with attributes
of policy decision rounds or being integrated in to policy issue decision
making round.
c.) Alignment of policy modelling actors with researchers. The policy decision
making and research-based knowledge generation rounds need to be aligned
when the researcher is converted to the policy actor with the stake to
recognise the hidden phenomena.

About Birut …
Birut Mikulskien holds a PhD in Physics. She has worked and gained
practical experience in Agency of International R&D programmes and in the
Lithuania Ministry of Education and Science for 8 years. She joined Mykolas
Romeris University in 2006 and in 2010, she was appointed as a Head of
Department of Management. Her main research interests include decision
making methods for policy processes development, R&D policy management,
public policy choice, participatory policy based on social network analysis.
She gives lectures at the master level courses on “The Decision Making
Theory” and “R&D projects management”.

20

Gráinne Kelly

Policy/Practice Coordinator, INCORE

University of Ulster, UK

Timing is everything: balancing topicality, relevance and precision in
delivering evidence-based policy-making
• Discussing the implications of selecting the right timing for both data
collection and research dissemination
• Exploring the relationship between topicality, timing and academic rigour
• Discussing the ethics concerning researcher and policy maker
relationships
Accepting a research grant from a government department comes with both
advantages and drawbacks. You have their attention and they have
demonstrated an interest in what you have to say. But to what extent have
you relinquished control by accepting public monies? Any good researcher
will say - not at all. But how can we be sure that this true, particularly if you
are working to the time schedule of the policymaker?

Evidence-based policymaking is now at the heart of civil service-speak. Could
it be that their anxiety to substantiate their decision-making with a limited
timeframe impacts on the researcher’s autonomy in any way? Drawing on the
experience of conducting publicly-funded qualitative research on conflict and
reconciliation in Northern Ireland, this paper sets out to identify some of the
challenges of aligning the timing of research undertaken with the wider
agendas of policymakers and to critically reflect on the relationship formed
between researcher and policymaker, to ensure appropriate critical distance is
maintained.

About Gráinne …
Gráinne Kelly is Policy/Practice Coordinator of INCORE (International Conflict
Research Institute), based at the University of Ulster. She has conducted
qualitative research on a range of conflict-related themes in Northern Ireland,
Cambodia and Sierra Leone. She has published widely on conflict resolution,
reconciliation and victims/survivors of conflict and has maintains a research
interest in the role of grantmakers in conflict-affected societies. She was
awarded a research fellowship at the Center for Philanthropy and Civil Society
in City University, New York in 2005. She teaches on a Master’s Programme
on Peace and Conflict Studies and contributes to a postgraduate course on
Researching Peace and Conflict in Divided Societies. She has recently
completed qualitative research on reconciliation theory and practice in
Northern Ireland.

21

Susan J. Popkin

Director, Program on Neighbourhoods and Youth
Development

The Urban Institute, US

Anticipating hot issues and producing timely reports for policy makers
to report to new developments
• Discussing recent experience in anticipating hot issues and developing
research agenda around it
• Developing methods to make research reports timely and accessible
• Implementing successful engagement strategy with the media and policy
makers in research results

This presentation will describe my experience in anticipating a “hot issue” -
the problem of housing “hard to house” families living in public/social housing
developments slated for redevelopment as part of community regeneration
initiatives.
I will discuss how this issue grew out of my research on resident relocation
and how we used a combination of qualitative and quantitative research
methods to illuminate the problems, develop a research demonstration, and
conduct a formative and outcome evaluation.
I will also describe how we developed a dissemination strategy, including
accessible policy briefs instead of reports, presentations, media outreach, and
outreach to policy makers. In particular, I will focus on how we used data from
our qualitative research to paint portraits of the families and engage policy
makers in discussion about how to best meet their service needs.

About Susan…
Susan J. Popkin, Ph.D. is a Director of The Urban Institute’s Program on
Neighborhoods and Youth Development and Senior Fellow in the Metropolitan
Housing and Communities Policy Center. Dr. Popkin is an expert on
qualitative research methods, including in-depth interviews, focus groups,
ethnography, and administrative interviews. Her particular expertise is in
integrating these methods into large, multi-method projects. She is lead
author for the book The Hidden War: Crime and the Tragedy of Public
Housing in Chicago; and co-author of Public Housing Transformation: The
Legacy of Segregation and Moving To Opportunity: The Story of an American
Experiment to Fight Ghetto Poverty.

22

Alice B. M. Vadrot
Research Fellow
Ronald J. Pohoryles
Director
Interdisciplinary Centre for Comparative
Research in the Social Sciences (ICCR), Austria

The science-policy interface for biodiversity and ecosystem services:
opportunities for science to enter in policy environments
• Presenting research results of the analysis of science-policy interfacing in
the area of biodiversity governance
• Discussing an appraisal approaches that were developed through
interviews with policy-makers and scientists in the field of biodiversity
• Evaluating the success of these approaches for use in supporting policy-
makers
Significant problems surround efforts to tackle the loss of biodiversity and the
degradation of ecosystem services. Implementation of current biodiversity
policy has resulted in regulatory discontent, a cycle crisis, and controversy.
One factor relating to the conflicting views on the value assigned to
biodiversity is its conservation and sustainable use. Current efforts to
demonstrate biodiversity’s value rest primarily on the concept of ecosystem
services and the benefits for society deriving from biodiversity, assuming that
an anthropocentric and economy-based starting point is likely to motivate
effective policy-making, integration, and implementation. We argue that such
an approach potentially challenges the governance of biodiversity,
considering that this solution to environmental problems blurs our vision of the
ecological, political, social and economic complexities. Qualitative
interdisciplinary research might help to overcome the shortcomings deriving
from quantitative research and approaches such as the concept ecosystem
services , especially in the case of the rather fuzzy field of biological diversity
and the political conflicts surrounding this issue. In this respect the paper
addresses the process of science and research entering Policy Environments
and the institutionalisation of the science-policy interface on biodiversity and
ecosystem services that tends to be seen as important instrument to enhance
international compliance and implementation of multilateral policies.

About Alice & Ronald…
Alice Vadrot is a Research Fellow at the ICCR. She has an MA in Political
Science and studied Philosophy at the Université Panthéon Sorbonne. The
subject of her PhD is Scientization and Politicization of Biological Diversity:
The Transition from Knowledge Politics to Epistemic Governance. Recently,
she became a member of the Austrian National Biodiversity Commission.
Ronald Pohoryles is the Director of the ICCR and Associate Professor at the
University of Innsbruck. His research expertise covers European integration
emphasising public policy analysis, science and technology with an emphasis
on internationalisation, and environmental sociology.

23


Natalie Armstrong

Lecturer in Social Science

University of Leicester, UK

Seeing it from the other side: reflections on a knowledge transfer
placement
• Discussing how academic research evidence fits into the broader range of
evidence that policy-makers have available to them;
• Exploring how qualitative research evidence is understood and evaluated
by policy-makers
• Identifying how best to present and communicate the outcomes of
qualitative research to a policy audience

Dr Natalie Armstrong was recently awarded an ESRC Knowledge Transfer
Placement Fellowship and spent nine months working full-time with the
Strategy Unit of the UK Cabinet Office (April to December 2009). She is a
medical sociologist experienced in applying social science theory and
qualitative methods to the area of health, and worked with the Strategy Unit’s
Health Team. In the course of this presentation, she will reflect on her
experiences of working at the very heart of government (the Strategy Unit
reported ultimately to the Prime Minister), and particularly on the insights
gained about the relationship between academic research evidence and
policy-making. Key topics to be discussed will include:
• How academic research evidence fits into the broader range of evidence
that policy-makers have available to them;
• How qualitative research evidence is understood and evaluated by policy-
makers;
• How best to present and communicate the outcomes of qualitative research
for a policy audience, including common pitfalls and how to avoid them;
• The value and limitations of this type of Placement Fellowship in building
bridges between academic research and policy-makers.

About Natalie…
Dr Natalie Armstrong is a Lecturer in Social Science applied to health at the
Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester. A medical sociologist,
she has previously held research posts at the University of Warwick and the
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Her main research
interests lie in exploring the interface between health services and the public,
in particular: lay and professional understandings and experiences of health,
illness and health care; interactions between lay and professional groups; the
development of innovative methods of health care delivery (including e-
health); and issues of policy, governance and regulation.

24

Ruth Garside

Senior Research Fellow

PenTAG, University of Exeter, UK

Developing indicators of study quality in systematic reviews of
qualitative research to inform public health policy making
• Presenting two alternative tools to assess the quality of studies included in
systematic reviews and syntheses of qualitative research for NICE in
England
• Discussing the utility, meaning and facility of use for these tools
• Facilitating a discussion about key elements of qualitative research
conduct and reporting

Methods for appraising the “quality” of qualitative research remain
contentious. Different research traditions value aspects as disparate as
literary merit, scientific rigour, utility of the findings, integrity of the researcher
or fidelity of the report to participants’ concerns.
Health policy makers are increasingly aware that qualitative research may
offer valuable insights that enhance services through, for example,
understanding the opinions and expectations of those at whom services are
aimed or uncovering the organisational factors that may help or hinder their
successful delivery. Concerns remain, however, about the reliability and
validity of qualitative research findings. In systematic reviews, although
quality appraisal of included studies is standard practice, there is little
consensus about the key features of a “good” or “poor” qualitative study.
This workshop will use systematic reviews undertaken for the National
Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) to illustrate the features
that policy makers may wish to be appraised. It will use this as the starting
point for a discussion about the importance of distinguishing between the
quality of research reporting and the quality of research conduct and aim to
establish agreement on some key reporting standards that might be
acceptable to authors, editors, reviewers and policy makers.

About Ruth…
I have worked for PenTAG since 2001 producing technology assessment
reports for NICE appraisal and public health guidance programmes, as well as
for the UK HTA Programme. My PhD critically reviewed methods for the
systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research, and produced
examples using meta-ethnography and meta-study. I lead systematic reviews
of qualitative research, including those which inform policy making at NICE’s
Centre for Public Health Excellence. The reviews focus on examining the
ways in which, for example, the attitudes of the targeted population,
mechanisms of implementing health interventions, or structures through which
these services are delivered, may help or hinder their success.

25


Ellen van Reuler

PhD Researcher

University of Manchester, UK

Policy and history: discussing a typology of qualitative approaches for
policy making
• Discussing what historians can add to mainstream policy analyses
• Presenting a typology of approaches to history and policy
• Illustrating these approaches with examples from historical work on health
care policy, in particular cancer and palliative care policy

The relevance of historical investigations for policy making is a topic that has
become increasingly debated. Two approaches dominate these discussions:
the analogy and the ‘search for roots of issues under debate’. Though
perfectly valid, these approaches are rather limited and do not utilise the full
potential of historical analyses in a policy context. In this paper, I develop a
typology of approaches that helps us to classify and utilise approaches to the
study of history in a policy context.
Firstly, I discuss what historical studies can add to mainstream policy
analyses. Secondly, a typology of approaches to history and policy is
developed drawing on the continuums of the concept of history applied (past
or method) and the aim of the history and policy study (solve a problem or
enhance understanding). Finally, I position various approaches to history and
policy within this framework. In addition to relatively well-known approaches,
several innovative approaches, such as the evaluation of long-term policy
outcomes and the combination of an analogy with a force field analysis, are
discussed. I illustrate these approaches with examples from my historical
work on health care policy, in particular cancer and palliative care policy.

About Ellen…
I am working as a PhD researcher at The University of Manchester. I initially
obtained MSc degrees in Public Administration, Industrial Engineering &
Management, and History of Medicine. I pursued research projects in different
areas, including international management, funding of palliative care, support
networks of the elderly, and development of cancer policies. My current work
investigates which approaches might be helpful in bridging the divide between
history and policy. The cases that I use to illustrate these approaches are the
histories of palliative and cancer care policies in England and the Netherlands
during the post war era.

26


Anita Vaillancourt

Assistant Professor

Algoma University, Canada

Supporting the application of Grounded Theory qualitative studies for
policy making
• Identifying and discussing unique contributions Grounded Theory can offer
to social policy development
• What are the challenges and opportunities of using Grounded Theory for
policy research and policy development?
• Discussing future considerations for the application of qualitative research
for social policy development

Grounded Theory as an increasingly popular qualitative research
methodology offers many advantages for exploring new and existing domains
of research that may aid policy development. Key advantages of using a
grounded theory methodology within qualitative research include its emphasis
on beginning with the data rather than with specific research questions
(Charmaz, 2006) which in turn, may provide improved opportunities for
research to be interpreted using a policy lens; it’s changing focus throughout
time which permits an ability of the researcher to focus on areas of emerging
importance (Charmaz, 2006); and the researcher’s ability to construct theory
from the research findings offers an element of rigour unavailable when using
other qualitative research methdologies and methods (Creswell, 1998).
However, not unlike other qualitative methodologies, persistent challenges
associated with a growing number of interpretations of Grounded Theory
application in terms of study design, implementation, analysis, and its growing
adoption as hybrid methodology may present challenges to its perceived
credibility and functionality as a viable and rigorous research methodology for
policy research and decision making. This presentation will discuss the
possibilities and challenges of Grounded Theory for policy making.

About Anita…
Anita Vaillancourt, MSW, PhD (cand) is currently an Assistant Professor at
Algoma University. She has worked as a clinical social worker and policy
researcher for over 12 years and currently teaches and conducts research in
the areas of poverty policy, addictions, precarious work, family violence, and
critical pedagogy.

27

Attendee List
FIRST NAME LAST NAME JOB TITLE ORGANISATION COUNTRY
Adam Fusheini Researcher University of Ulster UK

Aileen O'Carroll Manager IQDA Ireland

Alex Hekelaar Researcher Social Affairs Rotterdam The
Netherlands
Alice B. M. Vadrot Research Fellow ICCR Austria

Anita Vaillancourt Assistant Professor Algoma University Canada

Ann Higgins Senior Facilitator Mary Immaculate college Ireland

Anne-Marie Doherty Postgraduate Research Queen's University Belfast UK
Student
Avril Craig Research Officer Patient and Client Council UK

Birut Mikulskien Head of Department of Mykolas Romeris Lithuania
Management University
Brenda Roche Director of Research Wellesley Institute Canada

Christine Irvine Policy and Information Volunteer Now UK
Officer
Derek Birrell Professor of Social University of Ulster UK
Administration and
Policy
Dirk Schubotz YLT Director Queen's University Belfast UK

Eileen Martin Manager, The Science Queen's University Belfast UK
Shop
Ellen van Reuler PhD researcher University of Manchester UK

Eva Jansova Statistical officer European Training Italy
Foundation
Fran Bennett Senior Research Fellow University of Oxford UK

Francesca Morosi PhD Student Nottingham Trent UK
University
Gillian Robinson ARK Director University of Ulster UK

Giuseppe Veltri Scientific Officer European Commission Spain

Goretti Horgan Research Associate University of Ulster UK

Grainne Kelly Policy/Practice INCORE UK
Coordinator
Helena Tuite PhD Student University of Ulster UK

Oonagh Corrigan Associate Professor in Peninsual College of UK
Clinical Education Medicine & Dentistry
Research

28

Attendee List
FIRST NAME LAST NAME JOB TITLE ORGANISATION COUNTRY
Joerg Hecker Director Business ATLAS.ti Germany
Operations
Jytte Kaltoft Bendixen Union Advisor Danish Artist Union Denmark

Lavinia Maria Andrei PhD Candidate University of Bucharest Romania

Lea Caragata Associate Professor Wilfrid Laurier University Canada

Marina Roseman Lecturer Queen's University Belfast UK

Meena Chary Assistant Professor University of South Florida US

Natalie Armstrong Lecturer in Social University of Leicester UK
Science
Neil Coulson Associate Professor in University of Nottingham UK
Health Psychology
Robert Miller Professor of Sociology Queen's University of UK
Belfast
Roberta Bonini Senior Researcher IReR - Lombardy Regional Italy
Institute for Research
Ronald J. Pohoryles Director ICCR Austria

Ruth Garside Senior Research Fellow PenTAG UK

Sara Shaw Senior Fellow Nuffield Trust UK

Sarah Riley Senior Lecturer Aberystwyth University UK

Sethulego Matebesi Senior Lecturer and University of The Free South Africa
Department Chair State
Sharon Redmond Policy and Research RNID UK
Officer
Simon O'Hare Research and Change Makers UK
Publications Officer
Sirin Sung Lecturer in Social Policy Queen's University of UK
Belfast
Sue Ziebland Research Director University of Oxford UK

Susan Popkin Director, Program on The Urban Institute US
Neighbourhoods and
Youth Development
Susan Berkowitz Senior Study Director Westat US

Tim Nelson Lecturer in Social Policy Harvard University US

Wendy Scott PhD Candidate Queen's University of UK
Belfast

29

Message from our sponsors:

Making social and political
information on Northern
Ireland available to all
ARK is a resource dedicated to making social and political information on
Northern Ireland available to all. The ARK website holds information on a wide
range of social and political topics. With research summaries, survey results,
visual material, facts and figures, it is an essential starting point for anyone
who needs to gather information on Northern Ireland quickly and easily. Go to
www.ark.ac.uk, and search across all the ARK materials or go directly to one
of the specialist sections.

ARK also provides a number of services, including technical support for
people who want to carry out analyses of large-scale survey datasets, but do
not have the resources or expertise to do this themselves. To promote easy
access to research information ARK produces briefing papers and other
publications, and runs regular seminars and currently is developing a new
Policy Unit. The ARK team is always interested in hearing from users about
how we can improve or expand our service.

A powerful workbench for
analysing large bodies of
textual, graphical, audio and
video data
The purpose of ATLAS.ti is to help researchers uncover and systematically
analyze complex phenomena hidden in text and multimedia data. The
program provides tools that let the user locate, code, and annotate findings in
primary data material, to weigh and evaluate their importance, and to visualize
complex relations between them.

ATLAS.ti consolidates large volumes of documents and keeps track of all
notes, annotations, codes and memos in all fields that require close study and
analysis of primary material consisting of text, images, audio, video, and geo
data. In addition, it provides analytical and visualization tools designed to
open new interpretative views on the material.

Source: Wikipedia

30

Upcoming Events
Market Research in the Mobile World 2011
2nd International Conference
19-20 July 2011, Atlanta (USA)

Computer-Aided Qualitative Research Europe
4th Annual Conference
1-2 September 2011, Locarno (Switzerland)

Online Qualitative Research Congress 2011
14-15 December 2011, Milan (Italy)

Technology-Aided Qualitative Research Asia
3rd Annual Conference
21-22 February 2012, Singapore

Qualitative Research for Policy Making Asia
3rd International conference
23-24 February 2012, Singapore

Asia Mobile Market Research World 2012
1st International conference
25-26 April 2012, Singapore

For more information about our upcoming events, please
visit our website at http://www.merlien.org

Merlien Institute is an independent organisation dedicated to providing
timely and critical information to the qualitative research community. Our
mission is to provide researchers and practitioners a unique platform to
brainstorm new ideas and learn best practices in a highly interactive
conference environment. Merlien Institute, with its 4 staff and 26 Advisory
Board Members now host more than 10 annual meetings around the
globe. Our events have consistently resulted in new collaborations and
projects among delegates.

31

Organised by:

Venue Sponsor: Silver Sponsor:

© 2011 by Merlien Institute
All rights reserved.

Printed in The Netherlands

No part of this publication may be reproduced, transmitted, transcribed,
stored in a retrieval system, or translated into any language, in any form
or by any means without written authorisation from Merlien Institute.

This booklet is printed on recycled paper, please recycle.

32

QRPM2011 Conference Booklet

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Destaque

Destaque (9)

Semelhante a QRPM2011 Conference Booklet

Semelhante a QRPM2011 Conference Booklet (20)

Mais de Merlien Institute

Mais de Merlien Institute (20)

Último

Último (20)

QRPM2011 Conference Booklet