Research is the key to social betterment. It is the Academia's responsibility to inform policy makers, only then they can take fact-based decisions based on good science (peer-reviewed, of course).

i can only add to the the answers given above, that in over a decade i have worked as a policy analyst for NGOs dealing with social change, getting access to relevant researches has been fundamental for the policy papers, advocacy and initiatives (and grant seeking for them).

it is important though not to keep it all at academic peer reviewed journals often inaccessible to "outsiders" who do not research policy but actually work it.

Evidence based policies are crucial for long term improvements. However there are major challenges facing researchers when they intend to "inform" policy makers:

1- Language: Researchers need to put an extra effort to bring their language to public-friendly words and expressions that will help both policy people and the public understand and appreciate the value of the information & recommendations

2- Short term vs long term gains: Most policy makers tend to work on short term cycles (Government mandates, financial/fiscal revenues, etc.). On the other hand, researchers have a broader perspective and a more long term approach. Often times, research based recommendations get discounted or ignored because they fail in terms of proving the benefits (at least on a short term basis).

This sounds interesting, Artur. Shall we understand that issuing recommendations goes beyond researchers' role?

Thank you, all for your insightful comments. Much appreciated! I understand you agree that making policy recommendations falls within researchers' tasks (provided there is a receptive policy environment, or the researchers work towards that). I remember once coming across the idea researchers should come with the evidence, yet, not 'produce' policy recommendations as such, but leave that to decision makers who may have a better sense of the policy field. Well...this must have been a marginal opinion, I guess.

Yes. They should guide policy makers and provide feedback on policies and theu

irbimple

When a researcher undertakes a consultancy for the government or policy makers, they are expected to come up with recommendations linked to the findings. The government or client would then form a committee that would either accept or reject the recommendations. Some could be accepted with modifications.

Hi Mia. Interesting question. Of course we should make policy recommendations. As long as the policymakers let us know where we should send the invoice for our services and receive prompt payment.

David Cairns , too funny, as usual :) Well, my concern was one of legitimacy, division of labour and competence.

Well if I could make a more serious point, the reality is that researchers tend to produce outputs for different audiences: journal articles for universities, reports for practitioners and policy briefs for policymakers. Added to this work is the task of knowledge transfer; basically making sure that your work reaches its target audiences. So as researchers, we have to cope with the issue of labour multiplication, attend events, do media work, etc. They days when we could just sit in our offices and put out an article once a year or so are long gone.

In regard to our own failings, I think that people need to be quite specific about which policies they wish to inform, and be realistic about what is attainable. Working at EU level is also quite different from national or municipal levels. So we need to keep informed about the existing policy landscape so whatever ideas we have are relevant and credible.

in my opinion, sharing is caring as long as researchers as members of a society, a community ... providing policy recommendations will be an added value. I am thinking in case researchers do not bring policy recommendations, who else will provide them? policy makers with limited expertise.... just to name few..

Social science researchers should absolutely provide policy recommendations and contribute to policymaking discourse. The Government of Canada has made this a significant priority, creating a publicly-accessible online platform called GCcollab (https://gccollab.ca) that's designed to connect academics and students with public servants to foster discussion about policies and institutional innovation

I would distinguish between policy implications and policy recommendations. I think it is reasonable to identify implications - issues that need attention. but in my view researchers should be very cautious in issuing recommendations which ironically may risk being poorly researched (due to time pressures / need for additional expertise etc). well justified and 'road-tested' recommendations require a lot of work and consultation among relevant stakeholders if they are to be credible. sometimes researchers may not have the wider knowledge to move from findings/ implications to recommendations. clearly depends on the circumstances, level of expertise etc, but I think a little caution goes a long way!

@ Robbie Gilligan. I couldn't agree more. Thank you for putting it so wisely. Thinking in terms of this distinction helps!

Yes excellent points here - we have developed an approach to working with policy makers so that our research can assist in informing policy and practice: The Active Translational Engagement (ATE) Model - see our website (under Publications): www.youthsay.co.nz

I think this ATE model is very helpful. helps to unpack a range of ways in which researchers can engage with those interested in their findings.

Thanks Robbie - yes we developed it as we were planning the research and then refined it as we moved into the dissemination phase.

Absolutely. Informed decision-making in the policy field is crucial and should incorporate academic contributions, which offer a multitude of guiding frameworks for policy making. Uninformed and misguided policy decisions can create an array of complications which could have been avoided through the inclusion of qualified and educated sources rather than just political elites.

Yes interesting comments and I like Robbie Gilligan's idea of offering a discussion on implications. We try to do this in our articles that report on our research findings.

Whether social science researchers 'provide' policy recommendations or not in some sense doesn't matter, because those agencies, governments looking for evidence-based examination of contemporary issues affecting the public /electorate are going to do their research into what they can use to support policies and political choices. They will seek and find evidence that suits their agenda and ignore evidence that doesn't. Research should speak for itself within the parameters set out in the hypothesis/proposal and conclusions themselves will probably include implications for public policy. If the research begins with the aim of influencing public policy because of an identified need/gap in a particular area then that's transparent. Governments commission research specifically to address policy issues and expect recommendations too!

Thank you, Steven Walker, for your insights! We can, than, at best hope the government commissioned research is of reasonable quality (ideally free of bias). Wonder who qualifies as a research entity in government procurement of study reports and what are the implications for the notion of academic research.

In my opinion, it is possible that the principles of ethics and objectivity are met when scientists, researchers and researchers, recommendations, formulas, advice, solutions to economic problems, and recommendations on improving the effectiveness of applying specific economic policy, given by scientists and researchers dealing with e.g. economic policy, macroeconomics, public finances etc. To make this possible, these recommendations and advices should be formulated by researchers and scientists functioning completely independent of institutions participating in economic processes, institutions of the state public finance system, central institutions coordinating the implementation of economic, financial, monetary, etc. policies of the state. The key issue is to eliminate the possibility of a correlation between recommendations and advice formulated by scientists and researchers regarding the country's economic policy and the effects of those recommendations that could be diagnosed as factors affecting the existence of the authors of these tips and recommendations. The full independence of the authors of advice, recommendations, solutions etc. regarding a particular economic policy from the effects of these tips and recommendations is a key factor in the principles of ethics and objectivity of the formulated advice, recommendations, etc.

When it is possible they should make, when it is not they should suggest ...

It would be better if some of the social science researchers make policy recommendations based on long-term strategic thinking

I will be good for researchsers to make policy recommendations at least on important issues eventhough there is doubt about their feectibve implimentation by various agencies without govt. support.

Researchsers can certainly make useful policy recommendations on important issues of R & D though their ultimate implimentation depends various govt. agencies .

Why not? Researchers should take more active part in R & D policy reommendations as technologives are developed by researchers. It is to be note that govt. agencies should play equally important role for implementation of these recommendations so that development ambitions are well translated into realities.

One of the other processes we also use is to provide readily accessible resources for practitioners and policy makers - see our project logs here on Researchgate.

I do think that research that should impact policies must be shared. It is the reason that the research is conducted, to improve people's lives.

brigid

A scientifically based forecast is a necessary element of social science research.

Researchers must make adequate research recommendations to Govt. authorities for their ultimate implementation.

Yes, if the object of their research is defined by policies and the research was focused, or had a significant weight, on policies. No, if the research is very complex and defined by multiple policies (e.g. metropolitan governance). Rule of thumb: if you don't belong to that domain of activity, never worked in it, even as a volunteer, you might wanna wait for at least three years before trying to give any sort of advice (huh, what if "advice" is actually equal to policy recommendation?).