An article in Evidence & Policy examines the factors contributing to high quality policy-relevant research by using insights from international behavioural science units. The research findings highlight the positive impact of strong evidence-provider/user relationships and the importance of governments’ commitment to co-produced research. The analysis informed the development of the STEPS framework: Sharing, Transparency, Engagement, Partnership and Strong relationships.
The role of behavioural science
The evidence from behavioural science shows it has the potential to make a major contribution to policy development and evaluation with its focus on understanding and changing behaviour. The last ten years have seen a rapid growth in the demand and provision of behavioural science advice to address societal problems. These range from encouraging citizens to pay their taxes on time, to increasing organ donor registration.
The OECD has listed over 200 international institutions/units applying behavioural science to public policy and the number continues to grow. However, the establishment of these units has not solved the problem of getting behavioural science evidence into practice and there remains a translational gap.
About the research
The research was a qualitative study with twelve behavioural science units (BSUs). The units had been operating for between two and twelve years and between them had 103 years of experience of providing evidence and behavioural science advice to policymakers. Units were in North America, the UK, Australia, Europe, Scandinavia, the Middle East, and Africa.
What contributes to producing high-quality policy-relevant research
The research identified five themes:
1. Creating critical capacity
To identify and produce the required evidence to inform policy questions, there is a need to create capacity either within or outside of the team. This includes team members from a wide range of disciplines such as sociology, political science, systems thinking, anthropology and service design.
2. Generating and managing a project portfolio
BSUs have several criteria for accepting projects. The first is to clarify the problem and determine if it is amenable to behavioural analysis. The second is to decide if the topic area is a good fit/of interest to the unit.
BSUs also consider the ethical implications of policies the research would inform. Policy interventions that perpetuate inequality were given as an example of ethical conflict between the needs of the policymaker and the moral obligations of the BSU.
3. Transparency – permission and capacity
Publishing full details of research conduct and findings is critical for transparency and evidence accumulation. Several BSUs publicised projects and findings without peer review on their unit’s website. Some claimed they try to publish findings in peer-reviewed journals where possible. Units differed in how much value they placed on academic publications.
4. Relationships with policymakers
Relationships with policymakers are key for BSUs to help understand government policy priorities and facilitate the application of behavioural science to policy problems. Maintaining, and developing new relationships with policymakers ensured continued engagement and opportunities to conduct policy-related research.
5. Knowledge exchange
The journey from the inception of the policy project to the reporting of research findings involves a two-way process of knowledge exchange where evidence providers share with policymakers, and policymakers share information about government mechanisms and priorities.
The STEPS framework
The study identified three critical factors to producing research that impacts on policy:
- Understanding the policy arena and priorities: To propose research that is beneficial, units require an understanding both of the policy arena and government’s policy priorities.
- Adequate funding: Continuity of funding was critical to the team, building a translational research portfolio and transparency. To produce robust research, a skills mix is required that demands a certain team size and/or the ability to flexibly extend through collaboration or subcontracting the expertise of others.
- Strong relationships: Relationships were important for the units: from initial support for a BSU, agreeing the research design, negotiating dissemination of research findings, to implementation.
Based on the research, the authors created a framework of five success factors with the mnemonic ‘STEPS’ for research units working with policymakers:
- Sharing knowledge to understand the policy and research landscapes.
- Transparency through full dissemination of research methods and evidence.
- Engagement of policymakers throughout a research project.
- Partnerships between government and researchers to generate policy-relevant research.
- Strong relationships to unite evidence providers and users and pursue credible and policy-relevant research.
The bottom line
There are benefits to BSUs and policymakers of developing a shared understanding and strong working relationships. Governments who have an interest in the application of behavioural science to policy should work with BSUs to establish robust programs of work to address policy issues and fund the units accordingly so they can recruit and retain a strong core team.
Crucial to the field of behavioural science is peer-reviewed publications. Policy based on research that is not open to scrutiny will always be questioned and selective publication will lead to suspicions of a biased evidence base. Greater transparency would ensure that policy is based on robust evidence and may increase public trust in government.
Want to read more?
The critical factors in producing high quality and policy-relevant research: insights from international behavioural science units – Jan Lecouturier and others, Evidence & Policy, September 2023
Each fortnight The Bridge summarises a piece of academic research relevant to public sector managers.
Recent Research Briefs about behavioural science and policy include:
- Published Date: 14 August 2024