Engaged Research for Societal Benefit, A Call to Funders

Miyamoto, B., Corbett, K., Boaz, A., Doucet, F., Mahlanza-Langer, L., Jagannathan, K., Tandon, R., and Ranco, D. (2024) Engaged Research for Societal Benefit, A call to funders. Working Paper. https://www.agci.org/wp-content/uploads/imported-files/2024/05/TEFN-Engaged-Research—final.pdf

Abstract

To make progress on pressing global issues—to create healthy, equitable, peaceful, just, and sustainable societies—funders, researchers, governments, boundary spanners, community groups, civil society actors, and others will need to draw together diverse types of knowledge. For example, to address pressing societal challenges like climate change or health pandemics, actors from across sectors must bridge knowledge cultures to weave together policy acumen, practical know-how, Indigenous Knowledge, lived experience, research, and other types of evidence.

This is a report from a workshop involving diverse participants including academic and non-academic, multiple disciplines and from many countries including some from lower and middle income countries. The group came together to explore engaged scholarship with a goal of creating recommendations to funders to support this important work. I love anything related to funders because they are a key player in shaping the research ecosystem able to shape incentives and careers. But funders themselves are not autonomous entities. They are governed by boards that are often dominated by academics and have legislated mandates that allow for little flexibility (ie not being able to fund community organizations).

The authors clearly state that what we call engaged scholarship isn’t new. And the recommendations are not new. But the authors are seeing new momentum, so it is helpful to draw on what may not be new and marshal it to help ride a wave of new momentum.

For those who have been at this a long time, not much is new but it is good to see it in one place and pointing in one direction rather than being segregated by geography or discipline.

The group identified that engaged scholarship is needed to:

  • “Support the achievement of equitable and sustainable societal outcomes by ensuring those closest to the problem are included in the research processes driving problem-solving efforts;
  • Increase the likelihood that research achieves intended impacts (e.g. informing programs or policies, influencing behaviors);
  • Build knowledge about the conditions that enable research use to lead to better outcomes (e.g., improved health and education)”

The recommendations for funders fall into three categories.

  1. “Incentivize Engaged Research
    1. Communicating the unique value and impact of engaged research
    1. Rewarding engaged research
    1. Creating, testing, and refining methods for assessing quality and impact
  2. Cultivate the enabling conditions for ethical and effective engaged research
    1. Promoting the principles of engaged researchDeveloping funding, financing, and administrative mechanisms
    1. Investing in systematic learning and evaluation about engaged research and research use
  3. Invest in infrastructure for engaged research
    1. Creating professional development pathways
    1. Resourcing boundary spanners, local actors, and the full evidence ecosystem
    1. Encouraging flexibility, course corrections, and context-specific evaluation”

Of these, the recommendation about infrastructure is worth some unpacking, especially the recommendation about “resourcing boundary spanners, local actors, and the full evidence ecosystem”. Part of this recommendation is funding intermediaries and brokers – many of the roles played by Research Impact Canada members. The recommendation observes that “too often, these critical connectors—with distinct knowledge, skills, and capacities—are often underfunded and undervalued.”

We have distinct knowledge, skills and capacities. We add value to engaged scholarship. But we are often part of the Hidden REF, unrecognized, under supported, under valued (see this post from 2014 where I describe our work as invisible like cellophane).

And one little nudge: check out references 32 and 33, which describe how “some innovative efforts have developed indicators of effectiveness to help understand the health and likelihood of impact for engaged research projects and approaches for defining and evaluating the quality of engaged research”. Indicators of effectiveness. So important.

Questions for Brokers:

  1. Are you invisible like cellophane? Are you feeling unrecognized, under supported and under valued? Or does your institution (and researchers and partners) see you as valued members of the process?
  2. Of the nine recommendations, which one(s) resonate most with you and why?
  3. What are your indicators of success in your role?

Research Impact Canada is producing this journal club series to make evidence on KMb more accessible to knowledge brokers and to create online discussion about research on knowledge mobilization. It is designed for knowledge brokers and other people interested in knowledge mobilization. Read this open access article. Then come back to this post and join the journal club by posting your comments

© Research Impact Canada. All rights reserved. No part of this site may be reproduced without our written permission.