Making research relevant to policy-makers, development actors, and local communities: NCCR North-South report on effectiveness of research for development

Bridging the gap between research and policy is of growing importance in international development. The National Centre of Competence in Research (NCCR) North-South has rich experience in collaborating beyond academic boundaries to make their research relevant to various societal actors. This publication is the first to provide an overview of the effectiveness of NCCR North-South researchers’ efforts to interact with policy, practice, and local communities with a view to effecting a change in practices. A systematic assessment of researchers’ interactions with non-academic partners is presented, based on principles of monitoring and evaluation. On this basis, tools for collective learning and widespread adaptation are proposed. The report shows with what types of societal actors NCCR North-South researchers collaborate and analyses examples of how researchers conduct dialogue beyond academic boundaries, leading to specific outcomes. It also explains the frame conditions considered decisive for successful and sustainable policy dialogue and concludes with recommendations about how the NCCR North-South can increase the effectiveness of its research for development. The publication is a valuable source of inspiration for those interested in better understanding how to generate the multiple benefits of making science relevant to society.

Exploring the effectiveness of development research with a monitoring and learning approach

There is a growing demand for better understanding of the link between research, policy and practice in development. This article provides findings from a study that aimed to gain insights into how researchers engage with their non-academic partners. It draws on experiences from the National Centre of Competence in Research North-South programme, a development research network of Swiss, African, Asian and Latin American institutions. Conceptually, this study is concerned with research effectiveness as a means to identify knowledge useful for society. Research can be improved and adapted when monitoring the effects of interactions between researchers and non-academic partners. Therefore, a monitoring and learning approach was chosen. This study reveals researchers' strategies in engaging with non-academic partners and points to framing conditions considered decisive for soccessful interactions. It concludes that reserachrs need to systematically analyse the socio-political context in which they intervene. By providing insights from the ground and reflecting on them in the light of the latest theoretical concepts, this article contributes to the emerging literature founded on practice-based experience.

Partnership Actions for Mitigating Syndromes (PAMS): Experience with a transdisciplinary tool in the NCCR North-South programme

Partnership Actions for Mitigating Syndromes (PAMS) are small transdisciplinary projects which bring scientific research insights from the NCCR North-South into policy and practice. They are implemented by researchers from different disciplines in collaboration with non-scientific actors. PAMS aim to implement and test approaches, methods and tools developed in research, in order to identify promising strategies and potentials for sustainable development. In this sense, they are solution-oriented. This paper will provide insights into our experience with PAMS, with a special focus on the implementation of transdisciplinarity and its outcomes. From 2001 to 2010, 77 PAMS were implemented in Africa, Asia and Latin America. An internal evaluation of the first 55 projects was conducted in 2006. Results of this evaluation led to a refinement and improvement of the tool. A second internal evaluation is currently underway in the NCCR North-South. This evaluation will provide an overview of 22 new PAMS. We will look at partners involved, project beneficiaries, activities implemented, outcomes achieved, and lessons learnt. In the first evaluation, transdisciplinarity was considered as “a form of collaboration within scientific fields … and as a form of continuous dialogue between research and society” (Messerli et al., 2007). The evaluation report concluded that this understanding of transdisciplinarity was not satisfactorily applied in the 55 projects. Only about half of the PAMS addressed mutual exchange between researchers and society. Some involved only one specific field of research and clearly lacked interdisciplinary co-operation, and most often knowledge was transferred mainly unilaterally from the scientific community to society, without society having any effect on science. It was therefore recommended to address transdisciplinarity more carefully in Phase 2 PAMS. The second evaluation, which is currently under way, is analysing whether and how this recommendation has been met, based on criteria defined in the NCCR North-South’s Outcome Monitoring Strategy. The analysis is focusing on partners with whom researchers interact and investigating whether practices have changed both in research and society. We are also exploring the role of researchers in PAMS. Preliminary results show that researchers can assume different roles, from direct implementation, mediation, and promotion of social learning between different actors, to giving advice as neutral outsiders.