Research and policy in international development: introduction

JULIUS COURT, INGIE HOVLAND and JOHN YOUNG

Background

The challenge of evidence-based policy making

Better utilization of research and evidence in development policy and practice can help save lives, reduce poverty and improve the quality of life. For instance, the results of household disease surveys informed processes of health service reform which contributed to 43 and 46 per cent reductions in infant mortality between 2000 and 2003 in two districts in rural Tanzania. A recent study by the UK Department for International Development (DFID), as part of its effort to develop a new research policy, forcefully catalogues the value of research for development (Surr et al. 2002). However, researchers frequently do not see influencing activities as a priority once the research is completed. Policy makers and other stakeholders often do not know what research exists, which policies are most suitable, or how they can best be implemented in different contexts. Or, as is illustrated (with devastating consequences) by the lack of response to HIV/AIDS in some countries, policy makers may be unwilling to act on the evidence.

Major investment goes into research on international development – from stakeholders in the South (government and non-government) and from governments in the North and international agencies. While an exact figure is difficult to arrive at, we estimate that Northern and international sources provide around US$3 billion for international development research. If we are to reduce poverty in the South and meet the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), the key questions are: When and why does development research make a difference? Why do some research findings influence policy and practice while others do not? And how can we promote more informed international development policy?

Despite the importance of research–policy questions in the international development sector, very little relevant academic work exists on the topic. Studies on evidence-based policy have mainly focused on policy processes in the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries, paying particular attention to the national medical and educational sectors in these countries. In the USA, the 1980s has been termed the golden age of studies on knowledge utilization, following Weiss's (1977) seminal research on 'knowledge creep' and 'percolation'. In the UK, evidence-based policy is the central theme of the Centre for Management and Policy Studies, established by the Cabinet Office in mid-1999. In the same year, the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) established the Evidence Based Policy and Practice Initiative, a collaborative network of seven research units aiming to bring social-science research nearer to the decision-making process.

Analytical reflection on the many different contexts and factors influencing research–policy processes in countries outside the OECD is much more rare. This is no small challenge, as the massive diversity of cultural, economic and political contexts makes it especially difficult to draw valid generalizations and lessons from existing experience and theory. In addition, international actors have an exaggerated impact on research and policy processes in several countries in the South. Alongside these analytic gaps, there is a lack of relevant case-study material to illustrate and highlight successful and unsuccessful practices.

There has been some interest in these questions in the international development sector over the past few years. In 1998, the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) identified a six-point programme for improving the policy impact of research (Garrett and Islam 1998). The Overseas Development Institute (ODI) has been researching research–policy linkages since 1999, with an early report providing a 21-point checklist of what makes policies happen (Sutton 1999). Impact assessments by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) have focused increasingly over the last few years on measuring the policy impact of its research programmes, and how it can be improved. The link between research and policy has been a key issue for the Global Development Network (GDN) since its inception in 1999. The International Development Research Centre (IDRC) (Canada) is currently completing a strategic evaluation of the influence of IDRC-supported research on public policy.

This volume aims to enhance understanding of how research can contribute to pro-poor policy and practice. We believe it is a useful contribution for a number of reasons. First, it presents a cohesive framework that can be used to understand and analyse research–policy linkages. Second, it provides evidence from four systematic and in-depth case studies. The approach is innovative in that each case details instances of policy change and then does a 'tracer' study backwards in time to chart the different factors – including research – that led to the policy shift. We believe the approach is valuable in that it highlights the range of factors that affect policy uptake of research. Third, through comparison across the four cases, we draw out themes that will be relevant to those involved in development research or policy and who wish to use evidence to contribute to pro-poor policy making. In particular, we provide suggestions for how researchers might enhance the policy impact of their work.

The global context

An understanding of research–policy linkages in international development needs to take into account both the wide range of different contexts that development policies appear in, and the key challenges of the macro-level political context. There are a number of notable global trends here.

Democratization has been one of the striking developments of the past decades. In 1901, there were no nations that could be considered democratic...