Villanova Public Administration’s Post

New resource for policy organisations alert from CAPE - Capabilities in Academic-Policy Engagement: "Areas of Research Interest - A Practical Guide". Designed for policy professionals, this guide should be of particular relevance to combined and local authorities and other organisations who want to articulate their evidence needs to the academic community. It walks organisations through the stages of setting up Areas of Research interest, includes case studies from leading examples, and practical tools to support the process. Download ➡️ https://lnkd.in/euXvHpbV

Pleased to see this out with Dersu Ekim Tanca. I want to thank Daniel Béland, Philip Rocco, Iris Geva-May, and other participants of the JCPA workshop – Territorial Governance & Comparative Policy Analysis at the Subnational Level. Check out the special issue of The Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis on Territorial Governance & Comparative Policy Analysis at the Subnational Level. Abstract: "As social scientists take space seriously and engage in systematic comparisons of subnational entities within and across nations, there is a need to systematically ground comparative policy analyses (CPA) within this research program. But, when it comes to research design concerns, what are the implications of this cross-fertilization? By drawing on the literatures on the subnational research tradition and the comparative method, and connecting them to CPA, this paper addresses key practical, analytical, methodological, and data concerns in instances in which qualitative comparisons of two or more cases (i.e. small-N) are employed and subnational levels are the main units of analysis. To scale down the comparative method and apply it to subnational policy analyses, the paper provides guidance on how to design and conduct comparative subnational research within or across countries, including key lessons, best practices, and data resources." https://lnkd.in/e37-cqQg

I'm very pleased to share a new article 'Knowledge brokering for public sector reform' published in the Australian Journal of Public Administration. The article asks how and where university-produced research can best support evidence-based reform and makes the case for harnessing the relational nature of knowledge brokering and trialling new mechanism for research–practitioner partnerships. https://lnkd.in/g7iZT8Xr I see this article as particularly well timed, with Secretary of the Treasury Dr Steven Kennedy recently observing that "the role of our academic community cannot be understated in helping solve some of our biggest policy challenges. …Collaboration among researchers and policymakers is essential to ensure evidence is relevant, timely, and applicable to policy deliberations”. However, a key consideration for policymakers is how to establish arrangements and incentives that are mutually beneficial for researchers and practitioners alike. It is hoped that this article can inform a future research and practice agenda examining just this.

ICSSR is today launching ICSSR Empirical Projects Working Paper Series: Based on the Outcomes of the Empirical Studies on the Various Schemes/Public Policy Initiatives 2023-2024 https://lnkd.in/gGjXi_wx

A nice article about the role of knowledge brokers in public sector reform that has piqued my interest on so many levels. Its important to remind ourselves that many university-based researchers have not only worked in academia. They include people with a wealth of experience gained from working in different types of organisations (including the public and commercial sectors) and contexts, may be multi-disciplined, and often have either worked or collaborated internationally and may continue to do so. What a resource to tap into. But universities might not be the easiest organisations to work with - researchers are held to high ethical standards and the processes that govern our work are not necessarily understood by public servants when commissioning research. This is where brokers come in - they can help bridge that divide which is particularly useful if parties are not familiar with the way each other works. Given many researchers have experience working in the public service, and many public servants have completed higher degrees in research, the level of information asymmetry between parties may vary. So perhaps knowledge brokers should be used as needed rather than mandated - just to save a few dollars that could be spent elsewhere. Having completed several research projects with different types of knowledge brokers over the years, and as someone who has both commissioned research and delivered research, in my experience the models that appear to work best is where brokers have an enabling role and work alongside government to broker knowledge. Having all parties at the table allows research to have high utility and respond to changing contexts, needs and emerging findings. This has always given me a sense that government agencies are really interested in developing knowledge and understanding and applying it, as opposed to more transactional hands-off forms of brokering where it is perhaps unclear if or how the research will ever be used. Brokers also offer an intermediary model of contracting that overcome many of the challenges government experiences in contracting complex things well. If interested, you'll see the link in my thinking here https://lnkd.in/gup-398R. Lots to mull over. And it will be an interesting space to watch as new knowledge brokers emerge. Let's just hope it doesn't increase the distance between researchers and policy makers and risk information being lost in translation.

How academics can engage with government? Check out the guide below ⬇️

An excellent resource for academic researchers and other experts keen to learn about and engage with policymaking! #Science4Policy, #ScienceForPolicy, #EvidenceBasedPolicy, #ScienceToAction, #ActionableScience, #ScienceDiplomacy, #KnowledgeExchange, #ResearchCommunity, #DataForPolicy, #Policy, #DecisionMaking

#GrantSummit Hybrid: Linda Wastyn, Ph.D., CFRE, GPC: Are you new to the grants profession or "only" write grants and want to learn how to find more grant sources? This session will provide a basic understanding of the grant research process. https://buff.ly/4e6Yt5l

Did you see the latest issue of the Oregon Quarterly features a question highlighting COE research? Take the "You Think You Know UO Research" quiz now! https://lnkd.in/gNaxpZDf

Today's take home message from the EACCME – UEMS Conference on CME-CPD: To preserve the integrity of science in CME, we must constantly be aware of and avoid bias. It's more than just disclosing the faculty's conflict of interest. So how do we go about it? By implementing diverse and inclusive selection of topics and faculty members. It's also essential to seek feedback from both the learners and the faculty (although it's not always easy to get that feedback - nobody loves filling out surveys).