A Risky Business? The Politics of Knowledge Transfer in Public Health

Against a backdrop of increasing commitments to evidence-informed public health, a wealth of studies explore how evidence is used in public-health decision-making, some of which have informed emerging guidelines for increasing research 'impact'. Much of this work appears to conflate increasing the use of research evidence with improving its use, despite the vast array of studies demonstrating that policymakers often employ evidence symbolically (Boswell, 2009). Moreover, advice for researchers on improving the policy 'impact' of their research frequently assumes that policymakers will welcome these efforts, if appropriately articulated (e.g. Lavis et al, 2005; Pope et al, 2006), in spite of claims many are already oversaturated with evidence (Stevens, 2011). Finally, often ignoring 'policy network' type theories, public health studies rarely consider the role of 'research mediators', such as third sector & private interests (Kromm, 2010). This project will use qualitative methods to begin addressing these gaps.

First, via a literature review & interviews with public health policymakers, the project will explore how individuals involved in developing UK public health policies perceive & experience efforts to increase/improve the use of evidence. Specifically, it will examine how these actors view tools & systems designed to support the use of evidence in policy decisions, such as policy-orientated systematic reviews, impact assessments & 'impact' guidelines/incentives for academics. It will consider whether policymakers are concerned about any of the following risks, identified as possibilities in existing research: (i) policymakers, already oversaturated with evidence (Stevens, 2011), will become increasingly overburdened (Smith & Meer, 2012); (ii) the 'symbolic' use of evidence will increase (Boswell, 2009; Smith & Meer, 2012); & (iii) evidence-based policy requirements will make it harder to pass new public health legislation (Smith et al, 2010a). I will also explore whether policymakers' perceptions of evidence-based public health policy appear to be changing over time or in relation to particular tools/systems by comparatively drawing on my existing (PhD & Post-Doctoral) data.

Second, the project will examine the role of potential 'research mediators', notably third sector & commercial organisations involved in public health policy groups (e.g. Public Health Responsibility Deals). Again using a literature review & interview data, but supplementing this with relevant documentary analysis (e.g. of policy submissions) & a series of short placements within third sector organisations, the project will explore how these actors inform the relationship between public health research & policy. This strand of the project will complement a growing interest in public health advocacy (Chapman, 2007; Kromm, 2010) & corporate public health policy influence (Freudenburg et al, 2008; Gilmore et al, 2011).

Finally, the findings from the above will inform a Delphi survey of public health researchers & research users which will examine how different groups think the use of research in policy ought to be incentivised & governed. The results will inform bespoke recommendations for different groups, plus a manual & short course for research users & mediators.

Theoretically, the findings will enable me to: unpack policymakers' experiences of tools/incentives to promote evidence use; outline the roles of 'research mediators' in the relationship between public health research & policy; & develop the ideational framework for understanding relationships between research & policy I set out in my PhD (see Case for Support) by incorporating 'research mediators'. Practically, the project will enable me to collaboratively develop (with participants) sector-specific recommendations for using evidence to improve public health policies. All of this should reinforce my emerging reputation as a leading knowledge transfer & health policy scholar

This project seeks to influence the ways in which various groups approach the promotion of public health evidence in policy, with the intention of supporting evidence use that improves public health policies & their outcomes (whilst minimising any associated risks). The following six groups are the most likely beneficiaries:
1. Public health policymakers: the project aims to ensure that researchers who attempt to engage with policymakers do so in ways which are feasible & beneficial for policymakers. It will explore how policymakers perceive & experience ongoing commitments to 'evidence-based policy' & newer emphases on 'research impact' & will seek to identify any concerns relating to these agendas. It will subsequently attempt to ensure relevant guidance addresses any identifiable concerns. The views of this group have already shaped the research proposal & will continue to inform the research as it progresses, including at the dissemination stage. This will involve a cross-sector seminar, a policy briefing, a project web-site, blog contributions, the offer of bespoke oral presentations & the development of a manual & Continuing Professional Development course.
2. Third sector organisations with an interest in public health: the project will provide important insights into how these actors view the relationship between public health research & policy and what role they play within this. The findings will be used to help ensure these groups are appropriately considered within guidelines for improving the use of public health evidence in policy. As above, the views of third sector public health organisations have informed the proposal and will continue to do so throughout the project. The findings will be promoted to this group via similar methods to those used for policymakers, a process which will be aided by the networks developed during the placements.
3. Academics interested in studying, theorising &/or improving knowledge translation and research impact: the project will weave together existing theories about knowledge transfer (including my own) with data and theories concerning the role of key 'research mediators' (third sector & commercial interests). This group will be invited to the workshop and will be targeted via conference papers, short commentaries (e.g. on the LSE impact blog, OpenDemocracy and the Times Higher Education Supplement) & all five peer-review journal articles: (see Academic Beneficiaries & Case for Support)
4. Public health researchers: the project will aim to improve the available guidance for public health researchers interested in achieving effective & ethical research impacts. It will seek to increase awareness within this group of: (i) policymakers' perceptions of the various tools & systems that are currently being promoted as means of increasing the use of evidence in policy; & (ii) the potential role of 'research mediators', such as third sector & commercial organisations, in the relationship between public health research & policy. Information for this group will be promoted via public health blogs & virtual networks, conference papers & at least three of the five peer-review journal articles (see Academic Beneficiaries & Case for Support for further details)
5. Organisations working to improve the relationship between research and policy, such as the ESRC, MRC and RCUK: the project will make a series of specific recommendations as to how 'impact' guidance provided by research funders & others might be improved in the basis of the findings, paying particular attention to the incorporation of potential 'research mediators'.
6. The impetus for all of the above is to improve the use of public health evidence in policymaking in ways that will lead to better health outcomes. Hence, the final group of potential beneficiaries, indirectly but still crucially, are those individuals and communities who currently bear the brunt of the UK's major public health problems