An unfortunate reality of research is that it often fails to connect with real work and influence on the ground. Research that is too narrowly academic may be published in peer-reviewed journals, but may never be used. Some research is applied and policy-focused, but may not be well positioned for influence.
The disconnect between research and influence was among the questions examined in our recent learning evaluation of the International Development Research Centre (IDRC)’s Employment and Growth (EG) program. We assessed research quality for a representative sample of projects supported by the EG program between 2014 and 2018. IDRC defines research quality widely, considering not only methodological rigor but also importance, legitimacy (gender and contextual grounding), and positioning for use. These factors are often tied. Research alone is not enough.
In positioning for use, what strategies and partnerships can research teams pursue to better the chances for systemic influence? It’s contextual but some considerations seem critical to influence: gendered social norms; the state of research and practice on the ground; political will and the policy environment (often distinct areas).
Sometimes, the best research can do is shine a light on what is possible such as the care-giving research in China that allowed home day cares. In other contexts, action research can leverage a multi-stakeholder network as in the case of social protection and financial inclusion in Latin America.
This brief was prepared by Nanci Lee and Neale MacMillan based on findings from the Employment and Growth Learning Evaluation carried out by Sisters Ink Ltd. in 2018. The evaluation looked at the drivers of rigorous and grounded influential research, and likely impact on the economic empowerment of women and youth.