Research-policy exchange in Scotland

Executive summary

Over the past two decades, there has been a step change in the volume and quality of research policy exchange (RPE) across the UK and in Scotland. The focus on evidence-based policymaking in government, and the “impact” agenda in higher education, have galvanised investment in a range of RPE structures. These include in-house analytics, scientific advisory systems, policy-oriented centres and institutes, and mobility schemes. At the same time, higher education institutions (HEIs), research and intermediary organisations have expanded support for training and engagement. Scotland exemplifies this trend, benefitting from an array of structures to support RPE, and extensive engagement across Scottish Government (SG), Parliament and research organisations (ROs).

Much is at stake in getting this right. Research plays a crucial role in supporting policy decisions, especially in complex and risky areas such as climate change, economic growth, child poverty, technological change, or global order. HEIs and researchers are keen to apply their research to benefit society and increasingly need to demonstrate these contributions to justify funding. At a time of constrained resources, it is vital that Scotland’s considerable investment in RPE is wisely allocated.

Supported by Universities Scotland and the Royal Society of Edinburgh (RSE), this report is a first step in bringing together policymakers, research, HEIs and intermediary organisations to understand and improve how we deliver RPE in Scotland.

Motivations

This report starts by unpacking the often conflicting motivations for RPE. For policymakers, RPE can help identify new policy problems and develop responses. It can also help substantiate contested decisions, signal competence, and support alliance-building. Researchers and HEIs are motivated to engage in RPE to ensure their research has impact. They also need to evidence the impact of particular researchers or projects, often leading to a fragmented approach to engagement.

These diverse motivations mean that the priorities of policymakers and researchers do not always align. This necessitates astute design of RPE structures and activities, to ensure modes of engagement deliver the goals of different participants.

Structures and support

The report identifies five main institutional structures that can support RPE objectives.

1. In-house analytical teams: Embedded within government departments, these teams are agile and tailored to deliver policy-aligned research, primarily for policy development and substantiation. However, challenges include maintaining research independence and resource limitations.
2. Commissioned research: Governments frequently commission research to address policy gaps, often relying on consultants due to time constraints. While this offers independent analysis, challenges include ensuring alignment with policy needs and resourcing.
3. Scientific advisory systems: Chief scientific advisers (CSAs) and advisory councils support strategic and detailed policy advice, enhancing government credibility. However, tracing the specific impacts of this advice can be difficult.
4. Centres and institutes: These entities, often funded by government or external bodies, provide policy-relevant research and foster alliances. Their independence can lead to a drift from immediate policy priorities, requiring ongoing alignment mechanisms.
5. Mobility schemes: These initiatives allow researchers to engage directly with policy contexts, fostering skills and relationships. Effective implementation requires alignment of expertise with policy needs and sustained postengagement support.

A survey of HEIs undertaken for this report also identified key trends in support for RPE. Support has grown substantially over the past decade, with HEIs increasingly focussing investment in specialised support. Generating and evidencing policy impact is a crucial aspect of HEI engagement, with over a third of all REF2021 case studies identified through the survey involving policy impact.

Recommendations

The report suggests building a cohesive RPE approach in Scotland, leveraging its interconnectivity, small scale, and collaborative potential. The approach adopted needs to be cost-effective, and to enhance equality, diversity, and inclusion. Building on these principles, initial engagement with stakeholders has identified the following priorities.

• Tailor engagement: Understand the different motivations of parties involved in RPE. Design engagement to meet these needs effectively, ensuring alignment with policy priorities through tools like areas of research interest (ARIs).
• Collaborate: Reduce fragmentation and inefficiencies by integrating RPE activities and synthesising research across institutions. Ensure that funding schemes incentivise collaboration.
• Capacity-building: Conduct audits to identify gaps in RPE capacity across SG priorities. Leverage secondments and fellowships to extend benefits across the research community.
• Reward RPE: Recognise and incentivise researchers’ contributions to policy. Ensure diverse voices are included in RPE, emphasising long-term and diffuse impacts of research.

Download

Download the research-policy exchange in Scotland report (1MB, PDF)