The literature review and early research confirms that the RAPID Programme is dealing with complex processes influenced by politics, actors and knowledge. Politics and institutions are influenced by paradigms and discourses, and “the information age”. Actors and networks interact in complex ways. Knowledge circulates through different media, often changes and has varying value. Analysis of the literature, surveys and preliminary case studies undertaken during the first phase has helped to identify some of the key factors influencing research policy linkages which will be explored in more detail during the second phase. These factors can be grouped into three broad, though overlapping, areas: the political and institutional context, research characteristics, links between researchers and policy makers, and the influence of external agencies.

Context: Politics and Institutions

The political, institutional, cultural and structural dimensions within which policy-makers work exert a strong influence on how research can contribute to policy. Factors within this area seem to fall into four groups:

Factors influencing policy formulation:
Policy makers and researchers are not only limited by macro political and economic structures (relating for example to issues regarding the nature of the political system, cultural attitudes and ‘national systems of innovation’) but also the assumptions underlying them. They are also affected by the various institutional pressures limiting and enabling them (the ideology of policymakers, policy narratives and, most importantly perhaps, the existence and nature of vested interests).

Factors influencing policy implementation:
The complexity and diversity of contexts intensifies even further when considering how policy is adapted, developed or distorted during implementation and practice. What influences policy practices varies according to the priorities of, and pressures on, bureaucrats, institutional incentives, ‘room for manoeuvre’, local history, and power relations.

Decisive moments in the policy process:
Whether by design or by accident, there are often key moments in policy processes; timing can be critical. There are different types of processes – fundamental, emergent, routine or incremental – which have different dynamics. Policy windows can be triggered, but more often they occur by chance or due to an external crisis.

Exogenous factors:
Work so far suggests that external influences play a large role in research-policy links in developing countries. These include effect of International politics, agreements and policy for example, the World Trade Organization (WTO) now represents a new set of international rules that is likely to have an impact on research policy links in countries already within the WTO as well as those trying to join. Donors are also important research funders in developing countries, and their funding priorities can significantly affect the focus, sources and dissemination of research. Donor policies can also exert a strong influence for example many bilateral and multilateral donors give an emphasis to issues of democracy, human rights and good governance. This has often resulted in moves to representative forms of governance and media freedom that have an impact on the context for bridging research and policy.

Research Characteristics: Relevance, Credibility and Communication

The quality of the evidence is clearly a key factor influencing research uptake by policy makers. The first phase identified two aspects of this which seem to be particularly important:

Relevance and credibility:
The relevance of research to policy, not only in terms of substance, but also its operational use for policymakers, is often critical. The credibility of individual research findings are affected not only by the research approach and methodologies used, but also by the personalities and reputations of the researchers. High consensus in a research community can enhance credibility, but conflicting views can enhance visibility. Indigenous versus exogenous knowledge and local involvement are also important factors.

Communication:
There is no shortage of ideas about why some information makes a mark. The sources and conveyors of information may be as influential as the content; people accept information more readily from sources they trust. There is increasing emphasis placed on interactive models of communication, rather than traditional linear approaches. Phase one evidence supports two key issues: providing solutions as a way to increase interest; and, the importance of packaging and targeting messages. Often, there needs to be substantial pressure to challenge the ‘framework of possible thought’ of policymakers.

Links: Networks, Civil Society and Trust

The nature of the relationship between researchers and policy makers shapes how much influence they have over each other. This arena is informed by literature on policy processes, networks, campaigning, social epidemics, democracy and governance, and by the results of the surveys and case studies, but the conclusions so far are less clear. Three sets of issues however are clearly important:

Networks and influence:
There is much debate about the roles of different various types of communities and networks, such as epistemic communities, policy communities, advocacy coalitions (or communities of practice), and informal shadow networks in the policy process. Various types of networks and communities were clearly important in most of the case studies. It is clear that networks can provide an efficient means of sharing and enhancing coordination and cooperation, though it is less clear about which kind of network works best in particular circumstances. How researchers engage with policy networks and advocacy coalitions as well as utilize informal networks (the ‘shadow system’) clearly merits further study.

Legitimacy:
In addition to ‘upward’ links to various policy networks and decision-makers, the framework highlights the importance of ‘downward’ links to the populations and communities. This can help improve the legitimacy of organizations. A system of downward links and accountability should also enhance the credibility of the evidence and make it more difficult for policymakers to ignore. Such processes may be particularly important for the sustainability of policy change.

Trust:
The issue of trust is one that cuts across these two; the likelihood of research being used increases if there is a high level of mutual trust between researchers and policy-makers. Such relations contribute to the legitimacy of researchers in policy dynamics.