RAPID Tools: Successful Communication Online Toolkit

The literature on research communication

There is already considerable literature on communication of research, in and for development. Based on RAPID's literature review of around 100 books and articles on communication of research for poverty reduction, the following recommendations sum up some of the received wisdom in this field:

How to improve communication of research to policymakers:

Strengthen researchers' communication skills (in order to get the target group right, get the format right, get the timing right, etc.).
Aim for close collaboration between researchers and policymakers.
Construct an appropriate platform from which to communicate (a platform of broad engagement, e.g. a public campaign, is more likely to be heard).
Strengthen institutional policy capacity for uptake (government departments may not be able to use research because of lack of staff or organisational capacity).

How to improve communication of research to (other) researchers:

Strengthen Southern research capacity in order to enable Southern researchers to access Northern-produced research.
Support research networks, especially electronic and/or regional networks.
Continue with dissemination of development research, through for example the id21 format - popular with academics.

How to improve communication of research to end users (i.e. the poor and organisations working with the poor):

Incorporate communication activities into project design, taking into account, for example, gender, local context and existing ways of communicating, and possibilities for new ways of communicating through Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs).
Encourage user engagement, map existing information demand and information-use environment, and promote participative communication for empowerment.
Create an enabling environment (as failure to use research/information is not always due to lack of communication, but can instead be due to lack of a favourable political environment or lack of resources).

In addition to the received wisdom, there are a few issues that are underrepresented in the literature, but which nevertheless seem to be emerging as important themes:

Approach communication as a systemic issue: The most evident gap in the field is perhaps the failure to see communication as a systemic issue (i.e. linked to economic and political processes in society). Many of the current recommendations offer several possible communication options for individuals and local or project level activities, but have very little to say about how to approach or improve communication at a systemic level. The DFID Research Policy Paper (Surr et al (2002) Research for Poverty Reduction: DFID Research Policy Paper, UK Department for International Development, London, available through www.dfid.gov.uk) as begun to address this issue.
Improve the conditions under which research is communicated: The success (or failure) of communication at an individual, local or project level is largely determined by wider systems - including the political environment and socio-economic conditions. The conditions under which research is communicated can have a far more decisive effect on research uptake than the actual communication content, channel or strategy. While NGOs and other intermediary organisations have a comparative advantage to communicate at the project and interpersonal levels, the comparative advantage of large CSOs and bilateral agencies may lie at a systemic level.
Facilitate different levels of user engagement in communication of research: User engagement is the key to taking communication beyond dissemination. It can be approached at three levels, in relation to: (i) the importance of mapping Southern research demand; (ii) how to strengthen Southern research capacity; and (iii) how to facilitate Southern research communication. While the current recommendations from the literature focus on the first two points (Southern research demand and Southern research capacity), there is relatively little discussion concerning user engagement at the level of Southern research communication. The ability to use and shape communication processes are often correlated with the ability to engage in and shape decision-making processes, and is therefore a crucial component of any empowerment process.
Invest in communication for double loop learning: Many of the current recommendations on communication aim to maximise the direct impact of research on policy and practice. In the process they frequently lose sight of the more gradual and indirect impact that research can have. The current focus is on instrumental change through immediate and identifiable change in policies, and less on conceptual change in the way we see the world and the concepts we use to understand it. The current literature therefore tends to encourage single loop learning (i.e. bringing about corrective action within existing guidelines and frameworks), but largely overlooks the important but gradual contribution that research can make for double loop learning (i.e. independent and critical debate about the frameworks themselves). Some of these issues are beginning to be addressed through investment in networks, as networks can potentially foster engaged debate on development policy and practice.

For further information and a more comprehensive discussion of these points, please see the full paper - Communication of Research for Poverty Reduction: A Literature Review' ODI Working Paper 227.