Grainne KellyPolicy/Practice Coordinator

International Conflict Research Institute

www.incore.ulster.ac.uk

Timing is everything: balancing topicality, relevance and precision in delivering

evidence-based policy making

www.incore.ulster.ac.uk

Background

� Pressing policy issue.

� Yet, one beset by political division and ideological stalemate.

� Research topic: Good relations priorities for NI.

� Challenging area. How can policies develop relationships?

� Have previous experience which had policy implications.

� Timely to undertake new work.

� New context: engage with the policymakers.

Developing the research focus

� Deliberate strategy: go to the heart of government.

� Sell them the pitch.

� Negotiate on the pitch.

� Reflect on the difference between A (our proposal) and B (their needs).

� Agree on a way forward.

� Timeframe: Feb 2010 – April 2011.

Topicality: Prevailing Policy Environment

� Policy Context

Shared Future (2005)

Cohesion, Sharing and Integration. (2008-)

� Another consultation process.

Prevailing Public Environment:

� Discontent and frustration.

� Ambivalence and wariness.

� Stagnation.

Research Relevance

Significant levels of quantitative data available.

Self-consciously qualitative research:

� 21-30 informants.

� Process of identifying: collaborative.

� Five key questions. Interviews began June 2011.

� August 2011: Policy consultation document released.

� Activity in external environment.

� Qualitative discussions changed.

Topicality, relevance and precision

� Challenge: Surely you are wishing to affect policymaking?

� Do you go with the flow of conversation, or stick rigidly to the research questions?

� Interviews became an ongoing negotiation between focusing on the questions, and focusing on the policy realities.

Dissemination strategy

� Consultation ended in October 2010.

� Interviews continued until December 2010.

� First draft write up, January 2011. Meetings with officials on key findings.

� Feedback: validates policy focus in consultation document.

� However, quality and nature of the document was questioned by respondents.

� Discussions on emphasis of findings. Continued negotiation, based on political sensitivities.

Balance Sheet

� Findings: deeply critical of the political elites.

� Officials had commissioned with the work.

� Balance of speedy dissemination vs. time for reflection and analysis.

� Highly topical, engagement, back-and-forth.

� Discrete piece of work. Had the opportunity to make a difference.

� Informants were very engaged.

Reflections on relationship

� Honest relationship with senior civil servants.

� Unsure of power dynamics between civil servants, special advisors and political leaders.

� Civil servants working within challenging and sensitive political dynamics.

� Conscious not to get involved, but also to be mindful of this reality.

Researcher Gremlins

� Did I speak with the right people?

� Was critical distance maintained?

� How can we ensure appropriate and wide dissemination?

INCOREInternational Conflict Research Institute

www.incore.ulster.ac.uk

Presented at the 2nd European

conference on Qualitative Research for

Policy Making, 26 -27 May 2011, Belfast

For more information

Please visit: http://www.merlien.org