IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v31y2022i3p344-354..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interdisciplinary research and policy impacts: Assessing the significance of knowledge coproduction

Author

Listed:
  • Luisa Veras de Sandes-Guimarães
  • Raquel Velho
  • Guilherme Ary Plonski

Abstract

Research impact on various societal spheres has been increasingly demanded for funding purposes and as a form of demonstrating the relevance of scientific research for societal problems. In this context, interest in interdisciplinary research and knowledge coproduction has grown as a path to achieve this expected impact, but few studies have considered its conjoint association with societal impact. This article investigates how academic research undertaken in interdisciplinary groups impacts public policies. To this end, we used a multiple case study strategy (involving three broad interdisciplinary research groups) to understand how the differences regarding knowledge coproduction with policy actors were relevant to explain differences in research impacts: instrumental, conceptual, symbolic and capacity-building. All the groups studied presented some type of impact in public policies, with emphasis on conceptual impact. The importance of knowledge coproduction was highlighted in two broad interdisciplinary groups since they stood out with more instrumental impacts compared to the other one. We argue that the combination of broad interdisciplinarity of the group together with the coproduction of knowledge with policymakers as co-researchers produces research that has more impact on the public policy community, especially translated as instrumental impact.

Suggested Citation

  • Luisa Veras de Sandes-Guimarães & Raquel Velho & Guilherme Ary Plonski, 2022. "Interdisciplinary research and policy impacts: Assessing the significance of knowledge coproduction," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(3), pages 344-354.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:31:y:2022:i:3:p:344-354.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvac008
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marra, Mita, 2022. "Productive interactions in digital training partnerships: Lessons learned for regional development and university societal impact assessment," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    2. Marina Apgar & Mieke Snijder & Grace Lyn Higdon & Sylvia Szabo, 2023. "Evaluating Research for Development: Innovation to Navigate Complexity," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 35(2), pages 241-259, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:31:y:2022:i:3:p:344-354.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.