progress and lessons from the knowledge navigator programme local government knowledge navigator...
TRANSCRIPT
Progress and Lessons from the Knowledge Navigator
Programme
LOCAL GOVERNMENT KNOWLEDGE NAVIGATOR SEMINAR
27th March 2015
A broken bridge?
Identify local government knowledge needs
Test whether existing research is relevant to these
Find and publicise exemplars of councils that are making the most of research
Pilot approaches to packaging knowledge - Need 2 Know reviews
Advise on ways to better connect local government and research/researchers
Brief for Knowledge Navigator
Local government capacity and knowledge/evidence needs
Relevance of existing research base
Links between research and local government
Actions to strengthen evidence use by local government
A list of the main reports containing outputs are attached at the end of this presentation
Outputs Include an Overview of the State of:
Accessible, reliable and timely (answer today’s questions)
Co-definition of problems and co-production of solutions
Navigation aids and segmentation – who needs what knowledge and bringing it to their attention
Translation and transferability - help in understanding replicability and application in local context
Focus on local government perspective – national policy needs not necessarily the same as local needs
Research methodologies which support innovation
Outputs: Local Government Knowledge and Evidence
Needs
And a Challenging Context Demanding (for Example):
Ingenuity, innovation and forward thinking / early warning systems.
Anticipation / prevention / managing ‘demand’: intervention now to lower cost tomorrow.
New forms of organization / methods of communication and interaction / ways of working.
Handling complexity: in problems / communities / inter-relationships / new accountabilities.
Appealing to the public as citizens rather than as consumers of services.
Sharing ideas and learning: the danger of insularity.7
Actions
Change cultures in both communities Improve connectivity between and among the
communities Embed research in local government Seize some strategic opportunities to harness
research
Bristol
Sheffield
University of East Anglia
Southampton
IFS
Durham
Newcastle
A Few Lessons from Engagement with a Sample of
IAAs
Built on experience of other RCs’ IAAs
£470k for open competition to bottom up projects (£160k allocated 17 projects to date)
‘Let it happen organically’ (not orchestrated centrally)
£140k for PolicyBristol
Travel awards to meet national policy makers
Three projects with city council – directly elected mayors, ‘happy city’, ‘Green Cities’
Other projects with ‘intermediaries’ – schools, parent’s groups, youth charities
G4W – joint proposals but Cardiff slow and Bath no IAA
Bristol
£737,000 IAA
Good existing infrastructure for KE in social sciences (HEIF and internal funds)
IAA leveraged additional HEIF funding
Quarterly call for KE projects
Partnership building – build new, strengthen existing
Part-time research sabbaticals (in and out)
Promote KE and improve KE skill sets
Sheffield
Strong existing culture of working with schools and councils – many of the 13 departments are ‘practice based’
Collaboration through South Yorkshire LA University Network (Sheffield, Hallam and Barnsley Universities)
Workshops and Support to Local Plan development – Sheffield received £100k worth of consultancy for £40-5ok; critical friend for Doncaster (procurement barrier)
Two outgoing fellowships – Sheffield Planning and LEP
Four Incoming fellows in Crick Centre (one from local government, hoped for more) SG includes Carolyn Downs, Bob Kerslake and John Mothersole
Sheffield
Engagement with councils is uneven and depends on personal links (planning stronger than health and social care)
Engagement isn’t for all academics – ‘REF impact is driving some weak applications to IAA’
Councils may struggle to engage - ‘You need the right officers with the right mind sets in the right positions in the council to make it happen’
Spreading the IAA too thinly – ‘letting down problem external partners is uncomfortable’
Need for ‘more scalable KE platforms’
Sheffield
UEA
50% of IAA funds committed to strategic themes including:
i. Big Data & Societal Change, and Assessing and Influencing Policy; with
ii. Other potential strategic themes include water security, management and utilization; food production and consumption; behaviour and behaviour change; energy generation, retail and consumption;
iii. Cross faculty working, leveraging partnerships and other funding
20% of funds allocated to Rapid Responsive Mode in which UEA academics will be able to pitch for generally small projects, up to £10K
30% of funds for a Partnerships Manager to support two streams above.
IAA governance comprises an internal Delivery Board Chaired by an Executive Dean, and a more externally focussed Advisory Board with an Independent Chair (which will soon have its first meeting)
14
UEA
Norfolk County Council and Norwich City Council are both keen at CEO level to engage with the IAA
Key for the local authorities is extent to which their needs fit the declared funding and thematic structure of the IAA, and:
They have significant issues relating to Big Data e.g. flood defences;
Knowledge exchange needs which could be addressed in part through relatively small scale project funding
Much depends on the capacity, capability and approach of the Partnerships Manager: opportunity to create a bridge to the UEA IAA or to other HEs with an IAA, possibly through the SIG (which could also help them relate their needs to available funding or other research resource). 1
5
Southampton
Already policy@southampton to develop impact: a corporate University initiative: e.g. researchers, to deliver seminars and accessible literature on policy relevant topics.
IAA run in close conjunction. We engaged with Southampton, and with the South East Strategic Leaders
group of local authorities and Hampshire County Council to open exchanges with the Southampton and also – potentially – with other IAAs.
The University is eager to further engage with local government (although considering the balance between international; / national / sub-national engagement in relation to impact): there is already a history of past and current local government engagement.
Emerging from this: Common ground and potential for projects through the IAA,
starting ‘small’ and growing over time; Value in local council / local IAA liaison and partnership; but also Facilitation and connectivity to the wider IAA / research
‘universe’ where expertise isn’t available locally; and The need to find ways to communicate.
16
IFS Engage with local government (e.g. Lambeth on litter collection and
persuading people to manage it themselves; & Peterborough evaluating poverty alleviation).
Clear wish, and objective in business plan, to engage with local government.
Some IFS research agendas clearly relevant to local government: see potential and also mentioned a less high profile expertise in evaluation as potentially part of the ‘offer’;
Interest in issues such as local and regional growth and devolution ( currently focus Scotland): is there potential via IAA / other funding sources?
Have an agenda to ‘improve’ knowledge of local government both in communication terms and in terms of framing research findings
However, recognize that they don’t have routes into local government and interested in better connectivity and facilitation (have had conversations with LGA).
A clear example of a potentially willing organization that will benefit from help to facilitate local government engagement.
17
And A Rider We found a real desire by some IAA holders to work with
local government (Durham and Newcastle); but A challenge to find an initial common language / common
ground: communication but it can be done Importance of understanding – and being able to respond to
policy and practice needs: IAA (and wider research instrument) design key
Need help to route and connect researchers and local government
Knowing where to go for specific expertise around problems: recognizing that a local to local relationship won’t always meet this; and
Need the means to help councils who have well-defined research needs (e.g. Oxfordshire County Council)
Importance of evaluation (what works) and knowledge exchange, as well as ‘cutting edge’ new research
18
Annex: Local Government Knowledge Navigator Outputs To
Date
First LG Knowledge Navigator report “From Analysis to Action: Connecting Research and Local Government in an Age of Austerity’:
The identification of exemplars where research and local government collaboration has worked successfully (‘Collaboration in Action: local authorities that are making the most of research’)
Development, design and options appraisal for a new Research/Local Government web-based Knowledge Community
Analysis of local government engagement and themes in a major sample of ESRC grant awards
Assessment of ‘usability’ of ESRC instruments from a local government perspective
Engagement in emerging programmes eg ESRC Big Data Analysis of a joint SOLACE / LGA / Knowledge Navigator
survey of SOLACE members and their knowledge needs and sources (‘The role of Evidence and Research in Local Government’).
19
Annex: Local Government Knowledge Navigator Outputs To
Date
Six ‘Need to Know’ Research Reviews: that suggest a new and cost effective approach to making research accessible to local government (but see the lessons learned in the following section).
Seminars/debates that have generated profile/interest to key academic and Local Government audiences
Working papers on LG knowledge needs and our methodology. Engaged key players and potential resources, including the
What Works Centres, DCLG, and Cabinet Office to raise the profile of local government needs and the opportunities available
A submission of evidence to the Communities and Local Government Select Committee both by the Local Government Knowledge Navigators, and by two Need to Know review authors.
Engagement with ESRC’s Impact Accelerator Accounts; Consultation and review of ESRC strategic direction
20
