Bridging knowledge divides

Strengthening research-policy linkages through DPRN

Tags: Knowledge Management

This study examines how the Development Policy Review Network (DPRN) has contributed to more effective research-policy linkages in the field of Dutch Development Cooperation. The objective of the study comes forth from the difficulty DPRN has experienced in involving policymakers (defined as staff of ministries and embassies) in its activities.

DPRN was set up in 2004 in order to stimulate informed debate and knowledge exchange amongst various sectors (policy, science, practice and business) of development experts in the Netherlands and Flanders. The network is facilitated by a subsidy of the Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which became especially interested in bridging these knowledge divides following the publication their latest policy memorandum on research and knowledge for development in 2005.

 

The content of the study is twofold. First, it analyses the broader context in which DPRN is operating by looking at the ways knowledge exchange and intersectoral cooperation are perceived by various stakeholders. Concerning the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, it shows that even though the new knowledge policy is in place, it cannot be characterised as a knowledge-intensive organisation. Internally, knowledge building is hampered by amongst others a rotating personnel system favouring generalist knowledge, and a diplomatic culture wherein a critical stand towards its own functioning is not greatly appreciated. Externally, the Ministry is regarded as quite ‘closed’ to other actors - including other ministries.

 

The knowledge of the other sectors, e.g. science, practice, and business, shows a rather fragmented picture, with no permanent knowledge flows in place between the Ministry and these organisations. Communication with the Ministry can be improved in order to enhance the impact of knowledge on policy. In this respect there are still significant knowledge divides to be bridged, a situation that is counteracted by prevailing stereotypes.

 

In this sense DPRN thus still has an important function to fulfil, and therefore the second part of the research is dedicated to a more detailed assessment of DPRN’s activities. The study illustrates that DPRN is indeed considered a relevant institution for bridging knowledge divides and overcoming stereotypes. Partners carrying out activities in DPRN’s framework feel they have significant ownership and many of them appreciate the fact through DPRN they have been able to place an issue higher up the policy agenda. Policymakers’ involvement has improved, not only in terms of participants but also through acting as co-organisers of DPRN activities. Especially the chosen for thematic focus seems to fosters relations with policymakers of the Ministry’s thematic policy departments. In this regard, it is also interesting to note that, besides policymakers from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, other ministries are also becoming increasingly involved. Something that offers opportunities for interdepartmental cooperation and policy coherence processes.

 

However, there are some things that can be improved by the DPRN Task Force, and therefore it is recommended first of all to better Link the DPRN activities with other activities that have a similar focus. Not only will this give more direction to DPRN as a whole, for policymakers especially this would be beneficial in terms of time-investments. The second recommendation refers to the matter of steering and involvement of the Task Force. When this would be more actively managed, partners in DPRN are expected to benefit more from the Task Force’s knowledge and contacts, and the involvement and expectations of policymakers can be better monitored.

Author: Kim de Vries, Programme Assistant DPRN