2.4.1 Different worldviews of researchers and policymakers

The most basic premise of this guide is that experts and professionals can develop advice in a way that it becomes practically implementable within government programs.¹ This assumes a strong relationship and easy communication between experts/advisors and those supporting and managing such programs, that is, government officials, civil servants, and politicians. However, according to the literature in this area, this relationship is a continual challenge because academics and policymakers tend to see the world in very different ways.² A basic overview of the hurdle is as follows:

Table 3.

The different worldviews of researchers and policymakers

Researchers tend to:	Policymakers tend to:
continually question the fundamentals of policy approaches and thus are often seen as too radical in their proposals	have a program management and political view of public policy and are resistant to changes
be impractical or not see enough of the constraints of management and delivery of everyday government and services	be driven primarily by budget and capacity restrictions, political will, and election/budgetary cycles
talk in academic concepts and jargon	talk in terms of bureaucracy, budgets, and politics
be motivated by publication, funding, and donor agendas, recognition and new research commissions	be motivated by doing what works and what fits

Researchers tend to:

Policymakers tend to:

continually question the fundamentals of policy approaches and thus are often seen as too radical in their proposals

have a program management and political view of public policy and are resistant to changes

be impractical or not see enough of the constraints of management and delivery of everyday government and services

be driven primarily by budget and capacity restrictions, political will, and election/budgetary cycles

talk in academic concepts and jargon

talk in terms of bureaucracy, budgets, and politics

be motivated by publication, funding, and donor agendas, recognition and new research commissions

be motivated by doing what works and what fits

As one source put it “Often it seems as though the two groups not only come from different cultures, but in fact speak different languages. As a result communication between the two often falters, leaving both frustrated.”³ The challenge as advocates is to bridge between with two different perceptions: one more theoretical, objective, and universal and the other more practical, political, and context-driven. Realizing the shape of the challenge is an issue that goes to the heart of all aspects of a policy research project from the research design to the policy paper writing and advocacy at all levels. Ultimately, having a chance of influencing a target decision means having to contend with a perception often held by decisionmakers that policy research is “the opposite of action, rather than the opposite of ignorance.”⁴

Researchers often see objective policy choices; policymakers see practical and political ones.

This tension between researchers and policymakers assumes a developed culture of research influencing decisionmaking that is often not the case in transition countries, which we discuss further in section 2.4.5. Nevertheless, the core of this challenge is still relevant to anyone coming from outside of government and trying to advocate for change in public policy.

Jones 2009. ↩︎
Canadian Institute for Health Information 2004, Carden 2004, 2009, Court and Young 2003, Davies 2004, Glover 2005, International Development Research Centre 2004, Jones 2009, Neilson 2003, Stone and Maxwell 2005. ↩︎
Canadian Institute for Health Information 2004. ↩︎
Court and Young 2003. ↩︎