Upload
kiara
View
36
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Real-world impacts from research: Evidence & lessons. David Pannell Centre for Environmental Economics and Policy School of Agricultural and Resource Economics. For this PPT see www.davidpannell.net under “Talks”. Growing interest. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Real-world impacts from research: Evidence & lessonsDavid PannellCentre for Environmental Economics and PolicySchool of Agricultural and Resource Economics
For this PPT see www.davidpannell.net under “Talks”
Growing interest· Perception: we need to do better at convincing
government about benefits of research
· ARC discussing how to include real-world impact in ERA
· UK’s Research Excellence Framework: 20% of funding based on “impact” from 2014.
Trial by universities, 2012· Group of Eight (Go8) and
Aust Technology Network of Universities (ATN)
· Each university submitted cherry-picked case studies (165 submissions)
· Evaluated by people from industry & government
· 24 ‘best’ selected
Plan· An example research project
Was selected in the GO8/ATN · Some evidence about impact
· Measuring impact
· Strategies for having impact
Example
2000: Salinity was a hot topic
$1.4 billion of public funding
I was shocked· Poor design of the program
· Program developers seemed to have been unaware of crucial areas of salinity research and their implications
· No chance of any significant benefits
My response· Media· Discussion papers · Presentations· Submissions
Tried to help them· Developed INFFER (Investment Framework for
Environmental Resources)A tool for integrating the science with other infoDevelop logical, evidence-based environmental
projectsAssess value for moneyPrioritise projects
INFFER strategy· Extensive input by users· Make tools as simple as possible· Provide training and help desk for users· Readable documentation· Public critiques of existing approaches· Attempt to influence gov’t agencies to change the
signals
Regional NRM application
Policy impacts· Senate inquiry (2006)
Recommended use of INFFER· NRM Ministerial Council (2007)
Endorsed new set of principles for investment in salinity
· Victorian Government, Biodiversity White Paper “INFFER will be utilised for the next five years”.
· Caring for our Country Influenced design of project template
Lessons: Use of science· If you want people to use good science, the
people issues are crucialRelationshipsCommunication
· Most prospective users were happy with current (very poor) approach
· Didn’t perceive that government would reward them for doing it better
Lessons: User capacity· Lack of capacity to formally integrate disparate
technical and socio-economic information for decision making
· Lack of expertise in economics and social science
· Lack of time to read things· People misinterpret things easily
Research versus? Impact· Has taken considerable effort beyond traditional
researchTime commitmentNew skills and knowledgeNew networks
· Satisfying but very challenging to make a difference
· Worth it?
versus?and?
Research versus? Impact· Various benefits for my research
· Interesting problems and issues arise
· Innovation - outside what’s currently in journals
· Better understanding of research relevance
· Journal papers generatedDirectly part of the INFFER work: 17Related/stimulated by: 16
· Reputation for useful research easier to get funding (unsolicited approaches offering $)
versus?and?
Evidence about impact
Evidence of high returns· Estimated rates of return to R&D are typically
very highCan indicate 30%, 50%, 100% annual rate of return
· Credible?$1 invested at 50% over 100 years = $4E17 (a
million times Australia’s annual GDP)· Sound analyses still show good returns
For both applied and basic research
Heterogeneity· The distribution of benefits is highly skewed
· Most research has low impact
· A small number of projects have huge impactMore than enough to pay for the rest
Example: CRC program· Benefits for 1991 to 2017
· The CRC program generated a net economic benefit of $7.5 billion over the study period
· Annual contribution of $278 million
· BCR = 3.1
Impact is often slow· Lags to impact usually measured in decades
· e.g. US agriculture
· From first investment to peak impact = 24 years
· Still generating benefits after 50 years
· Several lagsResearch lagCommercialisation lagAdoption lag Impact lag
Longer lags = lower net benefits· Discounting allowing for interest costs on the
up-front investment
· 30-year lag, 7% discount rate, benefits reduced by 87%
· The high measured rates of return occur despite the long time lags
Supply push vs demand pull· Science push (Bush, 1945)
· Implicit in the “linear model”Basic R Applied R Technology Benefits
· Demand pull (Schmookler, 1966)Market demand Applied R Technology Benefits
· Big debate in the 1960s
· Resolved in the 1970s – innovation is an iterative process – both push and pull matter
Measuring impact
Determinants of benefits· Scale of relevance
· Adoptability of the research
· Benefits per unit
· Probability of research success
· Share of the credit attributable to particular research
· Time lags
With vs without
0 5 10 15 20 250
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
With project
Without project
Year
Wel
fare
/util
ity/in
com
e
Applicability?· The theory is relatively straightforward
· It has been applied successfully in many case studiesEspecially agriculture
But …· It takes resources and skills
· Easier … for physical products than for knowledge if the benefits arise in markets if the benefits occur quickly for applied than for basic research
· Much university research is not in the categories that are relatively easy to evaluateKnowledge, public goods, long time lags, basic
What will ERA do?· Perhaps copy the UK Research Excellence
Framework
· Two componentsCase studies of impactThe submitting unit's approach to enabling impact
from its research· They won’t expect an economic evaluation
If it’s case studies, you’ll need to· Make the case/tell the story
· Link elements in chain from research to impact
· Provide evidence
· Note: in Go8/ATN trial, many nominations did this poorlyThe chain was incompleteThe evidence was weak/unconvincing
· If you can do it well, you’ll stand out
Having an impact
How to have an impact?· There is little research about this
· There are papers, but largely anecdotal
· Some resources at end of PPT
Chain from research to impact· The chain varies widely from case to case
· Can have many links
· Understanding the chain for your research helps you tochoose, design and deliver research for greater
impactcommunicate impact provide evidence
A chain from research to impact: Technology· Research and development
· Sell the IP
· Feasibility studies
· Design
· Manufacturing capacity
· Finance
· Marketing
· Sales
A chain from research to impact: Information for policy· Research
· Something useful is learned (or isn’t)
· New information influences policy (or doesn’t)
· Policy change is implemented (or isn’t)
· If policy aims to change behaviour, people respond as intended (or don’t)
· Changes (relative to no research) result – social, environmental or economic benefits (or not)
Risk of low benefits from research to influence policy· Nobody is listening
· You lack credibility with the decision maker
· The decision maker doesn’t understand
· The new results are not different enough from what we already know
· The decision depends more on other factors
· The decision options have similar payoffs
Lessons: having impact· Need some demand pull
· Understand and respect potential users
· Be prepared for opposition
· Need perseverance, continual marketing
· Need repetition – government has short memory
· Seek a product champion
Lessons: having impact· Need “absorptive capacity” in the organisation
· The political circumstances need to be right. You can’t change ideological positions of govt.
· Timing. Grasp opportunities.
· Good communicationSimplicity, brevity, clarityAvoid jargon, maths, complex graphs
· Think about impact which choosing what to research
Conclusion· We are going to be asked to demonstrate real-
world impact
· It’s not just about communicating what we do better – we may need to change what we do to have genuine impact
· Pursuing impact is exciting and worthwhile but challenging – spinoff benefits for research
· The earlier in the research process you start thinking about impact, the better
Resources· Pannell, D.J. and Roberts, A.M. (2009).
Conducting and delivering integrated research to influence land-use policy: salinity policy in Australia, Environmental Science and Policy 12(8), 1088-1099.http://dpannell.fnas.uwa.edu.au/dp0803.htm
· Pannell, D.J. (2004). Effectively communicating economics to policy makers. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics 48(3), 535-555. http://dpannell.fnas.uwa.edu.au/j78ajare.pdf
Resources· Weible et al. (2012). “Understanding and
influencing the policy process”, Policy Science 45, 1-12. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11077-
011-9143-5
Pannell Discussions (Blog posts)· 150 – Why don’t environmental managers use
decision theory?http://www.pannelldiscussions.net/2009/04/150-wh
y-dont-environmental-managers-use-decision-theory/
· 136 – Engaging with policy: tips for researchershttp://www.pannelldiscussions.net/2008/09/136-eng
aging-with-policy-tips-for-researchers/
Resources· A relevant blog post by ecologist Brian McGill on
“What it takes to do policy-relevant science” http://dynamicecology.wordpress.com/2013/05/14/
what-it-takes-to-do-policy-relevant-science/
· Video: Ben Martin (U Sussex) “Science Policy Research - Can Research Influence Policy? How? And Does It Make for Better Policy?”http://upload.sms.csx.cam.ac.uk/media/747324
For this PPT see www.davidpannell.net under “Talks”