Dissemination in more detail Web Member Space vs. Public Site New sections / Twitter Multimedia 3 Multimedia specials Videos Webinars: 2-5 Events 10 national level policy roundtables 2 Pan-European practitioners´ workshops 1 Looking-forward visionary workshop 1 Concluding academic meeting
Dissemination in more detail Print and Branding Flyer Working papers Forthcoming publication series (Budrich) Anticorrp space in ACRN Quarterly Newsletter Policy briefs and research summaries (Heather)
The research-policy gap “Researchers cannot understand why there is resistance to policy change despite clear and convincing evidence. Policymakers bemoan the inability of researchers to make their findings accessible and digestible in time for policy decisions.” Young, John (2004) “Research and policy: parallel universes?” ODI Opinions 14. Overseas Development Institute. http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/download/458.pdf
Policy Briefs & Research Summaries Both valued by policy-makers but serve different purposes Clear, well-written, engaging & QUICK! 1 page research summaries – sums up the approach & the main findings What is the research all about? 2 page policy briefs – more space for pulling out policy relevant implications What am I going to do differently on Monday morning?
A Policy Brief… Explains and conveys the relevance and/or urgency of an issue Presents policy implications around the issue Gives evidence to support the reasoning behind the implications Points the reader to additional resources on the issues Avoids making recommendations unless you really know what your audience needs (which most academics don’t!) From Developmental Leadership Programme Style Guide – www.dlpprog.org
Suggested Process – Research Summaries Output author produces draft research summary based on simple guidance we’ll produce GSDRC edits this, puts it in the right format for publishing (ensuring ‘common voice’) & sends to the author for approval Once approved, it will be published on the ANTICORRP website & through other communication channels
Suggested Process – Policy Briefs WP leaders identify outputs/clusters of outputs with clear policy implications GSDRC receives author’s draft with identified implications (using our guidance note) & uses these and the research summary to produce draft for approval Steps 2 & 3 as above
Managing libel and defamation risks Why? potential collective liabilities easy to underestimate challenge of defence high financial risks How? adhere to established standards for research ethics conduct and document fact-check conduct and document libel check flag critical cases to disseminator (at least 4 weeks in advance of submission) insert disclaimer
Speaking for the consortium? organisational representation through coordinator no collective representation / voice with regard to content (findings, policy suggestions, commentary) Disclaimer: „ The information and views set out in this publication are those of the author(s) only and do not reflect any collective opinion of the Anticorrp consortium.”
Submitting a working paper prepare full final draft draft research summary libel check paste into template (logos, acknowledgements, disclaimers) decide on copyright forward to work package leader Wp leader to sign off and submit to disseminator for posting at least 10 days before due date for delivery
What we need from you Help fine-tune your audience, your outreach modes! Google doc to identify specific target audiences, distribution channels Help build a bigger pan-European distribution list, incl. social media influencers Your institutional contact for dissemination Overshare, rather than undershare!
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.