Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Jude Fransman
(The Open University)
Pradeep Narayanan
Kate Newman (Christian Aid)
Budd Hall (University of Victoria )
Jonathan Harle (INASP)
Send message to Convenors
- Formats:
- Experimental
- Stream:
- Impactful development?
- Location:
- Berrill Theatre
- Sessions:
- Wednesday 19 June, -
Time zone: Europe/London
Short Abstract:
Through a series of sessions in a variety of formats (e.g. debates, roundtable discussions, workshops etc.) this panel seeks to address some of the challenges surrounding impact, collaboration and capacity strengthening for ODA-funded research.
Long Abstract:
The launch of initiatives such as the Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF) marks an unprecedented investment of the UK's Official Development Assistance (ODA) commitment into research. This means that research must be ODA-compliant with measurable benefits to countries on the OECD's Development Assistance Committee (DAC)'s list. The challenge of ODA-compliance raises three central concerns around impact (ensuring research leads to societal and/or economic benefits), collaboration (ensuring research crosses disciplinary/sectoral/national boundaries, responding to 'real world problems' in specific contexts) and capacity (ensuring diverse stakeholders have the relevant knowledge and resources to support collaborative ODA research practice). This poses significant challenges to traditional approaches to research as well as traditional understandings of research impact, ethics, quality and governance.
The sessions in this panel will focus on the following themes:
•Rethinking research impact for ODA-funded research: How can pathways to ODA-research impact be created and evaluated? What can we learn from the impact practices of other development stakeholders?
•Rethinking research collaboration for ODA-funded research: How do different types of research partner collaborate? What challenges do they face and how might these be overcome?
•Rethinking research capacity for ODA-funded research: What types of knowledge and material resources are needed? Who's capacity should be strengthened? Where, how and by whom? What are the implications for researcher development programmes for development studies scholars?
•Rethinking research governance for ODA-funded research: Are our current policy/funding systems sufficient? Who participates in agenda-setting and evaluation? What is the role of funders in the global South?
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Wednesday 19 June, 2019, -Paper short abstract:
I propose a framework for the design and evaluation of RCD programmes grounded on principles of justice in order to capture social outcomes and the intangible dimensions of capacity. A focus on equity counters reductive assumptions and fragmented approaches to capacity that do not hold in practice
Paper long abstract:
Research capacity development (RCD) is about empowering individuals, organisations and systems to produce and use knowledge to achieve desirable social outcomes (better health, education, etc.) and is increasingly a required component of ODA-funded research. RCD is often approached as a linear problem requiring technocratic solutions, thus focusing on improving performance of discrete organisations and individuals in the hope that this will somehow 'add up' to stronger systems. A linearity assumption also underpins the evaluation of RCD programmes and the choice of easily quantifiable indicators (e.g. infrastructure or skills acquisition), which measure tangible outputs without capturing complex longer-term social outcomes. While often difficult to correlate to programme inputs, these are essential for assessing RCD impact. A social justice lens can afford more sophisticated understandings of social outcomes and shape the design and implementation of RCD inputs, as these determine how knowledge is created, shared and translated, and ultimately whose interests it serves.
As a first step towards mainstreaming concerns for justice and equity into RCD agendas, this 20min paper proposes an evaluative framework grounded on principles of accessibility, inclusion and sustainability. These principles can be used to develop suitable indicators while also bringing a justice focus into policy and agenda setting. Such focus emphasises the intangible dimensions of capacity, including power relations and the connections, feedback loops and relationships between different individuals and organisations across local, national and international levels. This opens up new approaches to RCD that better align with a more realistic conception of development as "wicked problem".
Paper short abstract:
We propose to deliver a 30-minute interactive presentation on key findings from ICAI reviews on ODA-funded research across government, namely the Global Challenges Research Fund and the Newton Fund, and recommendations for improving their governance and impact. N.B. We are available June 19 or 20.
Paper long abstract:
As a key evaluator of the UK's research funding on development challenges, ICAI scrutinises ODA research funds managed across government, particularly those overseen by BEIS. In a context of recent rapid funding increases, ICAI analyses whether these funds have appropriate governance structures in place to deliver effectively and equitably.
ICAI conducted a rapid review of the Global Challenges Research Fund in 2017. We found the fund's strategy, governance, and procedures were not yet strong enough, and will review progress against our recommendations this year through the annual ICAI follow-up process. In April 2019, we will publish a performance review of the Newton Fund.
This session is a prime opportunity for ICAI to learn from academic institutions and individuals at the coalface of delivering ODA-funded research, as well as share our insights on how the government has fared in delivering high-profile research funds as ODA.
Our presentation will focus on ICAI's recommendations regarding research funds. These touch particularly on the governance and impact themes of panel, and will include the following:
• Northern donors must distinguish between equal and equitable partnerships, ensuring that Southern partners from lower-resource institutions/areas can participate.
• ODA spent across government should be held to the same standards as DFID, seeking ODA excellence (rather than just ODA eligibility).
• DFID and BEIS could work more closely together on these funds, adding DFID's ODA expertise to BEIS's research and innovation experience.
We propose an interactive format whereby we facilitate a short discussion following each of our points.
Paper short abstract:
This session covers the findings of an evaluation conducted by the CSC into the successes and challenges of its scholarship which provides ODA funding to PhD students in the Global South to do research seeking to address a specific development issue in their home country at a partner UK university.
Paper long abstract:
The Commonwealth Scholarship Commission (CSC) offers ODA-funded Split-Site scholarships to PhD students from low and middle income Commonwealth countries to spend 12 months of their home-country registered PhD programme conducting research at a UK university. The programme seeks to support scholars who are undertaking development-oriented research from a variety of disciplines by facilitating access to UK-based equipment and expertise, while also strengthening international collaborations and partnerships between the (home) universities in the Global South and the (host) UK partners.
Drawing upon 230 survey responses and 70 key informant interviews with current scholars, alumni, and their supervisors from both home and host universities, this session will present key findings from the CSC's recent evaluation of the 487 Split-Site scholarships funded to date. Specifically, it will highlight the successes and challenges that scholars and supervisors experienced while conducting ODA-funded, development-oriented doctoral research projects, and associated issues that arose from creating and navigating personal and institutional partnerships across a variety of disciplinary and country contexts.
The session will include videos provided by home country-based participants in the evaluation speaking about their experiences recorded specifically for this session, which will provide illustrative examples of their experiences creating pathways to ODA-funded research. The session will provide a case study of the pathways and barriers for researchers and universities seeking to collaborate on ODA-funded, development-oriented research that addresses specific development needs of the home countries, while also increasing the teaching and research capacity of their higher education institutions through the sharing of expertise and experience.
Paper short abstract:
Through a short video and presentation, we will discuss the findings from a process of consultation that the LIDC Migration Leadership Team has been conducting over the past 12 months in five continents with researchers, migrants, policymakers, practitioners, artists and others.
Paper long abstract:
The LIDC Migration Leadership Team has been conducting a series of Migration Conversations with researchers, migrants, artists, policymakers, practitioners and others about research priorities, challenges to forging more equitable partnerships, and how to achieve maximum impact from research on migration and displacement. Our work, commissioned by the ESRC and AHRC will inform a joint strategy on migration funding. We have co-facilitated, with our local partners, events in Delhi, Nairobi, Beirut, London, Glasgow, Brussels, New York and Mexico as well as at major migration conferences. In all of these events we have been in listening mode. In this presentation we will begin to feed back what we have learned. We will show a short (4-5 minute) video about the Conversations and will share key findings from them which speak to the questions of how to make migration research a standard-bearer for more equitable partnerships and outstanding impact. Key themes include power sharing throughout the research process, decentring the research process, working collaboratively with the arts, across different disciplines, and with organisations engaged with migrants, and learning from best (and worst) practice with respect to impact.