Skip to main content

From Mission Statements to Mailing Lists

Ten Ways Research Institutions and Learned Societies Can Support Policy Engagement

Key features in a nutshell

  • Research institutions and learned societies can actively shape academic policy engagement rather than leaving it to individual researchers’ initiative — through organisational and financial support, training programmes, internal recognition structures
  • Institutions and learned societies don’t need large budgets to get started: while employing a knowledge mobiliser or brokerage team can be incredibly beneficial, many effective initiatives, such as curating policymaker mailing lists, offering funding-application advice, or hosting lunch talks, require limited resources and can be embedded into existing structures.

By recognising policy engagement in career progression, funding decisions, and institutional strategy, research institutions and learned societies can move it from a marginal activity to a core part of their institutional mission, alongside research and teaching.

How can research institutions and learned societies promote academic policy engagement?

  • Provide researchers with policy insights: Researchers generally do not have the time to understand policymaking processes, policy priorities, windows of opportunity, and knowledge exchange formats. Knowledge mobilisers at research institutions and learned societies — such as policy engagement officers, communication staff, or outreach managers — can support researchers in this regard. By sharing policy developments, key priorities, and calls for evidence, these knowledge mobilisers and research institutions more broadly can help their communities understand where and when more scientific evidence is needed by policymakers. This information can be shared through webinars, newsletters, and information hubs.
  • Support knowledge synthesis, translation, and exchange: In addition to sharing relevant policy developments, knowledge mobilisers can help researchers translate academic expertise into policy formats like policy briefs, policy reports, or presentations. They can help researchers identify relevant policymakers in parliaments, ministries, EU institutions, or international organisations and facilitate their initial interactions. They can also provide hands-on support, such as organising policy events, curating mailing lists, or editing policy publications.

Beyond supporting individual researchers, research institutions and learned societies can create and facilitate groups of researchers to provide scientific evidence. These groups or task forces are often created to provide evidence on a specific policy area and ideally include researchers from a range of different, relevant scientific disciplines. Administrative support from institutional knowledge mobilisers helps these groups by coordinating meetings, strategically steering the direction of group activities and tasks, and disseminating the scientific evidence to the intended policy audience.

  • Provide financial support: Research institutions and learned societies can establish internal funds for researchers to engage in policy activities, such as organising policy events or travelling to capitals to engage with policymakers. Goethe University Frankfurt, for instance, provides funds specifically for events in Brussels. Policy engagement can also be built into performance agreements between university leadership and academic units or considered as a criterion for performance-related pay — mechanisms that exist, in various forms, across many European higher education systems (e.g., the Rewards and Recognition programme in the Netherlands).
  • Facilitate opportunities for two–way dialogues: In addition to providing financial support for policy activities, research institutions and learned societies can also facilitate these initiatives and create spaces for individual researchers to engage with policymakers. For example, the European Geoscience Union (EGU) coordinates the EGU Science-Policy Pairing Scheme that provides researchers with the opportunity to work alongside a Member of the European Parliament for one week.
  • Inform grant applicants about policy engagement during the funding application process: Not every research topic lends itself to this, but researchers who consider policy engagement early on can meaningfully build it into applications and, later, into the funded project itself. Indeed, many funding bodies now require research projects to demonstrate societal impact witpolicy engagement constituting one potential impact dimension. Some research institutes and learned societies, especially those with Research Funding Officers, may be able to provide advice to researchers on available funding and how to integrate policy engagement into research projects and grant applications.
  • Cultivate internal recognition: Although providing science advice and integrating research into policy requires expertise, skills, and time, it often isn’t recognised or rewarded by research institutions. Research institutions and learned societies can internally communicate the importance of academic policy engagement via mission statements and institutional strategies. They can track policy engagement activities and provide recognition for achievements or awards in policy engagement, similar to achievements in research, teaching, or academic service. Research institutions can also host low-cost, virtual or in-person formats, such as lunch talks, where researchers share insights from their engagement in advisory bodies, policy events, or commissioned research.
  • Teaching load reductions: Reducing teaching obligations can give researchers limited additional time for policy engagement. Goethe University Frankfurt, for example, allows researchers serving on national or international policy advisory bodies a reduction of up to two teaching hours per week.
  • Include relevant training in professional development programmes: Navigating the science-policy interface requires distinct skills that researchers rarely acquire during their PhDs. Researchers often learn the skills required for engaging with policymakers on their own, and building this understanding can be time-consuming. By providing structured training and coaching, research institutions and learned societies can not only speed up the learning process, but also ensure best practice guidelines are taught. Alternatively, Institutions can integrate policy engagement modules directly into graduate academies or human resources development programmes.
  • Advocating for funding: While national governments and the EU stress the importance of science for policy, securing long-term funding for policy engagement continues to be a challenge. Research institutions and learned societies can advocate for their communities by outlining the importance of long-term funding for policy engagement togovernments, the EU, and funding organisations. Encouraging examples exist in Europe. For example, the Universities Policy Engagement Network in the UK has been awarded a grant of about £5.9 million by Research England, the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), and UK Research and Innovation, to improve UK universities’ policy engagement abilities.
  • Advocating for the reform of research assessment: Supporting research assessment reform is another way in which research institutions and learned socieites can advocate for their communities. A true systemic shift requires rewriting the rules of academic career progression, which have historically been dominated strictly by publication volume and grant acquisition. Through global coalitions like CoARA (Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment), research institutions are actively working to broaden evaluation metrics. While research institutions and learned societies can engage in both science advice and advocacy, both activities should be distinct and separate from one another to ensure that any scientific evidence provided is seen as independent and unbiased.

 

Sources and further reading

Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA) (2022), The Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment, accessed on 13 August 2026.

European Geosciences Union (EGU) (2026), Policy Overview, accessed on 13 August 2026.

European Geosciences Union (EGU) (2026), Geo Policy, accessed on 13 August 2026.

Lambertucci, S. A., et al. (2025), Supporting Researchers’ Engagement in International Science–Policy Bodies. Nature Sustainability, 8, 1–3.

Recognition and Rewards Programme (2023), Room for everyone’s talent in practice. Road map. How we are shaping a new system of recognition and rewards, accessed on 13 August 2026.

von Schneidemesser, E., et al. (2020), Prepare Scientists to Engage in Science-Policy. Environmental Science & Technology, 54(23), 14787–14789.

 

Do you want to know more about the policy engagement toolkit?

Do you want to share your experience in policy engagement? Do you think about contributing to the policy engagement toolkit? Feel free to contact Tome Sandevski via science-policy@pvw.uni-frankfurt.de

 

How to involve and interact with various stakeholders

How to involve and interact with various stakeholders including policymakers, academic researchers, local businesses, and community representatives

 

Description

Successfully involving and interacting with a broad range of stakeholders is crucial for ensuring that local development projects are comprehensive, inclusive, and sustainable.

Stakeholder engagement is not a one-off activity but a continuous process that requires clear communication, transparent decision-making, and ongoing collaboration between academia, policymakers, businesses, and civil society. Understanding the roles and expectations of each stakeholder group is fundamental to creating a cooperative environment in which all voices are heard and valued.

This contribution explores methods and best practices for engaging stakeholders and facilitating their active participation in territorial development initiatives. Furthermore, it addresses strategies for managing conflicting interests that may arise among stakeholders in collaborative territorial projects.

 

Summary: Key Features in a Nutshell

  • Objective: To create a framework for engaging stakeholders in territorial development projects by facilitating cooperation and mutual understanding across different sectors.
  • Approach: A multi-phase strategy involving stakeholder identification, consultation, collaboration, and continuous feedback loops to ensure that every stakeholder remains actively involved throughout the process.
  • Outcome: The creation of inclusive and sustainable solutions that reflect the interests and needs of all relevant stakeholders.

 

How Does the Format Work?

  1. Stakeholder Mapping and Identification: The first step in involving and interacting with stakeholders is to identify who the key stakeholders are and understand their role in the project. This includes policymakers, academic researchers, local businesses, community representatives, and other relevant actors connected to the issue at stake. Stakeholder identification can be carried out through several complementary methods: drawing on the knowledge and networks of the people already involved in the project, conducting internet and website searches, reviewing institutional documents and previous initiatives, consulting directories and public databases, asking affected groups and community organisations directly, and using snowball techniques in which initial contacts suggest additional relevant actors. Workshops, interviews, surveys, and participatory mapping exercises can also help to broaden and validate the stakeholder map. This process allows project leaders to determine who is affected by the project, who has relevant expertise, who holds decision-making power, and who can contribute resources, legitimacy, or implementation capacity to support the project’s success.
  2. Consultation and Needs Assessment: Once stakeholders are identified, the next step is to engage them in the decision-making process through consultation. This can be done through surveys, focus groups, community meetings, or online consultations. The goal is to gather insights into their needs, expectations, and concerns. For example, in a territorial development project, policymakers might be interested in economic growth, while local communities might prioritize sustainability and preservation of cultural heritage.
  3. Co-Creation and Collaborative Workshops: After gathering input from stakeholders, the next step is to move from consultation to co-creation. This is where stakeholders come together in collaborative workshops to design solutions. These workshops should be structured in a way that allows for inclusive participation and ensures that each stakeholder group has the opportunity to share their perspectives. For example, UGR researchers might provide scientific evidence and policy analysis, while local businesses might share their knowledge of the regional economy and market trends.
  4. Managing Conflicting Interests: In any collaborative territorial project, stakeholders may have conflicting interests, especially when the goals of local governments, academic researchers, and businesses differ. Managing these conflicts is crucial for maintaining productive relationships.

 

Strategies for managing conflicting interests include:

  • Open communication and transparency about each stakeholder’s objectives and constraints.
  • Compromise and negotiation, where stakeholders find common ground or agree to trade-offs that balance their interests.
  • Third-party facilitation to mediate disputes and provide neutral perspectives that encourage cooperation.
  • Building trust by involving all stakeholders in the decision-making process, ensuring that everyone feels their voice is valued and that they are contributing to the shared vision.
  1. Continuous Feedback and Adaptation: Stakeholder engagement does not end after the initial consultation or workshop. It is important to create feedback loops and ongoing communication channels to ensure that stakeholders remain involved throughout the project. This can include regular updates, surveys to gauge satisfaction, and public meetings to review progress. Feedback helps identify potential issues early on and allows for adjustments to be made to keep the project aligned with stakeholder expectations.
  2. Digital Platforms for Ongoing Interaction: One of the most effective ways to involve and interact with stakeholders is through digital platforms. Tools like the Impronta Granada website allow stakeholders to access information about ongoing projects, provide feedback, and connect with other participants. Platforms like these are crucial for maintaining engagement, especially in geographically dispersed areas where face-to-face meetings may be impractical.

 

Challenges

  • Diverse Interests: Involving diverse stakeholders means dealing with different interests and priorities. Balancing these can be difficult, especially when stakeholders have conflicting objectives or limited resources. Managing these differences requires strong communication and the ability to find common ground.
  • Sustaining Engagement: While initial engagement is often high, sustaining long-term involvement from stakeholders —particularly those with other competing priorities (e.g., researchers with heavy academic workloads or policymakers facing budget constraints)— can be challenging.
  • Communication Barriers: Ensuring that communication remains clear and effective across all stakeholder groups is key to preventing misunderstandings. Language differences, technical jargon, or varying levels of engagement can create barriers to effective collaboration.

 

Tasks and Resources

Scientists

  • Tasks:
    • Provide research data and scientific analysis to inform the decision-making process.
    • Participate in collaborative workshops and consultations to share knowledge and develop solutions.
  • Required Resources:
    • Time for fieldwork and data dissemination.
    • Communication tools to share research findings and connect with other stakeholders.

Knowledge Exchange Managers and Research Managers:

  • Tasks:
    • Facilitate stakeholder engagement by organizing workshops and consultations.
    • Ensure that knowledge exchange is effective and that the views of all stakeholders are represented in the project design.
  • Required Resources:
    • Digital platforms for ongoing interaction and data collection (e.g., websites, survey tools, communication channels).

Policymakers

  • Tasks:
    • Provide policy frameworks and resources to support collaborative projects.
    • Ensure that the solutions developed through stakeholder engagement align with local governance priorities.
  • Required Resources:
    • Policy expertise to facilitate discussions and create alignment between stakeholders.
    • Budget and funding for project implementation and follow-up activities.

 

Examples

UGR County Councils refers to the initiative led by the University of Granada (UGR) under the Erasmus+ ENGAGEgreen project, aiming to foster collaboration between academic researchers, local governments, and community stakeholders. This initiative focuses on addressing territorial challenges through co-created, research-driven solutions. The Second Impronta Granada Meeting is the third pilot event organized by UGR as part of this project, bringing together researchers, policymakers, and local communities to discuss and develop strategies for sustainable development in rural and urban areas.

  1. Second Impronta Granada Meeting and UGR County Councils: UGR County Councils successfully involved multiple stakeholders by creating multi-stakeholder platforms where researchers, local governments, and civil society could collaborate. The online preparatory meetings and subsequent interactive workshops that took place at the Second Impronta Granada Meeting ensured that researchers could present their work and directly engage with local needs, while policymakers provided real-world context for academic research.
  2. Impronta Granada Website: The Impronta Granada website provided an accessible platform for stakeholder interaction. Actor profiles and UGR project entries were featured, allowing researchers to connect with policymakers, businesses, and local communities. The website also served as a tool for feedback and continuing engagement, ensuring that local stakeholders remained informed and involved in the projects.

 

Sources and Further Reading

Introduction to Science Shops

What is a Science Shop?

“Science Shops are organizations that make knowledge available to civil society organizations that don’t have the means to pay or carry out research themselves. Science Shops can be embedded within other organizations (universities, research institutions, companies) or established as independent organizations in the form of non-governmental or other not-for-profit organizations.” (Science Shop Establishment Guide)


Key features at a glance

  • A Science Shop creates dialogue between civil society organizations and the research community to support these initiatives
  • A Science Shop is concerned with sharing ideas and developing appropriate responses
  • For each project, public feedback and/or an accessible deliverable are used to make all the knowledge recommendations that have emerged available

 

Introduction

What is the format about?

Associations, local authorities, and citizens’ groups sometimes need specific insights and knowledge to consolidate their actions, assess their impact, or discover new approaches.

The Science Shops provide a link between the research community and civil society, encouraging dialogue and collaboration between them.

Thanks to the space for exchange and monitoring, they offer potential for experimentation, particularly through seminars and workshops.

Associations, citizens’ groups, and local authorities are supported in their questioning by researchers who mobilize students in the form of internships, challenges, or group work.

 

How does the format work?

  1. The Call for interest => formulation of requests. This call for expressions of interest is open for a fairly long period of approximately four months (generally from February to May) so that all applications can be received and properly processed collectively.

A question of general interest is submitted to the Science Shop, studied, and reformulated in coordination with a scientific committee to develop specialized support.

  1. The Scientific Committee => selection of projects. Each year, the Science Shop brings together a scientific committee composed of experts who examine the applications submitted through the call for expressions of interest and select around fifteen projects to be carried out each year. In some cases, the scientific committee redirects applications to other formats.
  2. The design and dissemination of offers => Applications and interviews
  3. The completion of group tutorial projects and of individual placements

A team of researchers or students is then contacted and put together by the science shop to carry out a field study and work with these civil society players to develop a practical response to their problem.

  1. The dissertations / presentations / presentation of results => potential political decision makers in attendance

A public presentation and/or an accessible final publication will make available all the knowledge that has emerged.

 

Tasks and resources

This is a program to support the stakeholders in a project, promoting dialogue and collaboration between civil society organizations and scientific research.

It supports researchers who want to be more in touch with different stakeholders in the field and is interested in participatory research projects. They will become involved by taking part in seminars and workshops and will benefit from centralized resources on the theme of participatory research.

The Science Shop gives researchers the opportunity to supervise a student or a group project and to support the implementation of research in conjunction with all the players involved.

It also allows them to take part in the work of exploring and supporting social demand, enabling them to find and advise partner structures for collective student projects or personal projects.

For large-scale research projects, they can call on the expertise of the science shop’s third-party supervisors (participatory research supervisors).

  

Examples

Boutique des sciences de l’Université Lumière Lyon 2 https://www.univ-lyon2.fr/sciences-et-societe/boutique-des-sciences

 

Sources and further reading

Leaflet Boutique des Sciences ULL2: https://www.calameo.com/read/0074134546a08abe69437

Guide pratique de la recherche participative (A practical guide to participatory research French version): https://lemouvementassociatif-aura.org/wp-content/uploads/bsk-pdf-manager/2024/11/GUIDE-RECHERCHE-PARTICIPATIVE.pdf

Website : le mouvement associatif : https://lemouvementassociatif-aura.org/nos-4-champs-actions/actions-innovation-sociale-associations-mouvement-associatif-auvergne-rhone-alpes/

 

Living Knowledge Network – the formal international network of Science Shops and Community Based Research : https://livingknowledge.org/

And their Science Shop Establishment Guide (pdf version) : https://www.scishops.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/SciShops_D4.4_Guide.pdf.pdf

Other