A Practical Example of Science-Policy Dialogue for Territorial Drought Governance.

Description

This contribution presents a structured example of a science-policy webinar format applied to a highly sensitive societal challenge: drought and water scarcity in Spain. The webinar “Drought: A Comprehensive Approach from the Peninsula (Sequía: un abordaje integral desde la Península Ibérica) was organized at a time of relative calm, when the slowdown in the depletion of water reserves created the illusion that the emergency had eased.  The structural and environmental conditions behind drought remain unchanged, however, reinforcing the need to reflect precisely during these brief periods of apparent normality. The session proposed an integral perspective that brings together natural and social knowledge, compares territorial realities and, above all, fosters direct dialogue between scientists and policymakers. Through guiding questions, the webinar explored the question whether scientific insights are reaching political arenas, which barriers public administrations face, and how long-term thinking can be incorporated into decision-making processes typically dominated by short-term urgency.

Summary:

• Structural moment of discussion: Held during a temporary respite in drought conditions, enabling medium- and long-term reflections
• Integral approach: Combines the environmental, social, and territorial dimensions of drought
• Science-policy interface: Designed to connect researchers and public administrations through a shared set of guiding questions
• Regional comparison: Incorporates insights from different regions to illustrate diverse challenges and governance contexts
• Focus on decision-making barriers: Examines obstacles faced by policymakers when implementing research-based recommendations
• Long-term perspective: Emphasizes the need to move beyond emergency-driven responses toward structural, future-oriented strategies

How does the format work?

The session was organized into three consecutive blocks designed to progressively deepen the collective understanding of drought governance:

1. Shared framing and territorial diagnoses
2. From challenges to possible solutions
3. Open dialogue with participants

The moderator played a central role and was explicitly designed to maintain a balanced alternation between scientific perspectives and political viewpoints, preventing disciplinary silos and ensuring a fluid, dynamic exchange. Aglobal-to-local approach was employed: beginning with the structural dimensions of drought under global change, then introducing three territorial contexts (Catalonia, Granada, and Madrid), and finally opening the discussion to thematic experts in governance, ecology, and environmental history.

To guide the debate, the webinar relied on a set of core questions that structured the interaction between speakers. These questions were tailored to each type of participant:

• For researchers: Are your scientific proposals reaching the political level? What tools or forms of support would you need from public administrations to translate your innovations into practice?
• For policymakers and public administration representatives: What barriers do you encounter when attempting to integrate academic insights into policy? What were the main difficulties that emerged during the last drought in terms of decision making?
• For all participants: How can long-term, structural perspectives be incorporated into political environments that often operate under urgent or short timeframes? Would it be feasible or desirable to apply innovations from other territories to your own context?

This format enabled a clear, focused dialogue that linked structural challenges with practical constraints, helping identify common issues and potential avenues for science-policy collaboration.

Challenges

• Time constraints: Limited time reduces the depth of technical exchanges, making it difficult to expand on complex scientific or administrative issues
• Institutional barriers: Policymakers face structural or administrative constraints that limit the uptake of scientific proposals, even when there is interest or political will
• Communication gaps: Differences in language, priorities, and timeframes between academia and public administration can hinder mutual understanding
• Need for focused messages: Clear guidance is required to keep contributions concise and avoid fragmentation of the dialogue
• Uneven territorial capacities: Regions differ in technical, administrative, and environmental respects, which complicates the transferability of solutions
• Difficulty integrating long-term perspectives: Structural approaches often clash with short-term political cycles and emergency-driven decision making

Tasks and resources

Scientists

• Prepare concise, policy-relevant summaries of research findings on drought, water management and systemic impacts
• Provide territorial diagnoses and evidence-based explanations of structural drivers
• Respond to targeted questions from policymakers and engage in cross-territorial comparison
• Identify innovations or successful practices that may be transferable to other regions

Knowledge exchange managers and research managers

• Design the structure of the session, ensuring balanced alternation between scientific and political voices
• Facilitate communication before, during, and after the event, including follow-up emails and potential collaboration links
• Prepare guiding questions, contextual framing, and flow (global → regional → local)
• Support the creation of accessible materials, summaries, and visual resources for the audience

Policymakers

• Present the institutional and regional context of drought management
• Identify operational constraints, administrative barriers, and lessons learned from past decision making cycles.
• Engage with researchers to assess the feasibility of implementing scientific proposals
• Contribute local experiences that complement scientific evidence

Case studies

Webinar “Drought: A Comprehensive Approach from the Peninsula” (Sequía: un abordaje integral desde la Península Ibérica)

• Date and time: September 24, 2024, 6:00 PM
• Organized by: Erasmus+ ENGAGEgreen, a joint collaboration between the University of Granada and BETA, from the University of Vic.

Participants

• Nuria Hernández-Mora: PhD in geography, researcher and consultant specializing in water governance, and a member of the Fundación Nueva Cultura del Agua
• Javier García Martínez: Head of the Urban Water Cycle Service (Servicio del Ciclo Urbano del Agua) at the Provincial Council of Granada
• José Luis Nieto Bueno: Councilor for Más Madrid in the Madrid City Council and Spokesperson for the Urban Planning, Environment, and Mobility Committee; he holds a PhD in biology.
• Lorenzo Proia: Coordinator of the Applied Ecology and Global Change Unit at the BETA Technological Center, University of Vic.
• Fernando Delgado Ramos: Director of Cátedra del Agua at the University of Granada.
• Antonio Ortega Santos: Full Professor of Contemporary History at the University of Granada.

Available resources (what are the main tasks)

• Moderation script for the webinar
• YouTube recording of Webinario – Sequía: un abordaje integral desde la península

What worked

• Alternating science and policy ensured a fluid, dynamic format
• Comparing regions highlighted shared challenges and contextual differences
• The moderator played a key role in keeping messages concise and interconnected
• Shared conclusions emphasized:
  • urgency of systemic, structural approaches
  • participatory governance
  • limits to demand growth
  • water as a commons
  • need for multilevel coordination

What doesn’t & lessons learnt

• Value of territorial diversity: Comparing different regions provided clear added value, revealing both shared structural challenges and region-specific dynamics
• Global–to–local framing: Moving from overarching structural issues to concrete local cases helped expand the perspectives of all actors and connect scientific evidence to regional realities
• Role of facilitators: Effective moderation requires a strong understanding of the global context, normative frameworks and the ability to link contributions across disciplines and regions; the mediators or knowledge brokers should have a broad context of the topics and the main debates
• Foundations for future collaborations: These encounters can initiate new connections between researchers and policymakers, provided follow-up is supported (e.g., exchanging contacts, identifying thematic overlaps, and encouraging continued communication)
• Transferable innovations: Sharing successful practices and innovations from different regions helps participants identify feasible pathways for improving drought governance in their own contexts
• Time limitations: Limited time reduces the depth of technical exchanges and may constrain complex discussions
• Institutional constraints: Policymakers often face structural or administrative barriers that limit the uptake of scientific proposals
• Need for clear guidance: Providing concise instructions and time limits helps speakers keep their messages focused and ensures a balanced, coherent dialogue

How the activities evaluated?

The webinar highlighted the critical and non-postponable nature of the current drought situation, reinforcing the need for structural rather than reactive responses. Dialogue between political and academic spheres proved increasingly permeable, showing that collaborative approaches are both possible and necessary. Participants also stressed that water demand cannot continue to grow, pointing towards the need for a profound structural rethinking of current models.

A key insight was the importance of regional specificity: the challenges faced in Madrid differ significantly from those in smaller municipalities, making local perspectives essential for designing effective policies. Finally, the discussion underscored the relevance of social actor involvement as addressing drought requires engaging communities and local stakeholders in decision-making processes.

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 does the format work?

The ENGAGEgreen project aims, among other things, to strengthen universities’ capacity to engage in meaningful dialogue with policymakers, fostering equitable collaborations that generate concrete and socially relevant outcomes. Central to the project are the themes addressed in its seminar series: namely, the ecological and digital “twin transition” that constitutes the core focus of ENGAGEgreen.

This document, produced by the team from Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, offers a synthesis and critical re-elaboration of two seminars held with academic experts on topics of particular relevance to the ENGAGEgreen initiative.

The seminars were titled:

• “Bridging Sustainability and Artificial Intelligence” (16 February 2024)
• “Engaging Green Policy Decision Making” (30 February 2024)

A diverse group of scholars, researchers, entrepreneurs, and policymakers contributed to these seminars. The discussions were rich and multifaceted, generating a wide range of insights. At the end of each meeting, several participants were invited to provide written reflections. A number of colleagues agreed to contribute to this collective effort to identify and articulate key factors that can strengthen the connection between scientific research and policymaking processes.

The reflections presented here were guided by a set of questions that grounded the discussion in the concrete experience of the contributors – senior academics with extensive expertise in leading international research projects. The guiding questions were as follows:

1. Based on your professional knowledge and experience, what kind of cooperation between policymakers on the one hand and academics and researchers on the other is necessary to design and implement effective policies to address the consequences of climate change?
2. Based on your professional knowledge and experience, what role can financial markets play in supporting the green transition?
3. Based on your professional knowledge and experience, how can we distinguish between companies that are genuinely committed to the sustainability transition and those that engage in greenwashing practices?
4. Based on your professional knowledge and experience, do you think the European Commission should review any of the initiatives undertaken so far? If so, in which direction should such revisions be gone?

The main themes and insights distilled from the exchange among the experts are found below.

2. Based on your professional knowledge and experience, what kind of cooperation between policymakers on the one hand and academics and researchers on the other is necessary to design and implement effective policies to address the consequences of climate change?

A close, structured, and ongoing cooperation between policymakers and the academic/research community is essential for effective climate change policy. Political decisions should be “informed and supported” by scientific research. Moreover, rigorous scenario analysis – combining climate science, socioeconomic projections, and long-term modelling – must be a core component of any policy dialogue.

More specifically:

• Interdisciplinary research and scenario analysis as foundation

Researchers must develop robust, evidence-based climate, environmental, and socioeconomic scenarios that policymakers can use to anticipate the impact of different policy paths, assess trade-offs and make informed decisions. Scenario analysis has proven a valuable tool for navigating uncertainty and design resilient climate and adaptation policies.

• Institutionalized, two-way dialogue mechanisms

Instead of ad hoc consultations, institutional channels (e.g., advisory boards, policy-research consortia, regular working groups) should be established to ensure continuous exchange. This helps new scientific evidence to be integrated and policies to be adapted as knowledge evolves. Reports on bridging science and policy highlight the importance of concise, relevant summaries of scientific findings (policy briefs), to make research usable for decision makers.

• A holistic assessment of environmental, economic, and social impacts

Effective climate policies require not only the mitigation of emissions but also consideration of economic viability, social equity, resilience, and adaptation. Interdisciplinary research combining environmental science, economics, and the social sciences is crucial.

• Transparency and stakeholder engagement

Policies designed with input from researchers, civil society, business, and other stakeholders gain legitimacy, reflect a broad perspective, and are more likely to succeed. A collaborative approach increases public trust and enables more equitable, inclusive climate action.

In conclusion, cooperation between policymakers and researchers should be institutional and continuous, combining rigorous scientific analysis (scenarios, modeling, data) with inclusive, interdisciplinary dialogue. Only through such a partnership can climate policies be scientifically sound, socially equitable, economically viable, and adaptive over time.

2. Based on your professional knowledge and experience, what role can financial markets play in supporting the green transition?

Financial markets can – and should – play a central role in enabling the green transition. The points about the necessity of mobilizing funds and diversifying risk, together with the emphasis on financing voluntary mechanisms (carbon credits, biodiversity, restoration), underline two complementary roles: providing resources and incentivizing sustainable investment.

Concretely, financial markets can contribute by

• Mobilizing capital toward green investments

Instruments such as green bonds, sustainable bonds, and ESG-linked funds channel resources to renewable energy, energy efficiency, clean technologies, circular economy, restoration and other environmentally beneficial projects.

• Diversifying risk and attracting private investors

By pooling resources and spreading risk across investors, financial markets make green projects more viable. This is particularly important for large-scale or long-term investments, which often require upfront capital and have long payback horizons.

• Driving innovation and scale-up of sustainable technologies

Through financing mechanisms, markets can support startups and companies developing green technologies – facilitating diffusion of innovations and structural transformation of the economy.

Supporting mechanisms beyond direct investments – e.g., carbon credits, biodiversity credits, restoration finance

Financial support for voluntary environmental measures (carbon offsetting, biodiversity projects, nature-based solutions) can complement regulatory interventions, especially where public resources or regulatory coverage are limited.

• Embedding environmental risks into financial evaluation and risk management.

Through tools like climate scenario stress-tests and risk assessment frameworks, financial institutions and markets can internalize climate risk, making sustainability part of standard financial decision making.

The effectiveness of finance depends, however, on enabling conditions:

• Clear regulatory frameworks and definitions (e.g., sustainable activities taxonomy)

Investors need clarity about what counts as “green” or “sustainable” to channel funds credibly.

• Transparency, disclosure standards, and independent verification

To avoid “greenwashing,” firms and financial products must provide reliable, comparable ESG and impact data. Sustainability reporting and ESG disclosure regime are key.

• Coordination between public and private capital

Given the scale of investment required for transition – especially in infrastructure, energy, and large-scale environmental projects – public incentives (subsidies, guarantees, regulation) are often necessary to reduce risk and attract private capital.

In conclusion, financial markets are not just passive funders – they can act as enablers and accelerators of the green transition, provided they operate under robust regulatory frameworks, transparency requirements, and a long-term vision of sustainability.

3. Based on your professional knowledge and experience, how can we distinguish between companies that are genuinely committed to the sustainability transition and those that engage in greenwashing practices?

The reasonable view that companies must be properly understood and that clear metrics, standards, and credible certification are essential highlights the core challenge: distinguishing genuine commitment from superficial claims requires sound governance, transparency, and accountability.

Key criteria and mechanisms

• Mandatory, standardized ESG reporting and disclosure

Companies should publish regular, comparable, and independently verified sustainability reports (environmental, social, governance data), covering emissions, resource use, social impact. This allows stakeholders (investors, regulators, civil society) to judge performance over time.

• Use of recognized, independent certification schemes and sustainable-finance standards

Instruments like green bonds or sustainability-linked bonds should follow accepted frameworks and be verified by independent third parties, to ensure credibility of the environmental claims.

• Assessment of “additionality” and genuine impact, not just intentions

It is crucial to evaluate what companies would have done in the absence of “green” labeling; only net improvements compared to a realistic baseline should count.

• Ongoing monitoring, transparency, and stakeholder scrutiny

Sustainability should not be a one-off advertisement but a continuous commitment: audits, public reporting, stakeholder engagement, and accountability mechanisms must be in place.

• Alignment with objective, science-based frameworks and regulations

For instance, compliance with the EU Taxonomy for Sustainable Activities can help ascertain whether a company’s activities truly contribute to environmental objectives.

In conclusion, distinguishing genuine sustainability from greenwashing requires a governance infrastructure: standardized reporting, independent verification, impact assessment, accountability, and regulatory alignment. Without these factors, “green” claims risk being nothing more than marketing.

4. Based on your professional knowledge and experience, do you think the European Commission should review any of the initiatives undertaken so far? If so, in which direction should such revisions go?

A review of existing initiatives is justified and, if done properly, could strengthen the effectiveness, inclusiveness and credibility of the European green policy framework. Based on the responses received and informed by recent developments and challenges, the following directions are suggested:

• Stronger support for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs) and smaller actors

Large firms often have resources to meet ESG standards and access green finance; SMEs risk being left out. The Commission should create dedicated support mechanisms (technical assistance, preferential financing, simplified procedures) for SMEs to enable widespread, inclusive participation in the green transition.

• Reinforcing regulatory frameworks for sustainable finance and transparency

To prevent greenwashing and increase trust, the Commission should promote or mandate standardized ESG disclosure, encourage use of recognized sustainability standards and certification, and ensure that financial instruments labeled as “green” meet strict, science-based criteria (for example, complying with the EU Taxonomy).

• Promoting a holistic, interdisciplinary, and participatory governance model

Climate policies should integrate environmental, economic, and social dimensions: mitigation, adaptation, social equity, resilience, biodiversity, and long-term sustainability. Collaboration among science, civil society, the private sector, and public institutions should be fostered.

• Encouraging long-term investments and support for innovation

The Commission should incentivize sustainable investments that have long payback periods – for example, renewable energy infrastructure, circular economy, nature-based solutions, biodiversity restoration – through green bonds, subsidies, public-private partnerships, and guarantee schemes.

• Establishing robust monitoring and evaluation of policy impact

Policies should be regularly assessed using scientific evidence, data, and transparent metrics; adjustments should be made when necessary. This helps ensure that declared objectives translate into real environmental, social, and economic outcomes.

In conclusion, a revision of current initiatives should aim at making the green transition more inclusive, transparent, science-based, and resilient – with a special focus on SMEs, long-term financing, robust governance, and equity. Such a revision would strengthen the credibility and effectiveness of European climate policy, making it more likely to achieve its goals in a fair and sustainable manner.

Authors: the ENGAGEgreen Project, Venice Unit – Marco Corazza, Michele Marzulli, Giulia Ballarin, and Stefano Campostrini.

They express their heartfelt gratitude to all the seminar contributors, namely:

D. Barro, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice
H. Bersini, FARI Institute of Brussels
M. Bidoia, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice
M. Billio, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice
A. Calvi, Modefinance
M. Costola, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice
G. Figà-Talamanca, University of Perugia
G. Filograsso, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice
A. Fronzetti Colladon, University of Perugia
S. Gentner, DG European Commission
R. Giacometti, University of Bergamo
C. Giupponi, Ca’ Foscari University of Venice
B. Guardabascio, University of Perugia
A. Mistretta, Bank of Italy
M. Patacca, University of Perugia
M.A. Pigato, World Bank’s Consultant
J.M. Ricci, University of Bergamo
L. Segneri, University of Perugia
G. Torri, University of Bergamo
K. Vozian, Hanken School of Economics

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

Medialab UGR, Impronta Granada and its Regional Approach

Summary: Key features in a nutshell

• University Living Labs as spaces of open and experimental innovation linking science, policy, and society
• Territorial focus through county-based participatory structures across the province of Granada
• Integration of the Quintuple Helix model (academia, government, business, civil society, and environment)
• Practice-based engagement formats such as co-creation workshops, policy labs, and science-policy events
• Coordinated by Medialab UGR within the “Impronta Granada” initiative and the ENGAGEgreen project

Description

This article explores the role of university-based citizen laboratories as spaces for social innovation, collaborative governance, and inclusive engagement. Drawing on the case of Medialab UGR and its umbrella initiative Impronta Granada, the study analyses how public universities can act as facilitators of regional innovation ecosystems. It focuses on the deployment of ten Living Labs known as UGR County Councils structured around the Quadruple and evolving Quintuple Helix models. These labs have enabled over 230 participants from academia, government, civil society, and the private sector to co-design sustainable, place-based solutions to regional challenges. The methodology involved a four-phase process including training, co-creation and continuous evaluation. Key results include the development of targeted action plans and the activation of science-policy dialogues grounded in local knowledge. The study highlights the strategic value of universities as political and epistemic actors capable of mediating between knowledge and democratic regional governance. It concludes with lessons and recommendations for scaling this model across Europe, proposing a situated, effective and inclusive approach to innovation that recognises the environment and region as active agents.

How does the format work?

Main objective and relevance

This contribution aims to document a methodological case study showcasing the implementation of a university-led Living Lab ecosystem grounded in the Quintuple Helix model. It provides a detailed account of how universities can serve as mediating infrastructures between academia and public administration, fostering science-policy interfaces that respond to regional and environmental challenges. The case is relevant for stakeholders interested in participatory governance, place-based innovation, and regional development.

Background information

Medialab UGR, embedded in the Vice-Rectorate for Social Innovation, Employability and Entrepreneurship, functions as the social innovation lab of the University of Granada. Through its strategic programme Impronta Granada, it has established ten UGR County Councils as thematic Living Labs across the province. These Councils operationalise a Quintuple Helix structure, engaging diverse regional actors in identifying, analysing, and addressing region-specific challenges. This model shifts from traditional linear knowledge transfer to a distributed and systemic approach to innovation.

Figure 1. Overview of the Impronta Granada project; Source: authors’ own schematic.

Methodological approach

The implementation followed a four-phase methodology: (1) internal recruitment and onboarding of academic participants with territorial ties; (2) expansion to include policymakers, civil society organisations, and business actors; (3) capacity-building and co-creation workshops; and (4) monitoring and evaluation. A participatory registration system captured over 230 participants, segmented by helix affiliation, thematic interest, and geographical connection. Tools included online seminars, thematic roundtables, SWOT analyses, and surveys. The methodology prioritised relationality, territoriality and multi-actor co-creation.

Key activities

• Internal call and onboarding of UGR academic and administrative staff, coordinated by Medialab UGR within the framework of the Impronta Granada initiative
• Identification of territorial links by participants (municipality, county, thematic interest)
• Development of ten geographically distributed UGR County Councils
• Capacity-building seminars introducing Living Lab and Quintuple Helix methodologies
• Co-creation sessions at the I Impronta Granada Meeting (Jan 2025)
• Collaborative roundtables and thematic seminars
• Evaluation surveys and impact assessments

Results

• Over 230 participants joined the Councils, representing all helices
• Eight action plans co-designed and linked to specific county priorities
• More than fifteen public and internal activities conducted
• Significant interest generated at European and international forums
• Demonstrated ability to trigger science-policy dialogues on local issues
• Strengthened epistemic legitimacy of non-academic knowledge
• Enabled hybrid governance model with decentralised coordination

Lessons learnt

• Territorial anchoring of innovation processes enhances engagement and legitimacy
• Flexible governance structures accommodate diverse local dynamics
• Political and institutional backing is essential for sustainability
• Hybrid (online-offline) formats democratise participation
• Co-creation works best when coupled with symbolic recognition (certificates, awards)

Transferability

The Impronta Granada model is scalable and adaptable to other regions seeking to establish university-led regional Living Labs. It requires minimal infrastructure, relies on open-source methodologies and benefits from aligning with EU frameworks such as the Urban Agenda, Horizon Europe and Erasmus+. The approach is especially relevant in rural or decentralised territories seeking to activate participatory public policy ecosystems.

Connection with the Quadruple/Quintuple Helix

Initially designed within the Quadruple Helix, the UGR County Councils explicitly adopt the Quintuple Helix model by integrating environmental and regional dimensions as co-creators of innovation. This extension redefines the role of place, recognising it as both an epistemic and political actor. Environmental sustainability, landscape memory, and regional knowledge shape the agenda-setting and solution design phases of the Labs.

Figure 2. The Quintuple Helix Model; Source: authors’ own schematic

Figure 3. Distribution of Quadruple Helix Participants in the UGR County Councils; Source: authors’ own schematic

Challenges

• Asymmetry in expectations, language, and timeframes between researchers and public administration
• Limited institutional incentives or recognition for academic staff engaging in policy-oriented initiatives
• Need for constant mediation and facilitation to avoid fragmentation and ensure productive dialogue
• Scaling up localised actions while preserving territorial relevance and community trust

Tasks and resources

Scientists

• Identify and translate local and regional challenges into research-informed questions and frameworks
• Participate in co-creation processes and workshops alongside policymakers, civil society, and other stakeholders
• Contribute disciplinary expertise to interdisciplinary problem-solving efforts within the Living Lab
• Act as facilitators of evidence-based decision-making, bringing scientific knowledge into the public debate
• Engage in the development and evaluation of participatory methodologies and tools used in the Lab
• Communicate findings in accessible formats to non-academic audiences, including local governments

Knowledge exchange managers and research managers

• Design and coordinate the overall structure of the Living Lab, ensuring alignment with institutional and territorial goals
• Facilitate communication and collaboration between researchers, policymakers, civil society, and businesses
• Mediate expectations and timescales between academia and public administrations to enable effective co-creation
• Manage logistics, outreach, and documentation of activities (e.g. workshops, policy labs, meetings)
• Monitor and evaluate the impact of science-policy interactions, contributing to continuous improvement
• Support the institutional embedding and long-term sustainability of Living Lab initiatives

Policymakers

• Bring forward local and regional policy challenges to be addressed collaboratively within the Living Lab
• Participate actively in co-design sessions and workshops alongside scientists and other stakeholders
• Offer practical and regulatory insights that inform the development of realistic and actionable proposals
• Facilitate access to local networks, data, and institutional support for implementing pilot initiatives
• Act as potential end-users of research-based outputs, helping to translate co-created knowledge into public policy
• Promote political buy-in and institutional alignment to ensure the adoption of innovative solutions

Sources and further reading

Carayannis, E. G., & Campbell, D. F. J. (2010). Triple Helix, Quadruple Helix and Quintuple Helix. IJSESD, 1(1), 41–69.

Romero-Frías, E., & Robinson-García, N. (2017). Social Labs in Universities. Comunicar, 51(2), 29–38.

Bergvall-Kåreborn, B., Ståhlbröst, A., Holst, M., & Mirijamdotter, A. (2015). A Milieu for Innovation – Defining Living Labs. ENoLL Summer School.

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@uni-frankfurt.de

Case Study of the Second Impronta Granada Meeting and Poniente Workshop

Description

The Quadruple Helix (QH) model fosters collaboration between four key stakeholders: academia, government, industry, and civil society. The Living Lab methodology allows these groups to cocreate solutions in real-world settings.

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 regional challenges through cocreated, 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

The Poniente Workshop, part of the Second Impronta Granada meeting, serves as a case study of how these two frameworks work together to address regional challenges in the Poniente Granadino region. The event brought together policymakers, academics, local businesses, and citizens working together to identify shared needs, propose solutions, and codesign initiatives for the region’s sustainable development.

In the run-up to the workshop, two online meetings with the UGR County Councils from the Poniente region and other areas were held to identify the key themes that would be presented at the meeting. These discussions helped shape the agenda and guided the workshop’s focus on sustainable development, regional identity, and regional collaboration.

Summary: Key features in a nutshell

• Stakeholders involved: University of Granada (UGR), local governments (Diputación de Granada, municipalities), local businesses, civil society organizations, and citizens
• Objective: To identify common challenges and to cocreate actionable solutions for regional problems related to depopulation, local heritage, tourism, and economic development
• Format: An interactive workshop, with cocreation activities, and panel discussions, building on findings from two preparatory online meetings
• Outcome: Development of practical initiatives such as intergenerational housing, tourism revitalization, integration of local knowledge, and cultural heritage preservation

How does the format work?

The Poniente Workshop followed the Quadruple Helix (QH) model, with active participation from governmental actors, academia, local businesses, and civil society

1. Government: Local councils and the Diputación de Granada provided policy frameworks, funding, and regional development goals.
2. Academia: Experts from the University of Granada (UGR) shared research findings on cultural heritage, socioeconomic development, and sustainable tourism.
3. Civil Society: Organizations like Tierra de Aguas and local communities represented the needs of the population and their vision for the future of the Poniente region.
4. Local Businesses: Entrepreneurs discussed how to connect local products and services to sustainable tourism models and the economic revitalization of the area.

Challenges

• Coordination Complexity: Despite efforts, coordination between stakeholders remains a challenge due to the complexity of local governance structures, funding dynamics, and the differing goals of each actor
• Sustainability: The main challenge lies in maintaining long-term commitment to initiatives as most projects are funded on a short-term basis and lack a continuous funding strategy
• Stakeholder Engagement: The need to engage local businesses and the broader community remains difficult, especially in marginalized areas or regions where public participation is low

Tasks and resources

Scientists

• Tasks
  • Contributing research insights on socioeconomic development, cultural heritage, and sustainable tourism; providing evidence for policymaking
• Required resources
  • Time for fieldwork and data collection
  • Collaboration with local governments to align research with practical solutions
  • Support for disseminating research findings to local stakeholders

Knowledge exchange managers and research managers

• Tasks
  • Organizing stakeholder meetings
  • Disseminating research findings
  • Ensuring communication between academia, government, and civil society
• Required resources
  • Digital platforms (e.g., webinars, forums) to facilitate communication
  • Organizational resources for managing the events and sustaining long-term initiatives

Policymakers

• Tasks
  • Defining regional policy frameworks
  • Providing financial support for local initiatives
  • Ensuring alignment with local and EU development goals
• Required resources
  • Policy expertise and administrative capacity for effective project management
  • Financial support and allocation of resources to ongoing initiatives
  • Time to participate in meetings, workshops, and planning sessions

Examples

1. Living Lab Example:The Poniente Workshop served as a Living Lab where stakeholders codesigned solutions for regional development; projects such as intergenerational housing models and sustainable tourism programs were suggested based on real-world challenges presented during the workshop
2. Research-based example

• Research conducted by the University of Granada (UGR) on cultural heritage preservation informed the creation of strategies for preserving the region’s history while simultaneously boosting local economies
• Academic contributions, such as sociodemographic studies on depopulation, provided the foundation for formulating strategies that directly addressed the region’s challenges.

Sources and further reading

Official coverage of the Second Impronta Granada meeting – University and Territory event: https://improntagranada.es/impronta/ii-impronta-granada-meeting-strengthens-the-university-territory-alliance-in-loja/

Case Study Details

How is the Format Conducted?

• The Poniente Workshop followed a structured format of an interactive session with micropresentations, group work, and panel discussions; prior to the event, two preparatory online meetings helped define key themes, such as sustainable tourism, youth retention, and economic revitalization, which were then discussed in greater depth during the event

Available Resources (Main Tasks)

• Coordination between local councils, researchers, and civil society is key to ensuring sustainability and relevance of the projects
• Research dissemination through the University of Granada (UGR) to share key findings with all stakeholders and design solutions that align with regional needs

What works? What doesn’t? (Lessons learnt)

• What works: The QH model of collaboration was effective in fostering dialogue and co-creation among diverse stakeholders; bringing together a variety of stakeholders with shared interests can lead to effective co-creation of solutions. The Living Lab approach allows for real-time feedback
• What doesn’t work: Coordination remains a challenge, and stakeholder engagement continues to be difficult, especially with local businesses and marginalized groups; besides, ensuring sustainability and long-term engagement from stakeholders is challenging, particularly when there are limited resources

How are the activities evaluated?

• Evaluating the success of the Living Lab requires monitoring stakeholder engagement and the implementation of solutions post-workshop
• Feedback will be gathered through surveys and follow-up workshops to assess the long-term impact of the initiatives launched

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@uni-frankfurt.de

Description – Key features in a nutshell

The UGR County Councils are regional dialogue spaces that connect university staff, local policymakers, civil society actors, and the private sector across Granada’s regions. They foster collaboration to identify local challenges and co-design solutions. Their aim is to align scientific knowledge with regional development needs. They are organised primarily around in-person meetings, while virtual sessions are also held to follow up on the activities of each UGR County Council. The UGR County Councils are new collaborative spaces designed:

• To foster direct connections between the University of Granada (UGR) and the different municipalities and regions within the province of Granada
• To create innovative, sustainable solutions by engaging the university, local governments, businesses, and the public in co-creation processes
• To generate opportunities and transfer scientific, educational, and innovative knowledge that contribute to the transformation and sustainable development of the regions
• To lay the foundations for future Living Labs, testing and applying innovations in public policies and local practices

How does the format work?

The methodology behind the UGR County Councils is based on the Living Lab methodology and follows a collaborative model known as the ‘Quadruple Helix’, bringing together four key stakeholders: the university, the public sector (municipalities’ mayors and governments), businesses, and citizens. The UGR County Councils aim to work closely with local communities to identify local needs related to three main thematic areas: the environmental impact of urban agendas, soil and culture. Besides, one of the UGR County Councils’ objectives is to design solutions for local development through regular meetings, workshops, and hackathons which can be implemented through scientific knowledge, technological innovation, and public policies.

After recruiting our main participants (lecturers, researchers, professors, and technicians from the University of Granada) via Google Form, the first informational meeting about the formation of UGR County Councils was held on 18 December 2024, gathering over 45 participants. The formal launch of the UGR County Councils took place and premiered on 20 January, 2025, as part of the Impronta Granada initiative, the strategic alliance between the University of Granada and the Provincial Council of Granada.

This recruitment process was coordinated by Medialab UGR, the Social Innovation Lab of the University of Granada. The first internal call was launched through a Google Form open to the entire university community between June and July 2024. Once this initial group was engaged, we organised the first informational and training session on the Living Lab methodology on 18 December 2024.

After ensuring that the university community was familiar with the initiative, we updated the Google Form to open participation to the other three helices – citizens, policymakers, and the business sector. University members themselves helped share the form with representatives from their own municipalities. Parallel to this, Medialab UGR, with the support of the Provincial Council of Granada, also sent the form to all municipalities in the province of Granada.

Challenges

• Engagement of local stakeholders. Ensuring active and sustained participation from local businesses, municipalities, and citizens is challenging
• Coordinating diverse interests. Balancing the interests of different groups (university, public sector, businesses, and citizens) while ensuring the project’s goals are met
• Implementation of solutions. Ensuring the co-created solutions are practical and implementable within the local context and effectively integrated into local policies

Tasks and resources

Scientists

Over 80 scientists from the University of Granada have joined the UGR County Council initiative. The registered researchers have different backgrounds and are specialised in more than 20 diverse areas of expertise (ranging from psychology and linguistics to parasitology and ecology), which make the knowledge transfer rich and fruitful.

Key tasks

• Provide scientific expertise and knowledge to help identify local needs and co-create innovative solutions
• Guide collaborative research projects that address regional challenges, particularly within the framework of the “Living Lab” methodology
• Actively participate in the evaluation of proposed solutions and innovations based on scientific validity and local applicability
• Present findings from collaborative efforts at various meetings, workshops, and events, such as the Impronta Granada annual gathering

Knowledge exchange managers and research managers

Key tasks

• Coordination of knowledge transfer by facilitating the transfer of scientific knowledge to local communities
• Ensure active participation from all relevant stakeholders, including municipalities, businesses, and citizens and ensure their needs are met with appropriate knowledge inputs
• Handle logistical arrangements for meetings, workshops, and events, ensuring smooth operations and communication
• Oversee the implementation of collaborative projects between UGR, businesses, and local governments
• Promote participation in the councils through communication strategies such as the social media campaigns
• Collect participant feedback after each session, ensuring that ideas and concerns are communicated effectively to the relevant decision makers

Policymakers

Key tasks

• Contribute to the identification of local needs, leveraging their expertise to align council projects with existing urban agendas and municipal and regional development plans
• Help ensure that the innovative solutions developed through the UGR County Councils are integrated into local governance and policymaking processes.
• Provide institutional support for the projects that emerge from the UGR County Councils
• Engage with local businesses, citizens, and researchers to promote regional collaborations and policy initiatives based on scientific evidence.

Example

The successful implementation of the Living Lab methodology in the 10 different regions constituting the Granada province, where university researchers and local stakeholders work together to design and implement solutions for their municipalities’ needs.

How has the format been implemented?

1. Initial informational session. Held on 18 December 2024, organised by Medialab UGR within the framework of the Impronta Granada initiative, with institutional support from the Vice-Rectorate for Social Innovation, Employability and Entrepreneurship. The meeting was moderated by Medialab UGR staff, who were also responsible for designing and managing the agenda, and brought together 46 participants to discuss the structure, objectives, and methodology behind the creation of the UGR County Councils.
2. Internal structure
   1. Council presidency. Vice-Rectorate for Social Innovation, Employability, and Entrepreneurship.
   2. Council spokesperson. Responsible for leading meetings, ensuring cohesion among stakeholders, and coordinating action implementation. This role could be assumed by a UGR lecturer or staff member.
   3. Dialogue facilitator. When necessary, Medialab UGR experts will facilitate participatory processes, ensuring all actors have a voice and that discussions are productive and balanced.
3. Ongoing Google Form questionnaire. The initial Google Form used to reach the lecturers, professors, researchers, and technicians from the University of Granada has been extended to the other three stakeholders (municipalities’ governments, private sector and citizenship in the region of Granada) accounting currently for over 120 registered participants.
4. Emailing list. Creation of an emailing list per UGR County Council so that the different participants can contact each other.
5. Organisational session. 10 different virtual meetings have been organised so that every UGR County Council participant can meet their counterparts and identify their local needs so as to present them in the formal launch event.
6. Formal launch. The councils met officially on 20 January 2025 during the Impronta Granada event, where all participants were introduced and roles assigned.
7. Additional meetings. Subsequent meetings will be held either in-person or online, depending on local needs and priorities.

Available resources (What are the main tasks?)

1. Coordination: Organising meetings, gathering feedback, and ensuring all stakeholders are informed of developments.
2. Workshops and Living Labs: Facilitating collaborative problem-solving and ideation sessions.
3. Community engagement: Ensuring active participation from local residents, businesses, and governmental bodies. Fostering engagement is considered in the following ways:
   1. Participation certificates;
   2. Continuous training through science-policy based workshops;
   3. Best UGR County Council Award to be delivered at the 2026 Impronta Granada event;
   4. Visibility and dissemination through UGR social media.

What works? What doesn`t? (Lessons learnt)

• What works? Clear communication channels and flexible participation options (online and in-person meetings) have helped engage stakeholders
• What doesn’t? Overreliance on digital platforms for engagement may exclude some community members, especially in rural areas with limited access to technology.

How do you evaluate the activities?

Evaluation will be conducted through continuous feedback loops, including focus groups after each meeting. Success indicators include:

• Number of projects initiated
• Level of satisfaction from participants
• Number of solutions implemented in local policies
• Degree of local economic impact

Sources and further reading

Promotion and dissemination of both the informational meeting and the consolidation of the UGR County Councils:

• UGR County Councils microsite via Impronta Granada website with the profile of the different participants: https://improntagranada.es/campaign/consejoscomarcalesugr/
• UGR County Councils news and informational video within the University of Granada via Medialab UGR: https://medialab.ugr.es/impronta-granada/la-universidad-de-granada-celebra-la-primera-reunion-informativa-sobre-la-constitucion-de-los-consejos-comarcales-ugr/

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@uni-frankfurt.de

A Case Study of the Second Impronta Granada Meeting and Entrepreneurship and Employability Workshop

Description

UGR County Councils refers to the initiative led by the University of Granada (UGR) under the Erasmus+ ENGAGEgreen project, which aims to foster collaboration between academic researchers, local governments, and community stakeholders. This initiative focuses on addressing regional challenges through cocreated, 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.

Planning effective follow-up activities is essential to ensuring that the momentum generated by participatory events like the Entrepreneurship and Employability Workshop that took place at the Second Impronta Granada Meeting is sustained and transformed into long-term, actionable outcomes. The UGR County Councils initiative, along with the Second Impronta Granada Meeting, demonstrates how follow-up activities can provide continuous engagement between researchers, local governments, and youth participants to address employment and entrepreneurship challenges in rural regions. Follow-up actions help evaluate the success of proposed solutions and allow for adjustments as the community works together to overcome challenges and build sustainable initiatives.

Summary: Key features in a nutshell

• Objective: To design and implement follow-up activities that maintain engagement with local stakeholders and ensure sustainability in addressing employment and entrepreneurship issues
• Approach:
  • Post-event surveys to evaluate the effectiveness of proposals
  • Ongoing collaboration between UGR researchers, policymakers, and local businesses
  • Visibility of outcomes through digital platforms like the Impronta Granada website
• Outcome: Creation of long-term initiatives that reflect collaborative solutions and tackle local development challenges

How does the format work?

1. Planning post-event engagement: After the  Entrepreneurship and Employability Workshop, the follow-up phase ensures that all stakeholders stay engaged. This can be achieved through feedback loops like surveys and online discussions on platforms such as the Impronta Granada website. Feedback helps refine the solutions discussed during the event and provides participants an opportunity to reflect on the progress made.
2. Collecting feedback and evaluating impact: Post-event surveys and interviews can be used to measure the effectiveness of the proposed solutions. These tools help identify gaps in implementation and areas that require additional attention. For instance, participants could be asked if the entrepreneurship programs presented in the workshop were accessible and if they helped overcome barriers to starting businesses in rural areas.
3. Visibility and continuous engagement: Using digital platforms like the Impronta Granada website, researchers and policymakers can continue the dialogue after the event by updating project progress and sharing outcomes. This transparency keeps the community informed and ensures that everyone is working towards common goals.
4. Sustaining collaboration: Long-term engagement requires regular communication. After the II Encuentro Impronta Granada, stakeholders can continue collaborating through follow-up workshops, networking events, or virtual consultations, where ideas and solutions can be refined using feedback from the initial event.

Challenges

• Sustaining participation: Keeping stakeholders engaged long-term can be difficult due to time constraints, especially for researchers and policymakers who have other responsibilities
• Resource availability: Limited funding and resources can make consistent implementation of follow-up activities challenging
• Managing expectations: Ensuring that stakeholders’ expectations align with what can be realistically achieved in the follow-up phase is crucial to avoiding disillusionment

Tasks and resources

Scientists

• Tasks
  • Support data collection
  • Participate in follow-up workshops
  • Share updates on research progress
• Required resources
  • Time for research dissemination and follow-up consultations

Knowledge exchange managers and research managers

• Tasks
  • Coordinate online feedback.
  • Manage communication platforms
  • Facilitate follow-up events
• Required resources
  • Digital tools (e.g., websites, survey tools)

Policymakers

• Tasks
  • Monitor progress.
  • Allocate resources
  • Ensure that research findings are integrated into policy decisions
• Required resources
  • Financial and administrative support for post-event actions

Examples

1. Impronta Granada website: The Impronta Granada website allowed continuous engagement after the  Entrepreneurship and Employability Workshop where researchers shared updates, progress reports, and new insights, allowing policymakers and businesses could stay informed and involved.
2. Follow-up surveys: After the Second Encuentro Impronta Granada, surveys were used to assess the effectiveness of entrepreneurship programs and youth employment initiatives discussed during the event, with feedback used to refine the proposals and ensure that they met local needs.

Sources and further reading

• Impronta Granada Website – https://improntagranada.es/
• Official coverage of the Second Impronta Granada meeting – University and Regional event: https://improntagranada.es/impronta/ii-impronta-granada-meeting-strengthens-the-university-territory-alliance-in-loja/

Case study details:

How is the format implemented?

Follow-up activities are initiated post-dialogue events to ensure the connection between researchers and policymakers is maintained. For example, after the Second Impronta Granada Meeting, researchers were invited to submit further proposals for collaboration based on the feedback received from policymakers and stakeholders. This ensured that both parties could review and refine their engagements.

Available resources (main tasks):

• Collecting feedback from participants to assess the relevance of research presentations
• Facilitating ongoing dialogue via online platforms like Impronta Granada to track progress
• Organizing further collaborative meetings based on the discussions at the events

What works? What doesn’t? (Lessons Learnt):

What works:

Using structured online platforms such as Impronta Granada to continue discussions beyond events ensures that the momentum of the workshops and discussions is not lost.

What doesn’t work:

It’s challenging to maintain sustained participation by policymakers after the events due to their varying commitments and workloads.

How are the activities evaluated?

The follow-up activities were evaluated using feedback surveys sent to both researchers and policymakers, to gauge how well the research had impacted local policymaking. Follow-up surveys assessed the continuation of collaboration, the implementation of knowledge, and the development of new projects or initiatives inspired by the initial discussions.

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

Case Study of the Second Impronta Granada Meeting and Entrepreneurship and Employability Workshop

Description

Organizing dialogue events in capitals or key urban areas requires a structured approach that balances the needs of local stakeholders with the goals of policymakers. These events provide a platform for researchers, businesses, and policymakers to co-create solutions for pressing territorial challenges, ensuring that the voice of the community is heard and considered. This contribution discusses strategies for organizing dialogue events in urban centers and leveraging them to foster inclusive policymaking in the context of entrepreneurship and youth employment.

Summary: Key Features in a Nutshell:

• Objective: To create an effective structure for dialogue events that connect local stakeholders with policymakers to co-create sustainable solutions for employment and entrepreneurship.
• Approach:
  • Clear goals for the event to align academic research with policy priorities.
  • Multi-stakeholder workshops to foster collaborative solutions.
  • Use of interactive tools (e.g., micropresentations, polling, feedback sessions) to ensure active participation.
• Outcome: A transparent and inclusive process where local challenges are addressed through policy-driven solutions that are informed by academic research and local expertise.

How Does the Format Work?

1. Setting Clear Objectives: Before the event, it is essential to define the goals and outcomes expected from the dialogue event. For the Entrepreneurship and Employability Workshop, the goal was to address youth unemployment and promote entrepreneurship in the Poniente Granadino region by involving UGR researchers, local businesses, and policymakers.
2. Interactive Sessions and Workshops: During the event, interactive workshops and micropresentations were organized to encourage real-time feedback. Researchers shared data and insights, while policymakers discussed policy frameworks and how these could be integrated with academic findings to create actionable strategies.
3. Engagement with Local and National Stakeholders: It is important to include both local actors and national policymakers in the discussion. The Entrepreneurship and Employability Workshop in Granada connected local youth and policymakers with national representatives, ensuring that the solutions developed were relevant and feasible at both levels.
4. Post-Event Engagement: Ensuring that the event leads to sustained collaboration is key. Follow-up activities, including workshops and feedback surveys, should be planned to ensure that policymakers and researchers continue to collaborate after the event.

Challenges:

• Managing Expectations: Different stakeholders have different expectations. Policymakers may focus on policy alignment while researchers may prioritize data accuracy. Balancing these priorities requires careful facilitation.
• Sustaining Momentum: Keeping the engagement high after the initial dialogue event requires consistent follow-up, which may be hindered by time constraints or budget limitations.

Tasks and Resources:

Scientists

• Tasks:
  • Present research findings relevant to youth employment and entrepreneurship.
  • Provide data-driven solutions for local development challenges.
  • Engage in workshops and policy discussions.
• Required Resources:
  • Time for research dissemination and participation in events.
  • Communication tools for presenting research data and engaging with stakeholders.

Knowledge exchange managers and research managers

• Tasks
  • Facilitate interactive workshops and ensure researcher-policymaker interaction.
  • Organize feedback loops and ensure ongoing communication post-event.
• Required Resources:
  • Digital platforms for research dissemination and ongoing feedback.
  • Logistical support for organizing sessions and ensuring active participation.

Policymakers

• Tasks:
  • Integrate research findings into local policies and allocate resources to support research-driven initiatives.
  • Ensure long-term collaboration between researchers and local communities.
• Required Resources:
  • Policy expertise to interpret research data and incorporate it into decision-making.
  • Financial resources for post-event actions and implementation.

Examples

UGR County Councils refers to the initiative led by the University of Granada (UGR) under the 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.

The Entrepreneurship and Employability Workshop, which took place at the Second Impronta Granada meeting, successfully organized multi-stakeholder dialogues in an urban setting, enabling researchers, policymakers, and youth participants to collaborate in addressing employment and entrepreneurship challenges. The event’s interactive workshops helped align research with local policy, paving the way for further collaboration.

Sources and Further Reading

• Official coverage of the Second Impronta Granada meeting – University and Territory event: https://improntagranada.es/impronta/ii-impronta-granada-meeting-strengthens-the-university-territory-alliance-in-loja/

Case Study Details

How is the Format Conducted

Dialogue events in capitals, such as the Second Impronta Granada Meeting in Loja, combine workshops, networking sessions, and presentations. These events are organized with a mix of in-person and virtual participation to ensure accessibility for a broader audience. The inclusion of policymakers, researchers, and stakeholders from civil society allows for multi-dimensional dialogue on issues such as climate change, urban development, and social innovation.

For this event, an innovative dialogue event was held, where a combination of physical and virtual formats allowed for maximum participation from stakeholders. Researchers from the University of Granada and other partner universities participated by showcasing their work in thematic workshops. The event included a series of discussions, policy briefs, and presentations, as well as the important inclusion of local policymakers through the Impronta Granada platform, which bridges the gap between the academic community and decision-makers.

Available Resources (Main Tasks)

• Securing venues in capital cities for large-scale meetings.
• Coordinating with stakeholders from local and regional governments, universities, and research institutes.
• Using online platforms such as Impronta Granada to promote dialogue and share research outcomes with a wider audience.

What Works? What Doesn’t? (Lessons Learnt)

What works:

The hybrid event format (in-person + online) allowed for wide participation and dynamic interaction. Micropresentations were particularly successful in translating research data into actionable policy recommendations.

What doesn’t work:

Sustaining momentum after the event remains challenging, particularly in ensuring long-term involvement from policymakers who face competing priorities. Additionally, ensuring equal participation across all sectors, especially among local businesses, can be difficult in regions with fewer resources.

How Do You Evaluate the Activities:

To evaluate the effectiveness of the dialogue events, surveys were distributed to all participants to assess their satisfaction with the format, content, and overall engagement. Key indicators such as the number of new collaborations formed, and the implementation of research insights into local policies, were also tracked to assess long-term impact.

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

Summary: Key Features in a Nutshell

●       Objective: To create a clear framework for effectively connecting academic research with policy development, ensuring that research data is used to inform local decisions

●       Approach: Strategies include regular engagement between researchers and policymakers, data dissemination through interactive workshops and consultations, and leveraging digital platforms to ensure continuous feedback

●       Outcome: The development of data-driven policies that align with local development goals, improving public services, economic growth, and sustainability at the regional level

Description

Connecting research expertise with policymaking at local levels is essential for ensuring that academic knowledge directly informs policy decisions that affect regional development. The process involves bridging the gap between scientific research and practical, actionable solutions that policymakers can implement. By integrating research into decision-making processes, it becomes possible to create evidence-based policies that are not only grounded in data but also tailored to address local needs. This contribution explores strategies for connecting researchers with local policymakers, facilitating effective communication, and utilising research data to shape policy decisions.

How does the format work?

1.      Researcher-policymaker interaction. The process is typically initiated and coordinated by knowledge exchange managers or research managers within the university who act as intermediaries between researchers and policymakers. They establish regular communication channels – such as interactive workshops, consultation sessions or collaborative planning meetings – where researchers are invited to present evidence and data that can directly inform local policy decisions.

2.      Using research data to influence policymaking at local levels. A critical component of this process is ensuring that research data be relevant and accessible to policymakers. This can be achieved through the creation of policy briefs, data visualisation tools, and interactive reports that distill complex research findings into actionable insights. Researchers can work with local governments to highlight key findings that address specific regional issues such as sustainability, economic development, and public health. For instance, researchers from the University of Granada could present socioeconomic research on local development trends linked to green and digital transitions, such as sustainable land use, climate adaptation, the digitalisation of public services or the digital divide, as well as research on archaeological heritage preservation, and offer data-driven recommendations that align with policy goals for urban renewal or cultural conservation.

3.      Feedback and continuous engagement. A successful research-policy connection requires ongoing engagement. Researchers should not only share their findings but also actively participate in the policy implementation process. This can be done through dialogue-oriented follow-up consultations, such as meetings or workshops with policymakers, which may be complemented by written feedback or short analytical notes. These interactions allow researchers to assess how their evidence has been applied and to adjust strategies accordingly. Continuous interaction between researchers and policymakers enables policies to be refined as new data emerges, ensuring that decisions remain flexible and responsive to evolving local needs.

4.      Using digital platforms for ongoing interaction. Digital platforms, such as the Impronta Granada website, play a crucial role in maintaining visibility for research projects and ensuring that research findings be continuously accessible to local stakeholders. For example, platforms like these allow researchers to share project updates, findings, and recommendations, making it easy for local policymakers to track research progress and align their policy decisions with the most current data.

Challenges

●       Complexity of research data. Academic research can often be complex, and translating it into clear, actionable policy recommendations for local governments can be challenging. Ensuring that researchers are able to simplify their findings while maintaining their scientific integrity is key to this process. For example, quantitative research on soil health, climate adaptation, or digital inclusion may need to be translated into clear indicators, visual summaries or policy briefs that highlight implications for local planning or service provision, rather than detailed methodological explanations.

●       Stakeholder engagement. Engaging policymakers in the research process is not always straightforward. Local authorities may have competing priorities, and integrating research expertise into policy frameworks may require significant effort to overcome bureaucratic barriers.

Tasks and resources

Scientists

●       Tasks

○       Present research findings

○       Create policy briefs

○       Engage in collaborative workshops with policymakers

●       Required resources

○       Time for research dissemination and participation in events

○       Communication tools for presenting research data to policymakers

Knowledge exchange managers and research managers

●       Tasks

○       Coordinate researcher involvement with local policymakers

○       Facilitate workshops

○       Ensure that research is accessible and relevant to local governance needs

●       Required resources

○       Digital platforms for research dissemination and ongoing feedback

○       Facilitation support for organizing collaborative workshops and consultations

Policymakers

●       Tasks

o   Integrate research data into local policies and allocate resources for research-driven initiatives.

●       Required resources

○       Policy expertise to interpret research data and incorporate it into decision making

○       Financial and administrative resources to support research applications in local development projects

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 regional challenges through co-created, research-driven solutions. The Second Impronta Granada Meeting is the third pilot event organised 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

The UGR County Councils initiative played a crucial role in connecting researchers with policymakers. Through online preparatory meetings and interactive workshops, the initiative was coordinated by the University of Granada through its knowledge exchange structures, which invited UGR researchers to showcase their research projects. These projects were mapped in an Excel database and shared through the Impronta Granada website. The website allowed policymakers to view actor profiles of UGR researchers, filter them by county council, and understand how their research aligned with territorial development needs. These efforts culminated in the Second Impronta Granada Meeting, where researchers presented their projects in micropresentations, directly engaging with local governments and businesses to discuss real-world applications of their findings. This process ensured that research data was accessible, visible, and integrated into the policy-making process at local levels.

Sources and further reading

• Impronta Granada Website – Impronta Granada Actor Profiles and UGR Projects in County Councils.
• Official coverage of the Second Impronta Granada meeting – University and Territory event: https://improntagranada.es/impronta/ii-impronta-granada-meeting-strengthens-the-university-territory-alliance-in-loja/

Key features in a nutshell

• The Policy Fellowship Programmes of the Rhine-Main-Universities Darmstadt, Frankfurt, and Mainz allow policymaking professionals from regional and federal ministries, the European Commission and international organisations, NGOs, as well as journalists to visit the Rhine-Main-Universities to conduct meetings with scientists.
• The initiatives aim at providing practitioners with scientific expertise on the policy issues they are dealing with while the researchers learn about policy perspectives on their research topics.
• Record: 210 policymaking professionals have conducted about 2,800 meetings with about 730 scientists since 2016.

How does the format work?

The Rhine-Main Universities – an alliance of  Technical University Darmstadt, Goethe University Frankfurt, and Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz – promote dialogue between scientists from various disciplines and policymakers via face-to-face meetings. The Rhine-Main Universities have established three dialogue programmes: The Mercator Science-Policy Fellowship Programme, the Science Meets Regions Fellowship, and the ENGAGE Policy Fellowship.

These programmes follow a very similar structure: The Rhine-Main Universities circulate calls for applications to hundreds of policymaking institutions, civil society organisations and media in Germany and abroad.

When applying to our programmes, policymaking professionals must elaborate on their need for academic expertise in motivation letters. Also, they have to provide a list of questions they would like to discuss with our scientists. Once accepted into the programmes, each policymaking professional receives a comprehensive list of researchers with whom they can meet. The policymaking professionals provide feedback on the list. The policy engagement unit at Frankfurt University schedules the meetings between the scientists and the policymaking professionals.

Each fellowship cohort conducts joint visits to the Frankfurt/Rhine-Main area twice during their fellowship, and each policymaker has meetings with approximately eight researchers during each visit. If the policy fellow needs scientific expertise in the future, they will have a network of 16 researchers they have already met and whom they can approach. Likewise, the participating researchers can approach their counterparts in policymaking institutions if they want to disseminate their knowledge. Our evaluations show that the participating policymakers and scientists are very content with the programmes. Both appreciate the office’s time efficiency and organisational support for policy engagement.

These face-to-face meetings have resulted in numerous follow-up activities such as joint events, talks by researchers at the institutions of policy professionals, and joint research projects.

Our fellowship programme brings professionals and scientists together in hundreds of meetings they would otherwise never meet. Our evaluation surveys show that about half of the researchers had no or only occasional contact with policymakers before participating in our programmes. The same observation applies to the participating policymaking professionals.

Thus, our dialogue initiatives prove that there is excellent potential for programmes bringing policymaking professionals and researchers together.

Challenges (and how to address them)

A very practical challenge is scheduling meetings with our scientists, who are often not at the universities daily. Thus, we must start planning the meetings three months in advance.

Another challenge is for the scientists to understand that the policy fellows are diverse. Some policy fellows have extensive knowledge of the topics they would like to discuss; they ask questions, such as “How does the use of smartphones affect the reading skills of children in primary schools?” Others are interested in rather big “big questions” in their policy fields (e.g., “How stable are financial markets?”), while some policy fellows use the time to gain an overview of unfamiliar topics (e.g. “What are algorithms?”).

Likewise, policymakers might talk with scientists who understand policymaking well while others speak to policymakers for the first time. We have prepared FAQ lists for policymakers and scientists and informed policymakers about the programme through bilateral phone calls or Zoom calls and an induction event.

Tasks and resources

Scientists

The programmes are very time-efficient for scientists. Since the meetings are informal, they do not have to invest much time in preparing them other than reading the topics of interest of the policy fellows.

Knowledge exchange managers and research managers (Support staff)

The Rhine-Main-Universities created two new positions to coordinate their policy-dialogue projects. Our tasks include managing the application process, identifying possible experts for policymakers, assisting policymakers and scientists with organisational issues, scheduling 350 meetings per year, and other tasks. The programme is very resource intensive regarding support staff because we tailor some 16 meetings to the needs of the policy fellow.

Policymakers

The policymakers must submit an application, which takes them a couple of hours to prepare. We recommend that they spare 30 minutes of preparation time for each of the 16 scheduled meetings with our scientists. They have to conduct the meetings with our scientists. We also ask our policy fellows to participate in preparatory sessions, a feedback call, and two rounds of evaluations.

Required funding

We spend about 80% of our budget on financing two full-time positions. We have a modest budget for joint events, public relations, and travel. Stiftung Mercator provides about 60 per cent of our funds, while the EU and the three Rhine-Main-Universities contribute 20 per cent each.

Our policy fellows must cover the costs of travel to the Frankfurt/Rhine-Main area, accommodation, and dinners. We do not charge the policy fellows; other institutions, like the Centre for Science and Policy at Cambridge University or ETH Zürich, do so for their policy dialogue projects.

Sources and further reading

Tome Sandevski. How the Rine-Main Universities promote knowledge exchange between researchers and policymakers via face-to-face meetings. Knowledge of policy blog. 15 August 2023.  https://knowledge4policy.ec.europa.eu/blog/how-rhine-main-universities-promote-knowledge-exchange-between-researchers-policymakers-face-0_en

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

Key Features in a nutshell

• Bilingual webinars are the ideal format to virtually put face-to-face scientists and local/regional policymakers and break the language barrier.
• The remote component and its short duration (1h an half maximum) allow flexibility in terms of time, which meets the needs of the often-busy schedules of policymakers.
• Online formats such as webinars are more sustainable than in-person transnational meetings in terms of time, costs and inclusivity.
• The Q&A and comments sections of the platforms allow the interaction with a broader public such as civil society.

How does the format work

Université Lumière Lyon 2 and Ca’ Foscari University of Venice have piloted the bilingual webinar format, within the framework of the Erasmus+ project ENGAGEgreen: Enhancing Institutional Capacities for Policy Engagement for Green and Digital Transitions.

This type of webinar format, with the addition of Remote Simultaneous Interpreting (RSI), allows local and regional policymakers, who might not be familiar or comfortable enough to carry out a discussion in a different language, to actively participate in the webinar.

In their inclusivity, bilingual webinars help foster stronger relationships among host institutions and policymakers, thus broadening the network, and engaging in the discussion also the civil society.

Participants (including organizers and speakers):

10 Researchers

1 Student

9 NGO/Civil society

7 University personnel (Research/Project managers)

4 Other (freelance, company, Coldiretti)

Before the webinar:

In preparation for the webinars, host institutions meet online bilaterally to decide on common topics, possible speakers and the target audience. Subsequently, host institutions and speakers agree on the agenda and time slots dedicated to each speaker, to be included in the online registration form and communication material to be shared on websites and social media.

It is advisable to share with the interpreter the presentations or other support materials.

The videoconference platform chosen for this webinar format is Zoom. It allows RSI, the creation and customization of a registration form and automated reminders to attendees (e.g. 1 week, 1 day and 1 hour before the event), as well as follow-up emails and surveys.

15 minutes prior the start of the webinar the Research manager (or other support staff) initiates a “Zoom practice session” together with speakers, moderator and interpreter. This is to confirm all technical aspects such as audio, selection of language, and sharing of presentations, are ready for a smooth presentation.

During the webinar:

During a 1-hour webinar, a lineup of 3 speakers (ideally 1 moderator, 1 researcher and 1 policymaker from the respective regions/nations) will shortly present their cases and related challenges, to be followed by a round of open discussion, and concluding with taking Q&A from the broader public.

With the support of RSI, which translates the conversation in real time, participants to the webinar are able to follow the discussion without breaks and without the possible misunderstandings of listening/speaking in a language that is not native.

Research managers (or other administrative staff) can support the back-end moderation of the webinar, such as select questions from the participants, and assist the speakers and translators in the event of technical issues.

The structure of the programme is as follows:

15 minutes before the start – practice session with speakers, moderator and interpreter

5 minutes of welcoming & project introduction

15 minutes for the presentation of Speaker 1

15 minutes for the presentation of Speaker 2

5-10 minutes of discussion among speakers

10 minutes for the Q&A

(It is advisable to keep the overall duration of the webinars under 2 hours).

After the webinar:

The webinar is followed by social media posts to communicate the outcomes of the discussion. An automated follow-up email is sent to all participants including a short evaluation questionnaire and the link to the ENGAGEgreen project’s website.

This format of webinars can also be replicated with other project partners or stakeholders or repeated annually as a form of follow-up and to take in the state-of-the-art of the topics discussed.

Challenges (and way to address them)

• Identification of common topics of interests between the two national institutions. Mitigation measures: monitor common areas of study, investigate with other departments/units of the university about scientists/researchers to involve, contact the already existing network of policymakers.
• Match schedules of the speakers. Mitigation measures: propose multiple dates and time slots well in advance from the final date of the webinar. Set preliminary and recurrent meetings, to confirm the agenda and keep everyone updated.
• Possibility of increasing the number of languages and speakers, but this implies a longer duration and higher translation costs. Mitigation measures: investigate the possibility of using AI tools to generate subtitles or interpretation.
• Production of promotion material in both languages and carry out parallel promotion both on- and offline. Mitigation measures: Create some draft posters/promo material in a common language (e.g. English) and have each partner translate in the respective native language. Moreover, each should disseminate the promo material with the respective networks/dedicated mailing lists.

Tasks and Ressources

Project team

The personnel from the department/unit directly involved in a specific project liaise with other structures of the university/institution to identify the most suitable speakers on the chosen topic, both from academia and among policymakers and other organizations and stakeholders.

Knowledge exchange managers and research managers

Knowledge exchange managers and research managers play a key role in all phases of the organisation of webinars, from bilateral preliminary meetings to post-webinar debriefing. They can help identify possible topics for the webinars and coordinate the drafting of the programme. Moreover, they can assist in organising the webinar, like identifying the most suitable platform and setup the webinar, contact interpreters, or moderate the session. In addition to that, they can liaise with communication offices to give support in the preparation of press releases and social media posts before or after the webinars.

Speakers: Scientists/Researchers and Stakeholders

Researchers: The researchers need a clear understanding of the context in which they are speaking. Their contribution should balance scientific rigor with relevance for policy development. They should deliver high-value scientific content – not something obvious to the audience – while ensuring it is accessible to non-scientists. They must also adhere to the fast-paced timing typical of online events.

Stakeholder/Organization: It is important to involve individuals who represent a specific sector (for example, an economic sector) and who can effectively engage with researchers. This requires a sufficiently strong knowledge base to understand and meaningfully discuss the scientific issues presented.

Moderator: Given the complexity of connecting research and policy, the moderator’s role is to keep the discussion aligned with the objectives of the webinar. The moderator should be able to guide speakers back to the intended goals if the conversation diverges.

Required funding for activities

If the hosting institution does not have a licensed version of Zoom, which allows the webinar format, upgrade costs may apply.

Given the bilingual nature of this format of webinars, Remote Simultaneous Interpreting costs are required. AI-generated translation has not yet been considered.

Examples

Ca’ Foscari University of Venice website
Université Lumière Lyon 2 website