Understanding Policy Priorities: A Key Documents Exercise

Key features in a nutshell

• This exercise helps participants identify policy areas relevant to their research by exploring key policy documents such as government programs or sectoral strategies
• By reading the documents in full or using the table of contents and search function participants practice an efficient, targeted approach to navigating lengthy policy documents

How does the format work?

Most local, regional, or national governments in OECD countries, the European Commission, international organizations, and political parties publish documents that set out their priorities: government programs, strategic plans, work programs, or party platforms. These documents are essential reading for researchers who want to engage with policymakers effectively: they reveal which issues are on the political agenda, what language policymakers use to describe them, and where potential entry points for science-policy engagement exist. This exercise introduces participants to this type of document and asks them to map their own research expertise onto current policy priorities.

Step 1: Choose your document

Ask participants to select a policy priority document relevant to their institutional or national context. Depending on the workshop audience, facilitators may preselect two to four documents or invite participants to choose their own.

Step 2: Navigate efficiently

Participants can read the documents in full if they want to. Alternatively, ask them to only use two tools: the table of contents to get an overview of the document’s structure and the search function to look up terms related to their research.

Ask participants to reflect on the following questions as they browse:

• Do you find topics in this document on which you have research expertise?
• Which policy issues are of particular interest to you?
• What language does the document use to describe the issues you work on? Does it match the terminology you use in your research? Do you understand the terminology?
• Are there topics you expected to find that are absent or unexpected topics that are prominently featured?

Step 3: Debrief

Facilitate a short plenary discussion. Useful questions include:

• Where did you find the strongest connections to your own research?
• Were there any surprises, topics that were more prominent or less prominent than you expected?
• Did the language used in the document differ from how you would describe the same issues in an academic context? What does that tell you about how to communicate your research to policymakers?

The debrief typically takes 10–20 minutes, and productive conversations about the gap between academic and policy language often arise Steps 1 and 2 can be sent to participants in advance, with Step 3 conducted as a plenary discussion during the workshop. The full exercise – including the debrief – takes between 30 and 60 minutes, depending on group size and the depth of discussion.

Tasks and resources: Brief description of the tasks and resources needed by scientists, knowledge exchange officers/research managers, and policymakers

Workshop facilitators

Select two to four documents in advance that are most relevant to the workshop audience and share them with participants before the session if possible. For international audiences, prepare a short overview of the types of policy priority documents that exist at national, EU, and international levels. Facilitate the debrief discussion, paying particular attention to differences in language between academic and policy documents –  this is often the most productive thread.

Scientists and other participants

Browse the selected document using the table of contents and search function, reflect on the questions in Step 2, and contribute to the debrief. Participants who already engage with policymakers are encouraged to reflect on whether they have previously used documents like these to prepare for meetings or to identify relevant contacts.

Policymakers

If policymakers are present, invite them to share how they themselves use documents such as coalition agreements or work programs in their day-to-day work – and how they would expect researchers to engage with them. Their perspective on the gap between political language and research language is often illuminating.

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