The following is a blog post which was written recently by Rachel Hayman of the International NGO Training and Research Center (INTRAC) in Oxford, UK on productive relationships between NGOs and academics in the design and execution of research. This was based on findings of a small research project on this topic which INTRAC undertook recently, and for which one of the case studies was the research collaboration between Plan International Guatemala and the Transnational NGO Initiative in 2009 in the context of Plan's strategic evaluation of their transition in Guatemala towards a Rights Based Approach.
Should NGOs be shapers, producers, or consumers of research?
Reflections on academic-practitioner research collaboration?
Posted by Rachel Hayman on 18 May 2012, INTRAC website
Stakeholder engagement seems to be all the rage in certain
research funding circles. For a while the debate has focused primarily on how
research can be better used by policymakers, government institutions, NGOs and
civil society organisations. This 'research-to-use' debate is concerned with
how research can be communicated in a way that makes it relevant, accessible
and useable. It resonates with the 'impact' agenda hitting academic
institutions – the need to demonstrate that research brings tangible benefits
But the trend may be shifting towards more profound research
relationships between NGOs and academic institutions. Practitioners are
actively seeking academic partners – partly in response to the results agenda;
donors and research funders seem to be encouraging collaboration. We see this
happening in international development circles and within the humanitarian
sector (for example, ELRHA's work).
Why should NGOs consider collaboration? It requires
resources, institutional support, skills, a culture of critical enquiry, and a
willingness to accept both positive and negative findings that may emerge. But
it can also bring insights, solutions, credibility, evidence, and new
At a recent workshop, one participant proposed that we
consider the role that NGOs might or should play as shapers, producers or
consumers of research. Here are my thoughts:
NGOs as shapers of research
NGOs should be doing this but could be doing it so much
more. I've yet to look into this, but I wonder how many representatives of NGOs
sit on the research funding committees that decide on research themes and
funding priorities, or seek to influence them? In theory, practitioners should
be extremely well-placed to observe gaps in the international development
research that academics might plug, and to highlight potentially innovative
ideas which some funders claim to encourage.
But this assumes that practitioners act upon those
observations; that mechanisms exist for NGOs to feed research questions to
academics – beyond personal links and happenstance; and that funders are
willing to listen to NGOs. But there is more to shaping than just posing
relevant questions. Much research in international development involves NGOs
(international, national, local), their staff and the people that they work
with, often in a very informal way. NGOs should also be proactive in monitoring
how research is conducted, shaping the form of research as well as the content
(an ethics role – another debate!).
NGOs as consumers of research
Translating research findings into action, policy lessons,
advocacy campaigns, etc. seems an obvious role for NGOs. However, to do this,
NGOs need to have a good understanding of the research being presented. If
practitioners are fully involved in the research then the chances are they will
have a reasonable idea what they can do with the findings. Too often,
unfortunately, it is only at the point of dissemination that researchers
attempt to engage potential end-users. This relies too heavily on academics
taking the lead on sharing their knowledge – and many do this very badly. But
NGOs also need to actively go in search of research, to demand that it be more
accessible (more to follow on that point too!) and to make noise if research
that is being produced and publicly-funded is not sufficiently addressing real
needs and gaps.
NGOs as producers of research
But what about as producers? Many NGOs do not have a culture
of critical enquiry and even the largest NGOs only devote a small percentage of
their budgets to research (and that often gets squeezed when times are tough).
This contrasts with the situation 10-20 years ago when NGOs were much more
active producers of research and were pushing research boundaries in
international development (see A Survey of Research by UK NGOs, INTRAC 1994).
Nevertheless, NGOs still carry out research for many reasons – to feed advocacy
campaigns, to improve programming, or to evaluate their activities.
Collaborative research with academics likewise serves a range of purposes.
The question is whether researchers from NGOs should
complement the expertise offered by their academic partners, for example in facilitating
fieldwork or commenting on findings, or be fully involved. There are strong
arguments for both positions. NGOs are not research institutions, but with the
increasing cross-over of researchers between academic and practitioner worlds,
much academic expertise on topics of relevance to practitioners does not sit
within research institutions but within NGOs and think-tanks. And there are
many NGOs who also want their staff and local partners to be involved, hence
the growing interest in action research which may create (in theory) better
ownership of the research, and has benefits in terms of organisational
Where does this leave us? There are strong arguments for
NGOs to collaborate more with academics, to play roles as shapers, consumers and
producers, and to take advantage of the purported desire coming from some
funders for more innovation and imaginative thinking. But there are a lot of
hurdles to overcome for good collaboration to happen: different perspectives
and mindsets, different time frames and institutional structures, different
objectives and motivations, different publishing and dissemination needs. It
requires NGO senior managers and boards to be open to scrutiny, willing to
engage with whatever the research throws up, beyond searching for simple
answers and headlines, and to accept that the answers will not come tomorrow.
It requires academic institutions to be open to genuine
partnership, to place value on relationships and outputs beyond peer-reviewed
articles in top journals, and to comprehend NGO timeframes, structures and
advocacy needs. It requires research funders to take collaboration seriously
and support genuinely innovative topics and partnerships, not treat stakeholder
engagement as merely a means to achieving impact.
It is time to move the debate away from how NGOs (or other
'end-users') use the research that academics carry out, and move it much more
towards good collaboration or co-production. If space is genuinely growing for
collaboration, NGOs should grasp the opportunity, starting with recognising the
value of collaboration and actively pushing to break down some of the
institutional, financial and psychological barriers.
INTRAC is collaborating with the University of Bradford and
World Vision on a project, funded by the Development Studies Association,
looking research collaboration between academic institutions and NGOs.