A framework to evaluate the impacts of research on policy and practice: A forestry pilot study

• Published in: Forest policy and economics 2020-05, Vol.114, p.101975, Article 101975
• Main Authors: Edwards, David M., Meagher, Laura R.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Case studies; Forest management; Forestry; Forestry research; Institutes; Launching pads; Pilot projects; Researchers
• ISSN: 1389-9341; 1872-7050
• DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2019.101975

Increasingly, research funders are seeking evidence of the non-academic impacts of research, yet there is confusion as to what is meant by impact generation, and how it can be facilitated, captured and shared. This paper presents a framework to evaluate research impact, which we have piloted on 12 case studies led by Forest Research, a government research agency in UK. The framework was found to be user-friendly and fit for purpose. The breadth of impact types identified in the framework stimulated researchers to think beyond ‘instrumental’ impact and identify other changes generated by their work. By providing a generic list of ‘reasons for impact’, it encouraged researchers to think about the relationships between processes that had led, or could lead, towards impacts, including less tangible reasons that might otherwise go unmentioned. Asking for ‘lessons learned’ opened the way for researchers to step back and reflect critically on what had happened and what could be improved in the future. The framework was seen to function as a launch pad for research teams and stakeholders to translate isolated examples of impact and reasons for impact into narratives for both learning and dissemination. It could prove operationally useful to researchers and organisations beyond forestry, particularly those in applied fields and/or institutes. •A pragmatic framework for evaluation of research impacts was developed and tested.•The framework includes a comprehensive list of 5 impact types and 8 causal factors.•The framework was piloted on a range of forestry research case studies in UK.•The case studies were shown to have different ‘impact profiles’ and ‘causal profiles’.•Use of the framework stimulated critical reflection to inform future action.