Assessing policy and practice impacts of social science research: The application of the payback framework to assess the future of work programme

Research Evaluation

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 201-209

  Klautzer, Lisa ^a   Hanney, Stephen ^b   Nason, Edward ^c   Rubin, Jennifer ^d   Grant, Jonathan ^a   Wooding, Steven ^a  

^a RAND CORPORATION   (United States)

^b BRUNEL UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c Institute On Governance   (Canada)

^d Westbrook Centre   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 80053608512     PISSN: 09582029     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3152/095820211X13118583635675     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Banzi, Rita, Lorenzo Moja, Vanna Pistotti, Andres Facchini and Alessandro Liberati 2011. Conceptual frameworks and empirical approaches used to assess the impact of health research: an overview of reviews. Health Research Policy and Systems, 9(26).
2. Bozeman, Barry and Gordon Kingsley 1997. R&D value mapping: a new approach to case study-based evaluation. Journal of Technology Transfer, 22(2), 33-42.
3. Buxton, Martin and Stephen Hanney 1996. How can payback from health services research be assessed? Journal of Health Service Research and Policy, 1(1), 35-43.
4. CAHS, Canadian Academy of Health Sciences. 2009. Making an Impact: A Preferred Framework and Indicators to Measure Returns on Investment in Health Research. Ottowa, ON: CAHS.
5. Cave, Martin and Stephen Hanney 1996. Assessment of Research Impact on Non-Academic Audiences, report to the ESRC. Uxbridge, UK: Brunel niversity, Faculty of Social Sciences.
6. Donovan, Claire 2007. The qualitative future of esearch evaluation. Science and Public Policy, 34(8), October, 585-597.
7. Donovan, Claire and Stepehn Hanney 2011. The 'Payback Framework' explained. Research Evaluation, 20(3), September, 181-183.
8. Hanney, Stephen, Andrew Davies and Martin Buxton 1999. Assessing the benefits from ealth research projects: can we use questionnaires instead of case studies? Research valuation, 8(3), December, 189-199.
9. Hanney, Stephen, Miguel Gonzalez-Block, Martin Buxton and Maurice Kogan 2003. The tilization of health research in policy making: concepts, examples and methods of ssessment. Health Research Policy and Systems, 1(2).
10. Hanney, Stephen, Jonathan Grant, teven Wooding and Martin Buxton 2004. Proposed methods for reviewing the outcomes of research: the impact of funding by the UK's 'Arthritis Research Campaign'. Health esearch Policy and Systems, 2(4).
11. Hanney Stephen, Martin Buxton, Colin Green, Diane oulson and James Raftery 2007. An assessment of the impact of the NHS Health Technology Assessment Programme. Health Technology Assessment, 11(53).
12. Houston, iane 2000. Families and Work: Report for the Women's Unit. London: The Cabinet office.
13. Kogan,Maurice and Mary Henkel 1983. Government and Research. London: Heinemann.
14. Kogan, Maurice, Mary Henkel and Stephen Hanney 2006. Government and esearch: Thirty Years of Evolution. 2nd edn. Dordrecht: Springer.
15. Lomas, Jonathan 2000. Using 'linkage and exchange' to move research into policy at a Canadian Foundation. Health Affairs, 19, 236-240.
16. Molas-Gallart, Jordi, Puay Tang, Tom Sinclair, Susie Morrow and Ben Martin 1999. Assessing Research Impact on Non- Academic Audiences. Brighton: SPRU. A Report repared for the ESRC.
17. Molas-Gallart, Jordi, Puay Tang and Susie Morrow 2000. ssessing the non-academic impact of grant-funded socio-economic research: results from a pilot tudy. Research Evaluation, 9(3), December, 171-182.
18. Nason, Edward, Lisa Klautzer, Jennifer Rubin, Stephen Hanney, Steven Wooding and onathan Grant 2007. Policy and Practice Impacts of Research Funded by the Economic and Social Research Council: a Case Study of the Future of Work Programme, supporting data. Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation.
19. Nutley, Sandra, Isabel Walter and Huw Davies 2007. Using Evidence: How Research can Inform Public Services. Bristol: The Policy Press.
20. Thomas, Patricia 1985. The Aims and Outcomes of Social Policy Research. London: Croom Helm.
21. Weiss, Carol. 1980. Knowledge creep and decision accretion. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 1(3), 381-404.
22. Wooding, Steven, Stephen Hanney, Martin Buxton and Jonathan Grant 2005. Payback arising from research funding: evaluation of the Arthritis Research Campaign. Rheumatology (Oxford), 44(9), 1145-1156.
23. Wooding, Steven, Edward Nason, Lisa Klautzer, Jennifer Rubin, Stephen Hanney and Jonathan rant 2007. Policy and PracticeImpacts of Research Funded by the Economic and Social Research Council: a Case Study of the Future of Work Programme, Approach and Analysis. anta Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation.
24. Wooding, Steven, Stephen Hanney, Alexandra Politt, Martin Buxton and Jonathan Grant on behalf of the Project Retrosight Team 2011. Project Retrosight: Understanding the Returns from Cardiovascular and Stroke Research. The Policy Report. Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation.
25. Yin, Robert and Margaret Gwaltney 1981.Knowledge utilization as a networking process. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 2, 555-580.