Panel 2 brought together representatives from prominent Danish organizations to shed light on their collaborations with academic researchers. Kenneth Skov Jensen from the Danish Competition and Consumer Authority, Mette Svendgaard Høgholm from the Municipality of Copenhagen, and Morten Jung from the Danish Chamber of Commerce provided insightful responses to a series of pertinent questions. The panel explored how stakeholders typically collaborate with academic researchers. Mette Svendgaard Høgholm highlighted that stakeholders often engage researchers for data collection, particularly in projects with a need for rigorous qualitative data. Morten Jung stressed the importance of numerical data when striving to influence political agendas, underscoring that qualitative data may not always be as impactful, his advice to the researchers was “know your numbers”. Overall academia’s role in tackling time-consuming aspects of projects underlined the diverse forms of impact that can be achieved through collaboration.

Photo credit: Regina Mosch

Our panelists were asked the motivations behind partnering with the academic and research community, as well as the criteria for selecting such partnerships. Mette Svendgaard Høgholm pointed to EU projects as a major incentive, especially due to the funding they provide, as well as their focus on public procurement and the food sector. She also expressed a desire for compelling articles and qualitative data that can narrate their stories from an academic standpoint. Kenneth Skov Jensen highlighted the arduous process of data cleansing and quality assurance, underscoring the importance of providing reliable data. Morten Jung explained that their engagement often stems from a careful curation of content that aligns with their members’ interests.

For effective engagement with stakeholders, Mette Svendgaard Høgholm emphasized the criticality of understanding stakeholders, recognizing it as a significant challenge. Kenneth Skov Jensen added that solutions often require an interdisciplinary approach, transcending mere legal or economic perspectives.  Morten Jung stressed the need for a clear vision of what one aims to change, emphasizing that impact should be the driving force. The panelists also addressed the potential influence of researchers’ political beliefs or perspectives on their work, expressing a need for trust in well-documented research and a commitment to presenting objective truths. They also acknowledged the significance of international perspectives in research, highlighting the importance of considering both local and broader European contexts. This panel provided valuable insights into the dynamics of collaboration between stakeholders and academic researchers. Their responses highlighted the multifaceted nature of these partnerships, emphasizing the importance of clear objectives, reliable data, and interdisciplinary approaches to achieving meaningful impact. 

Panel 3 offered a deep dive into the intricate process of transforming research into impactful policy decisions. The panel featured distinguished representatives from key institutions, each offering unique perspectives on the collaboration between researchers and policymakers. Prof. Nicola  Countouris, an expert in EU law, emphasized the importance of bridging the gap between academia’s long-term vision and the immediacy of policy-making. He advocated for a collaborative approach, where researchers and policymakers work together to find common ground and facilitate effective knowledge transfer. Arnhild Dordi Gjønnes, representing Business Europe and the Confederation of Norwegian Enterprise (NHO), shed light on the specific needs of politicians in the decision-making process. She stressed the necessity for transparent, clear, and trustworthy data to support politicians in their goal-reaching endeavours. As an example, she highlighted the role of the Public Procurement Academy in Norway, demonstrating how research-driven insights can directly impact policy implementation. Karoline Kyhn, a representative from the EU Environmental Agency, provided a valuable perspective on how institutions can support policy development. The agency’s commitment to offering expertise and establishing a scientific committee for senior researchers showcases a commitment to informed decision-making. Kyhn also emphasized the importance of engaging in collaborative projects for the effective dissemination of research findings to a wider audience.

Photo credit: Regina Mosch

The panellists also addressed the critical role academic institutions play in enabling researchers to conduct policy-relevant research. Prof. N. Countouris noted the growing emphasis on research impact and highlighted three key factors: a well-defined impact strategy, rigorous research practices, and a degree of luck. Yet he emphasized that striking a balance between academic freedom and the pressing needs of policymakers is essential to ensure credible and meaningful outcomes. The discussion also explored challenges faced by public agencies when collaborating with researchers and academic institutions. Karoline Kyhn highlighted the differing mindsets of researchers, often inclined towards cutting-edge work, while agencies prioritize practical applicability. The fear of inadvertently providing competitive advantages to businesses in future tenders emerged as a challenge in sharing knowledge. This insight underscores the delicate balance required in knowledge dissemination.

Photo credit: Regina Mosch

The international and national context also emerged as a significant factor in the panelists’ work. Arnhild Dordi Gjønnes pointed out the willingness of the Norwegian enterprise to utilize expertise regardless of nationality, highlighting a commitment to collaborative knowledge sharing. Prof. N. Countouris emphasized the value of understanding multiple legal systems within the European Union for a comprehensive approach to research in EU law. This nuanced perspective underlines the complexity and richness of the research-policy dynamic. Panel 3 provided invaluable insights into the intricate process of translating research into impactful policy decisions. The diverse perspectives offered by the panelists showcased the importance of collaboration, transparency, and well-defined strategies in this critical endeavor. The session served as a testament to the vital role research plays in shaping policy, and the need for effective communication between researchers and policymakers for meaningful change to occur.

Panel 4 delved into the significance of research within international organizations and banks, providing valuable insights into their approaches and challenges. Participants included Marcus McKay from the United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS), Eliza Niewiadomska from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and Vincenzo Fucci from The International Training Centre of the International Labour Organization. The discussion aimed to uncover commonalities and differences in how these entities engage with research and the practical implications thereof.

One pivotal question addressed was the importance of research in the decision-making process. Vincenzo Fucci emphasized the contextual nature of research, highlighting that its urgency varies across different areas and stages of work. Eliza Niewiadomska indicated that research’s significance depends on the specific context and objectives of the projects involved. The panelists also explored the role of research within their institutions and the challenges associated with its practical application. Marcus McKay highlighted the need for research to align with practical expectations and objectives, particularly in contexts where experimentation is limited. Research must deliver tangible results and impact within certain constraints, which can influence decision-making processes.

The structure and approach toward research within their respective organizations were discussed. Vincenzo Fucci explained that research is inherent to the mandate of the ITCILO, integrated into its curriculum and addressing pedagogical issues aligned with the organization’s goals. Eliza Niewiadomska shed light on the hierarchical nature of development banks, where projects must be financially sustainable, affecting the core banking team’s role and decisions. Comparing the private and public sectors, Marcus McKay emphasized the shared objective of research: having an impact. While the private sector often focuses on risk reduction and profitability, the public sector, including UNOPS, is also concerned with increasing capacity and addressing broader societal challenges. Measuring research impact and defining key performance indicators (KPIs) were discussed, with Eliza Niewiadomska highlighting the importance of clear measurements and outcome assessment from the project’s inception. The panel also explored the reliance on internal versus external research. Vincenzo Fucci emphasized that while internal research may be easier to navigate, external research offers broader perspectives and generalizability. Combining both sources can enhance the validity of research outcomes. Lastly, the panel addressed primary obstacles, with Marcus McKay humorously noting that sometimes, “we are the obstacle.” This acknowledgment highlights the complexities and challenges within these organizations’ research landscapes.

This panel provided valuable insights into the multifaceted role of research within international organizations. The discussion highlighted the contextual nature of research, the importance of clear measurement, and the challenges associated with aligning research with practical objectives and constraints. These insights offer a deeper understanding of how research impacts decision-making processes in diverse organizational contexts.