When does research really shape policy?

A classroom question opens a wider reflection on why evidence often struggles to move from academic output to real-world decision-making.

By Vicentia Quartey

During a recent student engagement organised by the Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research (ISSER), one Senior High School student asked a simple but disarming question: how many policies has ISSER influenced since its establishment?

It should have been an easy question. After all, ISSER has a long-standing reputation for rigorous, policy-relevant research. Yet, the answer was not straightforward.

Why? Because the journey from research to policy is rarely linear. Evidence competes with political priorities, fiscal constraints, public opinion, and institutional realities. Policymakers work under pressure and timelines; researchers often operate on longer cycles. Even strong evidence must find the right moment, the right champions, and the right framing to influence decisions.

Globally, this is a persistent challenge. Estimates suggest that a large share of research, sometimes as high as 80 percent, does not directly translate into policy or practice (OECD, 2020; Cairney & Oliver, 2020) — not because it lacks quality, but because the pathways to influence are complex.

Ghana reflects this reality.

This year alone, the ISSER Conference has hosted over 20 research dissemination engagements, most of them generating recommendations aimed at improving policy and practice. Across the country, similar forums take place almost daily, many culminating in policy briefs, reports, and other accessible outputs designed to capture the attention of policymakers and practitioners. Funders increasingly demand a shift from outputs to demonstrating impact. Yet between the conference hall and the cabinet room, impact can sometimes begin to feel like a KPI we all pursue, but not always one we can trace.

A difficult question remains: are these efforts translating into real influence, or becoming a routine of well-intentioned but disconnected activity?

This is not to diminish the illuminating role of research in its own right. At its core, research remains quintessential — it expands knowledge, sharpens understanding, and reframes the questions we ask. It does shape policy — but often indirectly. A study may inform a conversation, shift perspectives, or lay the groundwork for reform long before it is visible in policy documents. Influence, in practice, is cumulative, not always immediate.

So what makes the difference?

From my experience working at the interface of research and policy over the past decade, three factors consistently stand out: timing, relationships, and relevance. Evidence must reach decision-makers when choices are being made, be communicated in ways they can act on, and speak directly to real policy needs. Sustained engagement, not one-off dissemination, is what ultimately matters.

There is also a broader continental question. As Dr. David Ameyaw of the International Centre for Evaluation and Development (ICED) observes, Africa contributes less than 7 percent of global research output. The challenge is not only production, but use: how do we better harness the evidence already generated, and learn more systematically from it?

Institutions like ISSER sit within this challenge, working across research, policy engagement, and knowledge translation. But the question remains: how do we move from producing evidence to ensuring it is meaningfully used?

This sits at the heart of the Evidence to Action (E2A) Conference 2026, to be hosted by ICED, ISSER, PASGR and other partners under the theme “Reimagining the Evidence-Informed Policy- and Decision-Making Ecosystem in Africa.” As both host and organising partner, ISSER’s role reflects a long-standing commitment to evidence-led development—creating spaces where research, policy, and practice intersect more deliberately.

Unlike conventional conferences, E2A is designed around interactive problem-solving labs, where participants examine real cases of evidence use: what works, what does not, and why. Across government, civil society, and the private sector, the focus is not just discussion but practical learning.

Over five days, participants will engage in plenaries, breakout labs, and collaborative sessions aimed at strengthening Africa-led evidence systems grounded in local realities and policy needs.

In many ways, the student’s question still lingers: how much research truly shapes policy?

E2A 2026 does not offer a simple answer. But it offers something more important — a space to confront the question honestly, learn from practice, and strengthen the pathways through which evidence informs decisions that matter.

For more information on the conference, visit https://www.iced-eval.org/e2a 

Vicentia Quartey ([email protected]) is a Communications Executive with nearly a decade of experience advancing research communication and supporting the translation of evidence into policy and practice. She has served on the E2A Communications Committee for three consecutive years.

The post When does research really shape policy? appeared first on The Business & Financial Times.

Read Full Story