Bridging research and policy: the role of science-policy organisations in evidence-informed policymaking

Credit: 2024 Alejandro Salinas Lopez “alperucho”.

2 December 2025

By Jessica Ko

In an era where policy decisions increasingly demand robust evidence, science-policy organisations (SPOs) are emerging as pivotal actors in shaping more equitable and effective public systems. However, extant research has largely focused on the role of the individual knowledge broker rather than organisational factors in the policymaking process. This is a research gap that our British Academy-funded research project hopes to address.

Why science-policy organisations matter

SPOs function as bridges or intermediaries between research and policy, linking scientists, researchers and other evidence producers with policymakers, civil society groups, and even private sector leaders who use that evidence to inform decision-making. These organisations, which translate evidence into actionable insights, can come in many forms. SPOs can be boundary organisations, such as the Education Endowment Foundation and Centre for the Use of Research and Evidence in Education (CUREE), that oversee or manage boundary spanning processes. Some SPOs, as in the case of the Government Office for Science, are government departments or embedded within political institutions, conducting research or synthesising scientific findings to inform specific policy goals. Others operate independently or within international organisations (e.g., the World Health Organization’s Evidence-informed Policy Network, EVIPNet) often focused on long-term advocacy around key issues like education, health or climate change. Whether they’re formal agencies or informal networks, SPOs play a crucial role in translating complex evidence into practical insights. They help ensure that policies are not just politically feasible, but also grounded in rigorous, robust research and stakeholder engagement.

The existing evidence on science-policy organisations

Despite the significance of SPOs, their influence on policymaking remains underexplored. Reviews of the existing literature on SPOs and knowledge brokering for policymaking have found that while individual knowledge brokers are important, focusing only on individuals isn’t enough (MacKillop et al., 2020; Rechsteiner et al., 2024). Organisational structures, leadership and internal capacity matter just as much and need to be considered (Jakobsen et al., 2019). Reviews by Contandriopoulos et al. (2010) and Liverani et al. (2013) also show that factors such as access to research, supportive leadership and even ideological leanings can shape how evidence is received and used. Koon et al. (2020) finds that informal norms like peer influence often matter more than formal policies when it comes to using evidence.

More recent research has also showed that context matters by focusing on specific sectors and settings. Durrant et al. (2024) and Sengalrayan and Harvey (2025) explore how evidence is mobilised in local education and public services.

Given the above, if we want to create an impact on how evidence informs policy, we need to move beyond considering factors at the individual level to those at the organisational and contextual levels (Clark et al., 2024). This means recognising the political, organisational and cultural contexts in which decisions are made – and designing strategies that fit those realities. It’s not just about better interpersonal communication; it’s about building up organisations that can support the use of evidence in meaningful, sustainable ways. These points are highlighted in a report by Langer et al. (2016), which encourages embedding evidence use into organisational systems through creating structures that make using research the default, not the exception.

Introducing a project on science-policy organisations

A new research initiative led by IOE’s Professor Mukdarut Bangpan and Associate Professor Janice Tripney explores how SPOs can drive evidence-informed policymaking (EIPM) in the context of education, particularly in complex and resource-constrained settings. It seeks to provide answers and insights to the underlying contextual and organisational factors influencing SPOs in the adoption and implementation of EIPM. The initiative, funded by the British Academy, is conducted in collaboration with Chulalongkorn University’s Faculty of Education, which brings deep expertise in Thailand’s educational policy and strong networks with Thai policymakers, school leaders and practitioners. Having begun in June 2025, this research is still in progress.

The project focusses on the role of SPOs in Thailand’s education sector, where despite significant investment, persistent inequalities and stagnant learning outcomes challenge progress. By examining two key Thai institutions – the Equitable Education Fund (EEF) and the Office for National Education Standards and Quality Assessment (ONESQA) – the study aims to uncover how organisational structures, stakeholder dynamics and systemic factors shape the adoption and institutionalisation of EIPM within education. Importantly, the research is co-designed with Thai partners, ensuring cultural relevance and local ownership.

While grounded in Thailand, the project also contributes to global conversations on institutionalising EIPM. It builds on prior work with the World Health Organization and draws lessons from international contexts, including the UK, Canada and Australia.

You can follow our progress on the project’s official website.