qrpm2011 conference booklet

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH FOR

POLICY MAKING 2011

2ND ANNUAL

26 & 27 May 2011

Queen’s University Belfast

Belfast, U.K.

2

Qualitative Research for Policy Making 2011

Welcome from Merlien Institute

We would like to welcome you to today’s event. This international conference is

designed to bring together academics and practitioners to discuss best practices for

delivering and interpreting qualitative research for policy making

Your contact persons at this conference

Conference Director: Jasper Lim

Conference Chair: Robert Miller

Conference Assistants: Wendy Scott, Francesca Morosi

Below you will find a few administrative details for your information. Should you

have any queries or problems during the conference, please speak with the contact

persons.

PRESENTATIONS

The presentation slides and papers of this event can be viewed or downloaded for a

limited period of time from slideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/event/qrpm2011

BADGES

Badges have been provided to help you identify fellow participants and the speakers.

Easy identification also helps the conference staff when delivering messages. Please

return your badge to the registration desk at the end of the conference.

QUESTIONS

If you have any questions during the conference, please raise your hand and wait for

the speaker to address you. It would be helpful if you could announce yourself by

name and organisation before asking your question.

EVALUATION FORM

Towards the end of the conference, you will be provided with an Evaluation Form.

We would be grateful if you would take time to complete the form and return it to the

registration desk before you leave the conference.

3

THURSDAY, 26 MAY 2011, Auditorium, McClay Library

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH FOR POLICY MAKING 2011

Keynote Presentation 09:00 Big machines and tangled knots: asking the right questions about social problems

• Discussing how to make qualitative research attractive and relevant to policy makers

• Identifying the comparative advantage of qualitative data in identifying the processes behind social problems

• Using the “big machine” and “tangled knot” metaphors to identify the most useful research questions in generating actionable information

Timothy Nelson - Lecturer in Social Policy, Harvard Kennedy School - Harvard University (US)

08:15 Registration @ McClay Library Foyer 08:45 Opening words by Merlien Institute & Chair Prof Robert Miller - Professor of Sociology - Queen’s University Belfast & ARK (UK)

09:30 “Don’t ask, don’t tell” law: challenges in delivering qualitative findings to senior level policy makers in the US Department of Defense

• Looking at the anticipated impact on US military service members and their families of repeal of the "don’t ask, don’t tell” law

• Analysing a massive amount of qualitative data from a variety of sources (town hall meetings, focus groups, in-box comments, on line dialogues)

• Developing a strategy to explain and deliver the findings to senior level policy makers in the Pentagon

Susan G. Berkowitz - Senior Study Director Westat (US)

12:00 Undertaking high quality and relevant qualitative research at a time of rapid healthcare reforms

• Addressing the significant challenges of keeping qualitative research relevant in times intense change in the National Health Service in England

• Describing our action research approach within a 2 year ethnographic study of healthcare commissioning

• Evaluating the tensions between study sites and policy environments that need to be identified and managed within such an action research study

Sara Shaw - Senior Fellow - Nuffield Trust (UK)

10:00 - 10:15 Joint Q&A Session

10:15 Money matters in low/moderate income families and the gender implications of UK welfare reform

• Drawing on research with low/moderate income couples to examine the UK government’s proposals on welfare reform from a gender perspective

• Discussing the value of qualitative research to policy design and debates

• Evaluating the UK government’s performance in relation to gender assessment

Fran Bennett - Senior Research Fellow University of Oxford (UK) Sirin Sung - University Lecturer Queens University Belfast (UK)

10:45 The key to policy advocacy: demonstrating the power of collaborative qualitative research to deliver welfare benefits

• Discussion of longitudinal community-based PAR project with lone mothers on social assistance and the policy challenges

• Demonstrating the power of qualitative research for policy advocacy

• Discussion of the multiple outcomes and their long term policy implications

Lea Caragata - Associate Professor, Faculty of Social Work - Wilfrid Laurier University (Canada)

12:30 Archiving qualitative data for policy research: meeting challenges and establishing best practices

• Reporting findings from demonstrator project on archiving qualitative data generated in the evaluation of a complex community intervention initiative

• Discussing benefits and challenges of archiving identified by researchers, funders and policy makers in the course of the project

• Describing the development and implementation of best practices in qualitative data archiving

Aileen O'Carroll - Manager - IQDA (Ireland)



11:30 - 12:00 Coffee Break

13:15 - 14:15 Lunch Break

4

THURSDAY, 26 MAY 2011, Auditorium, McClay Library


Brainstorming workshop 14:15 Building acceptance of qualitative methodologies: developing strategies to build academic rigor and enhance methodological validity In this workshop, delegates divided into teams will brainstorm strategies to mitigate effects of challenges and build acceptance of qualitative methodologies among those who influence and make policy. At the end of the workshop, team leaders will present their solutions to the audience.

Facilitated by Meena Chary - Assistant Professor - University of South Florida (US)


17:15 Qualitative evidence of municipal service delivery protests: implications for South Africa

• Reflecting critically on the factors that contributed to the violent service delivery-related protests in 3 different provinces in South Africa

• Discussing the socio-economic impact and long-term development challenges of these protests

• Illustrating the importance of registering early warnings signals and institutionalising mediation at municipal level.

Sethulego Matebesi - Senior Lecturer and Department Chair University of the Free State (South Africa)


18:00 Closing remarks of day 1 from chair

19:45 Optional Networking Dinner @ Nick’s Warehouse, 35-39 Hill Street, Central Belfast

16:00 Evidence-based policy in Eastern European countries: how can qualitative research become more legitimate for the policy makers?

• Discussing the significant overlap between the policy makers and the academic community in Romania

• Assessing the impact of this overlap that could dilute professional boundaries and gives birth to inappropriate “intimacy” between science and policy making

• Discussing the unwillingness of policy makers in Romania to get their decisions scrutinised by science

Lavinia Maria Andrei - PhD Candidate University of Bucharest (Romania)

16:30 Qualitative research and policy making in Northern Ireland: barriers arising from lack of capacity, conceptualisation and consensus

• Describing a multi-levelled policy process with little joined up or collective decision-making

• Identifying the lack of policy capacity in governance system with existing outputs reflecting little use or understanding of qualitative research

• Discussing how the absence of political consensus, flexibility and adoption of modernisation agendas has imposed constraints on use of qualitative research

Derek Birrell - Professor of Social Administration and Policy - University of Ulster (UK)

17:45 - 18:00 Q&A Session

5

FRIDAY, 27 MAY 2011, The Canada Room & Council Chamber, Lanyon Building


08:15 Morning coffee 08:45 Opening words by Merlien Institute & Chair Sue Ziebland, Research Director, Department of Primary Healthcare - University of Oxford (UK)

Keynote Presentation 09:00 Delivering effective qualitative research for policy making in times of austerity

• Discussing how qualitative research can make a distinctive contribution to different stages of policy making

• Utilising qualitative method to complement information derived from quantitative methods

• Arguing that in the age of austerity, it is important that all instruments should be used to avoid ill-advised policies

Giuseppe A. Veltri - Scientific Fellow, JRC, IPTS European Commission

09:30 Research based knowledge for policy decision making rounds: practical implications

• Evaluating research studies within the period of 2007-2009 ordered by Ministry of Education and Science and Ministry of Economy in Lithuania

• Discussing coupling between research knowledge creation process and policy rounds

• Evaluating the research based knowledge in terms of transformation scenario content

Birutė Mikulskienė - Head of Department of Management - Mykolas Romeris University (Lithuania)


10:15 Timing is everything: balancing topicality, relevance and precision in delivering evidence-based policy-making

• Discussing the implications of selecting the right timing for both data collection and research dissemination

• Exploring the relationship between topicality, timing and academic rigour

• Discussing the ethics concerning researcher and policy maker relationships

Gráinne Kelly - Policy/Practice Coordinator, INCORE University of Ulster (UK)

10:45 Anticipating hot issues and producing timely reports for policy makers to report to new developments

• Discussing recent experience in anticipating hot issues and developing research agenda around it

• Developing methods to make research reports timely and accessible

• Implementing successful engagement strategy with the media and policy makers in research results

Susan J. Popkin - Director, Program on Neighbourhoods and Youth Development The Urban Institute (US)


12:00 The science-policy interface for biodiversity and ecosystem services: opportunities for science to enter in policy environments • Presenting research results of the analysis of

science-policy interfacing in the area of biodiversity governance

• Discussing an appraisal approaches that were developed through interviews with policy-makers and scientists in the field of biodiversity

• Evaluating the success of these approaches for use in supporting policy-makers

Alice B. M. Vadrot - Research Fellow Ronald J. Pohoryles - Director ICCR (Austria)

12:30 Seeing it from the other side: reflections on a knowledge transfer placement • Discussing how academic research evidence fits into

the broader range of evidence that policy-makers have available to them;

• Exploring how qualitative research evidence is understood and evaluated by policy-makers

• Identifying how best to present and communicate the outcomes of qualitative research to a policy audience

Natalie Armstrong - Lecturer in Social Science University of Leicester (UK)



13:15 - 14:15 Lunch Break

6

FRIDAY, 27 MAY 2011, The Canada Room & Council Chamber, Lanyon Building


Brainstorming workshop: 14:30 Developing indicators of study quality in systematic reviews of qualitative research to inform public health policy making This workshop will use systematic reviews undertaken for the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) to illustrate the features that policy makers may wish to be appraised. It will use this as the starting point for a discussion about the importance of distinguishing between the quality of research reporting and the quality of research conduct and aim to establish agreement on some key reporting standards that might be acceptable to authors, editors, reviewers and policy makers. Facilitated by Ruth Garside - Senior Research Fellow - PenTAG, University of Exeter (UK)


16:15 Policy and history: discussing a typology of qualitative approaches for policy making • Discussing what historians can add to mainstream

policy analyses

• Presenting a typology of approaches to history and policy

• Illustrating these approaches with examples from historical work on health care policy, in particular cancer and palliative care policy

Ellen van Reuler - PhD Researcher University of Manchester (UK)

16:45 Supporting the application of Grounded Theory qualitative studies for policy making • Identifying and discussing unique contributions

Grounded Theory can offer to social policy development

• What are the challenges and opportunities of using Grounded Theory for policy research and policy development?

• Discussing future considerations for the application of qualitative research for social policy development

Anita Vaillancourt - Assistant Professor Algoma University (Canada)


17:30 Closing remarks of Day 2 by chair and close of conference

This conference is proudly supported by:

Sponsored Presentation: 14:15 ATLAS.ti: A powerful workbench for analysing large bodies of textual, graphical, audio and video data - Jörg Hecker - Director Business Operations - ATLAS.ti (Germany)

7

Thursday 26 May - 08:45

From our chairperson Opening remarks and speaker introductions

Robert L. Miller

Professor of Sociology

Queen’s University Belfast, UK

About Robert… Robert Miller a Professor of Sociology at Queen’s University Belfast. He studied at Duke University and the University of Florida and completed his Ph.D. at the Queen's University of Belfast. His main sociological work has been in the areas of social stratification & mobility and gender & political participation. He has contributed to the social policy debate surrounding equal opportunity issues in Northern Ireland - most notably with a highly controversial study of religious discrimination in the Northern Irish Civil Service that led directly to major reforms in that body. He presently has returned to his long-standing interest in social mobility, only employing the qualitative methods of family history and(auto)biographical research. He has been involved with the European Sociological Association since its founding having been its General Secretary 1997-99 and Chair of the ESA Research Network 'Biographical Perspectives on European Societies. Robert Miller is Convenor of the Masters in Social Research Methods and is Deputy Director of ARK, a joint initiative of Queen's University and the University of Ulster dedicated to making social science information more accessible to the general public http://www.ark.ac.uk.

8


Timothy Nelson

Lecturer in Social Policy

Harvard Kennedy School, Harvard University (US)

Keynote Presentation: Big Machines and Tangled Knots: Asking the Right Questions about Social Problems

• Discussing how to make qualitative research attractive and relevant to policy makers

• Identifying the comparative advantage of qualitative data in identifying the processes behind social problems

• Using the “big machine” and “tangled knot” metaphors to identify the most useful research questions in generating actionable information

Presentation abstract: Policy makers are often eager to utilize research to tackle some of the most intractable challenges facing society. Yet often academics, even those who study social problems, do not formulate their research in ways which might be most useful for policy interventions. Following Sparrow (2008), social problems like father absence, early school leaving, gang violence, and ghetto poverty can be thought of as “knots,” which in order to be undone must be examined in all of their specificity. In a similar vein, following Becker (1988), undesired outcomes can be conceived of as the result of the confluence of regular social processes (the Big Machine) which produces them. By identifying all of the necessary contributing components of the problem, social scientists can pinpoint the ones most amenable to policy intervention. Qualitative methods are uniquely equipped to address these tough challenges because of their ability to get at complexity, understand context and overturn false assumptions which often underlie existing programs and policies. I will illustrate these points through several qualitative policy-relevant projects in the United States. About Tim… Timothy Nelson is Lecturer in Social Policy. His research focuses on low-income, non-custodial fathers, as well as congregational studies and African American religion. His most recent publication is Every Time I Feel the Spirit: Religious Experience and Ritual in an African American Congregation. His next book is tentatively titled Marginal Men: Fatherhood in the Lives of Low Income Unmarried Men (with Kathryn Edin and Laura Lein). Nelson received his PhD in sociology from the University of Chicago in 1997 and has also taught at Northwestern University and the University of Pennsylvania.

9


Susan G. Berkowitz

Senior Study Director Westat, US

“Don’t ask, don’t tell” law: Challenges in delivering qualitative findings to senior level policy makers in the US Department of Defense • Looking at the anticipated impact on US military Service members and

their families of repeal of the "don’t ask, don’t tell” law

• Analysing a massive amount of qualitative data from a variety of sources (town hall meetings, focus groups, in-box comments, on line dialogues)

• Developing a strategy to explain and deliver the findings to senior level policy makers in the Pentagon

Presentation abstract: In May, 2010 Westat was awarded a contract to support the activities of the Comprehensive Review Working Group (CRWG) established by the US Secretary of Defense to examine the potential impact of repeal of the “don’t ask don’t tell” law in effect since 1993. Along with conducting two large-scale surveys, Westat researchers collected and analyzed a large amount of qualitative data on Service member and spouse’s views on repeal from sources including: town hall meetings, focus groups, in-box comments, confidential on-line dialogues and open-ended survey comments. At the outset, these were viewed less as “real” data collection efforts than as opportunities to engage the force. Over time this view changed as Westat’s qualitative analysis team, working with the CRWG, made a convincing argument that these data were being subject to a rigorous, systematic, team-based analytic process yielding unique, policy-relevant insights not available from the survey results alone. This presentation will “tell the story” of the qualitative component of this time-pressured, highly politically visible effort, offering “lessons learned” for persuading policy makers of the importance and utility of these often powerful qualitative data both for understanding the potential impact of repeal and planning for its implementation. About Susan… Dr. Susan Berkowitz, a Senior Study Director at Westat in Rockville, MD, is an expert in qualitative and mixed methods research. She has led several high-profile qualitative studies whose results have informed policy-making for the US Census Bureau, the Defense Manpower Data Center, and, most recently, the Comprehensive Review Working Group. Dr. Berkowitz holds a Ph.D. in Anthropology from the University of Michigan and a Postdoctoral Certificate in Health Policy from the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health. She is a frequent presenter at national and international conferences, has published widely and gives professional development workshops to varied audiences.

10


Fran Bennett Senior Research Fellow University of Oxford, UK

Sirin Sung University Lecturer Queen’s University Belfast, UK Money matters in low/moderate income families and the gender implications of UK welfare reform

• Drawing on research with low/moderate income couples to examine the UK government’s proposals on welfare reform from a gender perspective

• Discussing the value of qualitative research to policy design and debates

• Evaluating the UK government’s performance in relation to gender assessment

Presentation abstract: By law the UK coalition government must have regard to the impact of its policies on women. This paper investigates to what extent this is influencing debates about proposals for welfare reform, especially the ‘universal credit’. It draws on one author’s experience of aiming to draw policy makers’ attention to relevant findings from qualitative research (about how low-income couples manage money and negotiate gender roles) - in particular those from a study by both authors involving separate semi-structured interviews in 2006 with men and women in 30 low/moderate income couples in Britain.

A major aim of this study - part of the Within Household Inequalities and Public Policy research in the ESRC-funded Gender Equality Network (www.genet.ac.uk) - was to facilitate analysis of welfare reform taking account of gender roles and relationships within the household. The paper therefore demonstrates how these and other similar findings can be used to examine universal credit from a gender perspective.

The authors use this to explore two broader issues: the value of qualitative research to policy design and debates, in particular as a supplement to economic modelling; and the essential elements of a comprehensive gender assessment of welfare reform to fully meet the equalities duty. About Fran & Sirin… Fran Bennett is a part-time Senior Research Fellow, doing teaching and research at Oxford University. Her interests include gender, social security, poverty and participation. She is also an independent consultant and writes for the UK government and NGOs. She is joint editor of the on-line Social Policy Digest for the Journal of Social Policy, and also of the Journal of Poverty and Social Justice. Sirin Sung is Lecturer in Social Policy at Queen’s University Belfast. Her main research interests include gender and social policy, gender and employment, work-life balance policies, and gender and benefits in East Asian countries and the UK. She is currently researching gender and the welfare state in Korea; and work-family balance policies in the UK and US, funded by the Leverhulme Trust.

11


Lea Caragata

Associate Professor, Faculty of Social Work Wilfrid Laurier University, Canada

The key to policy advocacy: demonstrating the power of collaborative qualitative research to deliver welfare benefits

• Discussion of longitudinal community-based PAR project with lone mothers on social assistance and the policy challenges

• Demonstrating the power of qualitative research for policy advocacy

• Discussion of the multiple outcomes and their long term policy implications Presentation abstract: “Lone Mothers: Building Social Inclusion” is a community university research alliance (CURA) that involves academic researchers with community partners including advocacy and service delivery organizations serving marginalized and minoritized women as well as Toronto Employment and Social Services (TESS), the fourth largest welfare delivery body in Canada and part of the City of Toronto. This Canada-wide longitudinal study examines lone mother’s experiences with work-for-welfare systems and the growing precarious labour market with a combined focus on research and advocacy. The grounding of the work in a feminist, participatory methodology is reflected in the recruitment of lone mothers on social assistance hired and trained to work as Research Assistants. These women brought their own experiences with poverty and welfare systems to the project both through serving as an ongoing reference group and through their additional participation as research participants and as active participants in policy dialogues.

This paper describes how these multiple partners have been key to policy advocacy directed to facilitating lone mothers’ access to post secondary education, removal of punitive welfare provisions, gendering welfare delivery and more general advocacy for improved welfare benefits and the needs of these families for sustainable employment.

Also discussed are the effects of these collaborations on project partners as feminist and participatory action research designs explicitly challenge the power relations between researcher and participant which in itself has important implications for policy research. About Lea… Dr. Lea Caragata teaches in the areas of social policy and community development. Areas of research and specialization include marginalization and oppression, most recently focused on labour market changes and welfare state retrenchment. Dr. Caragata's academic work follows extensive practice experience, including grassroots community organizing, social housing development, public policy coordination, and public administration.

12


Sara Shaw

Senior Fellow Nuffield Trust, UK

Undertaking high quality and relevant qualitative research at a time of rapid healthcare reforms

• Addressing the significant challenges of keeping qualitative research relevant in times intense change in the National Health Service in England

• Describing our action research approach within a 2 year ethnographic study of healthcare commissioning

• Evaluating the tensions between study sites and policy environments that need to be identified and managed within such an action research study

Presentation abstract: The NHS is going through a period of rapid and intense change. We explore how an action research model has enabled us to address the twin challenges of keeping qualitative research relevant and working with evolving organisations. We draw on data from a two-year ethnographic study investigating the process of commissioning high quality care for people with long-term conditions.

The decision to establish a senior team combined with the location of the project – at an independent health policy foundation – enabled team members to act as ‘boundary spanners’, simultaneously engaging with the three study sites and the policy environment. A ‘Chinese Wall’ allowed ‘researchers’ to focus on data collection and analysis and ‘actioners’ to focus on working with sites to address specific areas of healthcare commissioning (e.g. diabetic podiatry).

Successfully enabling an action research approach has involved: (1) balancing contributions to policy at the national and local levels; (2) responding to action requests whilst offering action that we believe will be most beneficial; and (3) keeping a clear analytical focus to the research elements of the study while offering useful action. In doing so, our intention is to convert the conclusions drawn from qualitative research into relevant and actionable policy recommendations. About Sara… Sara Shaw is a Senior Fellow at the Nuffield Trust. Her background is in medical sociology and policy studies. She has published widely on topics including shaping national health research policy, critical approaches to policy analysis and the organisation of primary care. Her current research interests focus on healthcare commissioning and integrated care. In addition to her role at The Nuffield Trust, Sara is also Senior Lecturer in Health Policy Research at Queen Mary, University of London.

13

Thursday 26 May - 12:30 Aileen O’Carroll

Manager

IQDA, Ireland Archiving qualitative data for policy research: meeting challenges and establishing best practices

• Reporting findings from demonstrator project on archiving qualitative data generated in the evaluation of a complex community intervention initiative

• Discussing benefits and challenges of archiving identified by researchers, funders and policy makers in the course of the project

• Describing the development and implementation of best practices in qualitative data archiving

Presentation abstract: Applied social, economic and evaluation research projects often generate significant amounts of qualitative data. Yet, compared to quantitative data, the conventions and requirements relating to archiving qualitative data, and making it available for re-use, are less likely to be formalised at commissioner, faculty or University level. This is despite qualitative data being considered an indicator of methodological innovation and advancement. There are several benefits to archiving both quantitative and qualitative data, including: avoiding unnecessary duplication of research projects; permitting comparative studies; tracking trends over time; improving methods for undertaking similar research; and investigating new research questions. Archiving also permits the use of data beyond the lifetime of a project. Archived data represents a valuable resource for the advancement of scientific inquiry and promotes the use of appropriate data in policy making at local and national levels.

This paper will report on the findings from a major demonstrator project on archiving qualitative data generated in the evaluation of a complex community intervention initiative. The paper will provide an overview of findings and output from two strands of the project: (1) a consultation process that identified concerns, perceived challenges and orientations towards qualitative data archiving amongst researchers, policy specialists and data commissioners; (2) the development of best practice guidelines for qualitative data archiving in Ireland. About Aileen… Aileen O'Carroll is manager of IQDA. She liaises with researchers at the beginning and end of the research process as to how best conduct qualitative research with to a view to archiving the data produced. She has created a catalogue of Irish Qualitative Research which can be accessed at the www.iqda.ie. She lectured on research methods at University College Dublin. Her own research work has involved the use of qualitative research methods, time diaries, in analysing the organisation of working time.

14


Meena Chary

Assistant Professor, Government and International Affairs University of South Florida, US

Brainstorming workshop: Building acceptance of qualitative methodologies: developing strategies to build academic rigor and enhance methodological validity In this workshop, delegates divided into teams will brainstorm to mitigate effects of challenges and build acceptance of qualitative methodologies among those who influence and make policy. Delegates may want to include issues such as academic rigor and methodological validity in their discussions. At the end of the workshop, team leaders will present their solutions to the audience. About Meena … Meena Chary holds a Ph.D. in Public Administration, as well as degrees in Electrical Engineering, Economics and Management. She is a methodologist and a public policy scholar researching in the areas of human rights and information technology. She is part of the faculty of the Public Administration Program within the Department of Government and International Affairs at the University of South Florida in Tampa, Florida, USA.

15


Lavinia Maria Andrei

PhD Candidate, Faculty of Sociology and Social Assistance University of Bucharest, Romania

Evidence-based policy in Eastern European countries: how can qualitative research become more legitimate for the policy makers?

• Discussing the significant overlap between the policy makers and the academic community in Romania

• Assessing the impact of this overlap that could dilute professional boundaries and gives birth to inappropriate “intimacy” between science and policy making

• Discussing the unwillingness of policy makers in Romania to get their decisions scrutinised by science

Presentation abstract: The article presents a general perspective upon the use of social research in the policy process in Romania and tries to underline the regional similarities across some Eastern European countries. What particularizes Romanian social research and policy communities? How can research and especially the qualitative and quasi-experimental methods become more legitimate for the policy makers? The paper gives a few interesting answers in what regards why the lack of legitimacy and cooperation between the two communities, and tries to propose some solutions to overcome this situation and encourage evidence based policy and practice in Romania and in the region. Policy and research are, from a certain point of view, entangled, intimate even, and professional turfs seem to be overlapping. Legitimacy of research is thus lost in the process and social research becomes a mere argument in the political debate. The primacy of quantitative over qualitative is also observed, though different explanations come from different experts.

All in all, the paper concludes that better use of research into the policy making process could lead to better governance and less arbitrary in the decision making process. Democratic institutions are now expected to reform their procedures and to move towards expert advice and scientific knowledge gathering in support of their normative power. Romania could represent a good example of how policy can shape into a functional process, but it could also accept only the form, without acknowledging the content. About Lavinia… Lavinia is currently a PhD Candidate at the Faculty of Sociology and Social Assistance at the University of Bucharest. In 2005 she was appointed as civil servant in the Ministry of Economy. In 2006, she joined the Young Professional Scheme, a one year intensive training program in public management. She was later appointed as a Public Manager in the Ministry of Economy and Finance. Since 2008, she teaches Public Policy at Bucharest University in Romania.

16


Derek Birrell

Professor of Social Administration & Policy University of Ulster, UK

Qualitative research and policy making in Northern Ireland: barriers arising from lack of capacity, conceptualisation and consensus

• Describing a multi-levelled policy process with little joined up or collective decision-making

• Identifying the lack of policy capacity in governance system with existing outputs reflecting little use or understanding of qualitative research

• Discussing how the absence of political consensus, flexibility and adoption of modernisation agendas has imposed constraints on use of qualitative research

Presentation abstract: The paper argues that the formal policy making processes have made little use of or taken cognisance of qualitative research. This can be evidenced through the examination of consultation papers, commissioned reports, equality impact assessments and Assembly committee reports. Three main explanations can be suggested for the limited use of qualitative evidence in the policy process. Firstly, the lack of policy making capacity in the Civil Service and other public bodies and the limited presence and operation of research institutes, policy units and networks. Secondly, the low level of conceptual analysis and understanding displayed in government narratives and discourses. Examples are quoted from the policy areas of health delivery, integration of health and social care, educational achievement, social work, user and public participation, and public sector reform Thirdly, the lack of political consensus on many issues of social and public policy among ministers and politicians. This has presented obstacles to change, to the adoption of new and modernised agendas and promoted a lowest common denominator approach to policy making. Northern Ireland experience suggests that a range of political, ideological, communal and vested interests has lead to the limited impact of qualitative research and also the non-promotion of qualitative research. About Derek… Derek Birrell is a Professor of Social Administration and Policy in the School of Criminology, Politics and Social Policy at the University of Ulster. He is the author of the several books: ‘The impact of devolution on social policy’ and ‘Direct rule and the governance of Northern Ireland’. He is also the co-author of the book ‘Social Work in Northern Ireland, Conflict and Change’ that is published in 2011. His new books: ‘Comparing Devolved Governance’ (Palgrave Macmillan) and with Ann-Marie Gray ‘Adult Social Care’ (Policy Press) will be published in early 2012.

17


Sethulego Matebesi

Senior Lecturer & Department Chair University of the Free State, South Africa

Qualitative evidence of municipal service delivery protests: implications for South Africa

• Reflecting critically on the factors that contributed to the violent service delivery-related protests in 3 different provinces in South Africa

• Discussing the socio-economic impact and long-term development challenges of these protests

• Illustrating the importance of registering early warnings signals and institutionalising mediation at municipal level.

Presentation abstract: Social protests in South Africa were to a large degree responsible for making the former black townships ungovernable. In 2004, a decade since the advent of the new political dispensation, South Africa witnessed unrest of significant proportions at local government level. This occurred despite the emphasis on good municipal governance by the national government. The lack of capacity to deliver on mandates, together with factors such as individual political struggles, poor communication and ineffective client interface, are key contributors to the surge in violent protests.

This study was conducted in four cities from three different provinces in South Africa. The main aim of the study was to identify the reasons for the violent protests and policy implications. Methodologically, this entailed 100 in-depth interviews with community leaders, councillors and municipal and provincial government officials. More than 300 community members (both protestors and non-protestors) were interviewed by means of focus groups discussions. This qualitative study is useful to policy makers and planners at all spheres of government, including security services because it not only identified the reasons for the protests, but also identified early warning signals and various lessons on how to prevent or manage these events in future. About Sethulego… Sethulego is currently the Chairperson and Senior Lecturer in the Department of Sociology and Research Associate at the Centre for Development Support, both at the University of the Free State. He also serves as Council Member of the South African Sociological Association and Editorial Associate for the Journal for Development Studies. In general terms, his research has strong focus on two areas: health systems research (tuberculosis and HIV and AIDS) and developmental issues (community-based worker systems, and poverty alleviation strategies). His recent empirical work has focuses on the service delivery-related protests in South Africa.

18

Friday 27 May - 08:45

From our chairperson Opening remarks and speaker introductions

Sue Ziebland

Research Director, Department of Primary Healthcare University of Oxford, UK

About Sue… Sue Ziebland is a University Reader in Qualitative Health Research and research director of the Health Experiences Research Group, based in the Department of Primary Health Care. She is also a research fellow at Green Templeton College. Sue’s background is in medical sociology, with increasing focus on qualitative research approaches. Since completing her MSc in Social Research Methods Sue has worked as a researcher in the academic, NHS and voluntary sectors and has published over 100 papers and chapters in social science and health publications. Sue was invited (by Ann McPherson) to be involved in the DIPEx (now Healthtalkonline) projects when it was still at the kitchen table stage – back in 1999. She spent a considerable (and perhaps not surprising) amount of 1999 getting the projects through a national research ethics committee. Since then Sue has worked closely with colleagues in the research group, on the steering group and DIPEx charity to develop the methods used in the projects and raise funding for the research. Sue’s other research interests include people’s use of the internet for health information and qualitative research methods (which she teaches at various levels). In 2010 she has started a 5 year NIHR programme on the use of patients’ experiences on the internet, working with some splendid colleagues in Warwick, Northumbria, Sheffield and Stirling as well as Oxford.

19


Giuseppe A. Veltri

Scientific Fellow, JRC, IPTS

European Commission

Keynote Presentation: Delivering effective qualitative research for policy making in times of austerity

• Discussing how qualitative research can make a distinctive contribution to different stages of policy making

• Utilising qualitative method to complement information derived from quantitative methods

• Arguing that in the age of austerity, it is important that all instruments should be used to avoid ill-advised policies

Presentation abstract: Qualitative research seeks to provide a better understanding of the processes, context, rationales and motivations underlying social and economic activity. Hence, qualitative research can make a distinctive contribution to policy-making at all stages. It can help identify priority areas, design policy interventions (examining what can be effective and successful), and foresee unintended consequences. Insights from qualitative research are also important for fine-tuning policy implementation and monitoring. In time of public sector cuts, all available instruments should be used to avoid ill-advised policies that fail to deliver or produce unintended negative results.

In policy-making, qualitative methodology is complementary to information derived from quantitative methods. For example, qualitative methods are a valuable tool against the outcome of Campbell’s law that affects quantitative indicators used in policy-making. In other words, qualitative research can complement quantitative indicators, monitoring their ‘health status’ and showing when they have ceased to ‘measure’ what they were designed to do (as proxies). In order to be effective, qualitative research should stress this complementarily with quantitative research rather than oppose it, ensure transparency and rigour in its procedures, and take into account policy makers' needs and the context in which they must make their decisions.

About Giuseppe… Giuseppe holds an MSc in Social Research Methods from the Methodology Institute of the London School of Economics (LSE) and a PhD in Social Psychology from the LSE. He is currently a scientific fellow at the European Commission JRC Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS). Before joining the IPTS, he has been a research associate at the Institut Jean Nicod (Ecole Normale Supérieure) in Paris. He has taught extensively in the fields of methodology of social research and social psychology. His research interests focus on public opinion research, social representations, behavioural economics and social psychology of economic life, and public understanding of science.

20


Birutė Mikulskienė

Head of Department of Management

Mykolas Romeris University, Lithuania

Research based knowledge for policy decision making rounds: practical implications

• Evaluating research studies within the period of 2007-2009 ordered by Ministry of Education and Science and Ministry of Economy in Lithuania

• Discussing coupling between research knowledge creation process and policy rounds

• Evaluating the research based knowledge in terms of transformation scenario content

Presentation abstract: Effectiveness of research-based knowledge transfer in to public decision making is not self-oriented or spontaneous action. The aim of this research was to outline the managerial practical implications for the potential use of research-based knowledge with the purpose to improve public policy decision making. The investigation let us draw the main managerial framework, which is based on threefold aspect, such as:

a.) The research content quality including transformation scenarios. Research content must be shaped up in the form directly usable for policy decision making without additional efforts and could be recognized as organic prolongation of policy process or detached to policy round.

b.) The research process interaction with policy making rounds. If we consider policy decision making process as round models, the research-based knowledge could be created either during research own round with attributes of policy decision rounds or being integrated in to policy issue decision making round.

c.) Alignment of policy modelling actors with researchers. The policy decision making and research-based knowledge generation rounds need to be aligned when the researcher is converted to the policy actor with the stake to recognise the hidden phenomena. About Birutė … Birutė Mikulskienė holds a PhD in Physics. She has worked and gained practical experience in Agency of International R&D programmes and in the Lithuania Ministry of Education and Science for 8 years. She joined Mykolas Romeris University in 2006 and in 2010, she was appointed as a Head of Department of Management. Her main research interests include decision making methods for policy processes development, R&D policy management, public policy choice, participatory policy based on social network analysis. She gives lectures at the master level courses on “The Decision Making Theory” and “R&D projects management”.

21


Gráinne Kelly

Policy/Practice Coordinator, INCORE

University of Ulster, UK

Timing is everything: balancing topicality, relevance and precision in delivering evidence-based policy-making

• Discussing the implications of selecting the right timing for both data collection and research dissemination

• Exploring the relationship between topicality, timing and academic rigour

• Discussing the ethics concerning researcher and policy maker relationships

Presentation abstract: Accepting a research grant from a government department comes with both advantages and drawbacks. You have their attention and they have demonstrated an interest in what you have to say. But to what extent have you relinquished control by accepting public monies? Any good researcher will say - not at all. But how can we be sure that this true, particularly if you are working to the time schedule of the policymaker? Evidence-based policymaking is now at the heart of civil service-speak. Could it be that their anxiety to substantiate their decision-making with a limited timeframe impacts on the researcher’s autonomy in any way? Drawing on the experience of conducting publicly-funded qualitative research on conflict and reconciliation in Northern Ireland, this paper sets out to identify some of the challenges of aligning the timing of research undertaken with the wider agendas of policymakers and to critically reflect on the relationship formed between researcher and policymaker, to ensure appropriate critical distance is maintained. About Gráinne … Gráinne Kelly is Policy/Practice Coordinator of INCORE (International Conflict Research Institute), based at the University of Ulster. She has conducted qualitative research on a range of conflict-related themes in Northern Ireland, Cambodia and Sierra Leone. She has published widely on conflict resolution, reconciliation and victims/survivors of conflict and has maintains a research interest in the role of grantmakers in conflict-affected societies. She was awarded a research fellowship at the Center for Philanthropy and Civil Society in City University, New York in 2005. She teaches on a Master’s Programme on Peace and Conflict Studies and contributes to a postgraduate course on Researching Peace and Conflict in Divided Societies. She has recently completed qualitative research on reconciliation theory and practice in Northern Ireland.

22


Susan J. Popkin

Director, Program on Neighbourhoods and Youth Development The Urban Institute, US

Anticipating hot issues and producing timely reports for policy makers to report to new developments

• Discussing recent experience in anticipating hot issues and developing research agenda around it

• Developing methods to make research reports timely and accessible

• Implementing successful engagement strategy with the media and policy makers in research results

Presentation abstract: This presentation will describe my experience in anticipating a “hot issue” - the problem of housing “hard to house” families living in public/social housing developments slated for redevelopment as part of community regeneration initiatives.

I will discuss how this issue grew out of my research on resident relocation and how we used a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods to illuminate the problems, develop a research demonstration, and conduct a formative and outcome evaluation.

I will also describe how we developed a dissemination strategy, including accessible policy briefs instead of reports, presentations, media outreach, and outreach to policy makers. In particular, I will focus on how we used data from our qualitative research to paint portraits of the families and engage policy makers in discussion about how to best meet their service needs. About Susan… Susan J. Popkin, Ph.D. is a Director of The Urban Institute’s Program on Neighborhoods and Youth Development and Senior Fellow in the Metropolitan Housing and Communities Policy Center. Dr. Popkin is an expert on qualitative research methods, including in-depth interviews, focus groups, ethnography, and administrative interviews. Her particular expertise is in integrating these methods into large, multi-method projects. She is lead author for the book The Hidden War: Crime and the Tragedy of Public Housing in Chicago; and co-author of Public Housing Transformation: The Legacy of Segregation and Moving To Opportunity: The Story of an American Experiment to Fight Ghetto Poverty.

23


Alice B. M. Vadrot Research Fellow

Ronald J. Pohoryles Director

Interdisciplinary Centre for Comparative Research in the Social Sciences (ICCR), Austria

The science-policy interface for biodiversity and ecosystem services: opportunities for science to enter in policy environments

• Presenting research results of the analysis of science-policy interfacing in the area of biodiversity governance

• Discussing an appraisal approaches that were developed through interviews with policy-makers and scientists in the field of biodiversity

• Evaluating the success of these approaches for use in supporting policy-makers

Presentation abstract: Significant problems surround efforts to tackle the loss of biodiversity and the degradation of ecosystem services. Implementation of current biodiversity policy has resulted in regulatory discontent, a cycle crisis, and controversy. One factor relating to the conflicting views on the value assigned to biodiversity is its conservation and sustainable use. Current efforts to demonstrate biodiversity’s value rest primarily on the concept of ecosystem services and the benefits for society deriving from biodiversity, assuming that an anthropocentric and economy-based starting point is likely to motivate effective policy-making, integration, and implementation. We argue that such an approach potentially challenges the governance of biodiversity, considering that this solution to environmental problems blurs our vision of the ecological, political, social and economic complexities. Qualitative interdisciplinary research might help to overcome the shortcomings deriving from quantitative research and approaches such as the concept ecosystem services , especially in the case of the rather fuzzy field of biological diversity and the political conflicts surrounding this issue. In this respect the paper addresses the process of science and research entering Policy Environments and the institutionalisation of the science-policy interface on biodiversity and ecosystem services that tends to be seen as important instrument to enhance international compliance and implementation of multilateral policies. About Alice & Ronald… Alice Vadrot is a Research Fellow at the ICCR. She has an MA in Political Science and studied Philosophy at the Université Panthéon Sorbonne. The subject of her PhD is Scientization and Politicization of Biological Diversity: The Transition from Knowledge Politics to Epistemic Governance. Recently, she became a member of the Austrian National Biodiversity Commission. Ronald Pohoryles is the Director of the ICCR and Associate Professor at the University of Innsbruck. His research expertise covers European integration emphasising public policy analysis, science and technology with an emphasis on internationalisation, and environmental sociology.

24


Natalie Armstrong

Lecturer in Social Science University of Leicester, UK

Seeing it from the other side: reflections on a knowledge transfer placement

• Discussing how academic research evidence fits into the broader range of evidence that policy-makers have available to them;

• Exploring how qualitative research evidence is understood and evaluated by policy-makers

• Identifying how best to present and communicate the outcomes of qualitative research to a policy audience

Presentation abstract: Dr Natalie Armstrong was recently awarded an ESRC Knowledge Transfer Placement Fellowship and spent nine months working full-time with the Strategy Unit of the UK Cabinet Office (April to December 2009). She is a medical sociologist experienced in applying social science theory and qualitative methods to the area of health, and worked with the Strategy Unit’s Health Team. In the course of this presentation, she will reflect on her experiences of working at the very heart of government (the Strategy Unit reported ultimately to the Prime Minister), and particularly on the insights gained about the relationship between academic research evidence and policy-making. Key topics to be discussed will include:

• How academic research evidence fits into the broader range of evidence that policy-makers have available to them;

• How qualitative research evidence is understood and evaluated by policy-makers;

• How best to present and communicate the outcomes of qualitative research for a policy audience, including common pitfalls and how to avoid them;

• The value and limitations of this type of Placement Fellowship in building bridges between academic research and policy-makers.

About Natalie… Dr Natalie Armstrong is a Lecturer in Social Science applied to health at the Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester. A medical sociologist, she has previously held research posts at the University of Warwick and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. Her main research interests lie in exploring the interface between health services and the public, in particular: lay and professional understandings and experiences of health, illness and health care; interactions between lay and professional groups; the development of innovative methods of health care delivery (including e-health); and issues of policy, governance and regulation.

25


Ruth Garside

Senior Research Fellow PenTAG, University of Exeter, UK

Brainstorming workshop: Developing indicators of study quality in systematic reviews of qualitative research to inform public health policy making

• Presenting two alternative tools to assess the quality of studies included in systematic reviews and syntheses of qualitative research for NICE in England

• Discussing the utility, meaning and facility of use for these tools

• Facilitating a discussion about key elements of qualitative research conduct and reporting

Methods for appraising the “quality” of qualitative research remain contentious. Different research traditions value aspects as disparate as literary merit, scientific rigour, utility of the findings, integrity of the researcher or fidelity of the report to participants’ concerns.

Health policy makers are increasingly aware that qualitative research may offer valuable insights that enhance services through, for example, understanding the opinions and expectations of those at whom services are aimed or uncovering the organisational factors that may help or hinder their successful delivery. Concerns remain, however, about the reliability and validity of qualitative research findings. In systematic reviews, although quality appraisal of included studies is standard practice, there is little consensus about the key features of a “good” or “poor” qualitative study.

This workshop will use systematic reviews undertaken for the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) to illustrate the features that policy makers may wish to be appraised. It will use this as the starting point for a discussion about the importance of distinguishing between the quality of research reporting and the quality of research conduct and aim to establish agreement on some key reporting standards that might be acceptable to authors, editors, reviewers and policy makers. About Ruth… I have worked for PenTAG since 2001 producing technology assessment reports for NICE appraisal and public health guidance programmes, as well as for the UK HTA Programme. My PhD critically reviewed methods for the systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research, and produced examples using meta-ethnography and meta-study. I lead systematic reviews of qualitative research, including those which inform policy making at NICE’s Centre for Public Health Excellence. The reviews focus on examining the ways in which, for example, the attitudes of the targeted population, mechanisms of implementing health interventions, or structures through which these services are delivered, may help or hinder their success.

26


Ellen van Reuler

PhD Researcher University of Manchester, UK

Policy and history: discussing a typology of qualitative approaches for policy making

• Discussing what historians can add to mainstream policy analyses

• Presenting a typology of approaches to history and policy

• Illustrating these approaches with examples from historical work on health care policy, in particular cancer and palliative care policy

Presentation abstract: The relevance of historical investigations for policy making is a topic that has become increasingly debated. Two approaches dominate these discussions: the analogy and the ‘search for roots of issues under debate’. Though perfectly valid, these approaches are rather limited and do not utilise the full potential of historical analyses in a policy context. In this paper, I develop a typology of approaches that helps us to classify and utilise approaches to the study of history in a policy context.

Firstly, I discuss what historical studies can add to mainstream policy analyses. Secondly, a typology of approaches to history and policy is developed drawing on the continuums of the concept of history applied (past or method) and the aim of the history and policy study (solve a problem or enhance understanding). Finally, I position various approaches to history and policy within this framework. In addition to relatively well-known approaches, several innovative approaches, such as the evaluation of long-term policy outcomes and the combination of an analogy with a force field analysis, are discussed. I illustrate these approaches with examples from my historical work on health care policy, in particular cancer and palliative care policy. About Ellen… I am working as a PhD researcher at The University of Manchester. I initially obtained MSc degrees in Public Administration, Industrial Engineering & Management, and History of Medicine. I pursued research projects in different areas, including international management, funding of palliative care, support networks of the elderly, and development of cancer policies. My current work investigates which approaches might be helpful in bridging the divide between history and policy. The cases that I use to illustrate these approaches are the histories of palliative and cancer care policies in England and the Netherlands during the post war era.

27


Anita Vaillancourt

Assistant Professor Algoma University, Canada

Supporting the application of Grounded Theory qualitative studies for policy making

• Identifying and discussing unique contributions Grounded Theory can offer to social policy development

• What are the challenges and opportunities of using Grounded Theory for policy research and policy development?

• Discussing future considerations for the application of qualitative research for social policy development

Presentation abstract: Grounded Theory as an increasingly popular qualitative research methodology offers many advantages for exploring new and existing domains of research that may aid policy development. Key advantages of using a grounded theory methodology within qualitative research include its emphasis on beginning with the data rather than with specific research questions (Charmaz, 2006) which in turn, may provide improved opportunities for research to be interpreted using a policy lens; it’s changing focus throughout time which permits an ability of the researcher to focus on areas of emerging importance (Charmaz, 2006); and the researcher’s ability to construct theory from the research findings offers an element of rigour unavailable when using other qualitative research methdologies and methods (Creswell, 1998). However, not unlike other qualitative methodologies, persistent challenges associated with a growing number of interpretations of Grounded Theory application in terms of study design, implementation, analysis, and its growing adoption as hybrid methodology may present challenges to its perceived credibility and functionality as a viable and rigorous research methodology for policy research and decision making. This presentation will discuss the possibilities and challenges of Grounded Theory for policy making. About Anita… Anita Vaillancourt, MSW, PhD (cand) is currently an Assistant Professor at Algoma University. She has worked as a clinical social worker and policy researcher for over 12 years and currently teaches and conducts research in the areas of poverty policy, addictions, precarious work, family violence, and critical pedagogy.

28

Attendee List FIRST NAME LAST NAME JOB TITLE ORGANISATION COUNTRY

Adam Fusheini Researcher University of Ulster UK

Aileen O'Carroll Manager IQDA Ireland

Alex Hekelaar Researcher Social Affairs Rotterdam The Netherlands

Alice B. M. Vadrot Research Fellow ICCR Austria

Anita Vaillancourt Assistant Professor Algoma University Canada

Ann Higgins Senior Facilitator Mary Immaculate college Ireland

Anne-Marie Doherty Postgraduate Research Student

Queen's University Belfast UK

Avril Craig Research Officer Patient and Client Council UK

Birutė Mikulskienė Head of Department of Management

Mykolas Romeris University

Lithuania

Brenda Roche Director of Research Wellesley Institute Canada

Christine Irvine Policy and Information Officer

Volunteer Now UK

Derek Birrell Professor of Social Administration and Policy

University of Ulster UK

Dirk Schubotz YLT Director Queen's University Belfast UK

Eileen Martin Manager, The Science Shop

Queen's University Belfast UK

Ellen van Reuler PhD researcher University of Manchester UK

Eva Jansova Statistical officer European Training Foundation

Italy

Fran Bennett Senior Research Fellow University of Oxford UK

Francesca Morosi PhD Student Nottingham Trent University

UK

Gillian Robinson ARK Director University of Ulster UK

Giuseppe Veltri Scientific Officer European Commission Spain

Goretti Horgan Research Associate University of Ulster UK

Grainne Kelly Policy/Practice Coordinator

INCORE UK

Helena Tuite PhD Student University of Ulster UK

Oonagh Corrigan Associate Professor in Clinical Education Research

Peninsual College of Medicine & Dentistry

UK

29

Attendee List FIRST NAME LAST NAME JOB TITLE ORGANISATION COUNTRY

Joerg Hecker Director Business Operations

ATLAS.ti Germany

Jytte Kaltoft Bendixen Union Advisor Danish Artist Union Denmark

Lavinia Maria Andrei PhD Candidate University of Bucharest Romania

Lea Caragata Associate Professor Wilfrid Laurier University Canada

Marina Roseman Lecturer Queen's University Belfast UK

Meena Chary Assistant Professor University of South Florida US

Natalie Armstrong Lecturer in Social Science

University of Leicester UK

Neil Coulson Associate Professor in Health Psychology

University of Nottingham UK

Robert Miller Professor of Sociology Queen's University of Belfast

UK

Roberta Bonini Senior Researcher IReR - Lombardy Regional Institute for Research

Italy

Ronald J. Pohoryles Director ICCR Austria

Ruth Garside Senior Research Fellow PenTAG UK

Sara Shaw Senior Fellow Nuffield Trust UK

Sarah Riley Senior Lecturer Aberystwyth University UK

Sethulego Matebesi Senior Lecturer and Department Chair

University of The Free State

South Africa

Sharon Redmond Policy and Research Officer

RNID UK

Simon O'Hare Research and Publications Officer

Change Makers UK

Sirin Sung Lecturer in Social Policy Queen's University of Belfast

UK

Sue Ziebland Research Director University of Oxford UK

Susan Popkin Director, Program on Neighbourhoods and Youth Development

The Urban Institute US

Susan Berkowitz Senior Study Director Westat US

Tim Nelson Lecturer in Social Policy Harvard University US

Wendy Scott PhD Candidate Queen's University of Belfast

UK

30

Message from our sponsors:

Making social and political information on Northern Ireland available to all ARK is a resource dedicated to making social and political information on Northern Ireland available to all. The ARK website holds information on a wide range of social and political topics. With research summaries, survey results, visual material, facts and figures, it is an essential starting point for anyone who needs to gather information on Northern Ireland quickly and easily. Go to www.ark.ac.uk, and search across all the ARK materials or go directly to one of the specialist sections. ARK also provides a number of services, including technical support for people who want to carry out analyses of large-scale survey datasets, but do not have the resources or expertise to do this themselves. To promote easy access to research information ARK produces briefing papers and other publications, and runs regular seminars and currently is developing a new Policy Unit. The ARK team is always interested in hearing from users about how we can improve or expand our service.

A powerful workbench for analysing large bodies of textual, graphical, audio and video data

The purpose of ATLAS.ti is to help researchers uncover and systematically analyze complex phenomena hidden in text and multimedia data. The program provides tools that let the user locate, code, and annotate findings in primary data material, to weigh and evaluate their importance, and to visualize complex relations between them. ATLAS.ti consolidates large volumes of documents and keeps track of all notes, annotations, codes and memos in all fields that require close study and analysis of primary material consisting of text, images, audio, video, and geo data. In addition, it provides analytical and visualization tools designed to open new interpretative views on the material. Source: Wikipedia

31

Upcoming Events

Market Research in the Mobile World 2011 2nd International Conference 19-20 July 2011, Atlanta (USA)

Computer-Aided Qualitative Research Europe 4th Annual Conference

1-2 September 2011, Locarno (Switzerland)

Online Qualitative Research Congress 2011 14-15 December 2011, Milan (Italy)

Technology-Aided Qualitative Research Asia 3rd Annual Conference

21-22 February 2012, Singapore

Qualitative Research for Policy Making Asia 3rd International conference 23-24 February 2012, Singapore

Asia Mobile Market Research World 2012 1st International conference 25-26 April 2012, Singapore

For more information about our upcoming events, please

visit our website at http://www.merlien.org

Merlien Institute is an independent organisation dedicated to providing timely and critical information to the qualitative research community. Our

mission is to provide researchers and practitioners a unique platform to brainstorm new ideas and learn best practices in a highly interactive conference environment. Merlien Institute, with its 4 staff and 26 Advisory

Board Members now host more than 10 annual meetings around the globe. Our events have consistently resulted in new collaborations and

projects among delegates.

32

Organised by:

© 2011 by Merlien Institute All rights reserved.

Printed in The Netherlands

No part of this publication may be reproduced, transmitted, transcribed, stored in a retrieval system, or translated into any language, in any form

or by any means without written authorisation from Merlien Institute.

This booklet is printed on recycled paper, please recycle.

Silver Sponsor:

Venue Sponsor:

qrpm2011 conference booklet

Education

value of qualitative

policyqualitative research

qualitative findings

useful research

social policy

action research approach

policy makerscommissioningin

senior level policy