By Rowena Harding

Engagement is the art of helping research reach the right audiences without it losing its integrity along the way. Learning how to connect research with the people and processes it could influence is now an integral part of being a good researcher. Journals, conferences, and citations remain vital, but they reach only part of the audience that could benefit from the findings.

The good news is that successful engagement for research impact is not about doing more, but about making small shifts towards doing things differently – and finding the relationships, conversations, and opportunities that help the research have an impact where it is needed most.

Doing things differently, not doing more
For many academics, engagement can feel unfamiliar and they can feel a little uncertain as to what it entails. While some researchers already work closely with partners outside academia and want to refine what they do, others are discovering this space for the first time and wondering where to start. It is important to remember that engagement does not mean giving up rigour and impartiality for advocacy.

Engagement builds on the very strengths that make a good researcher and the forms of engagement that researchers already do without realising it, such as when they are choosing the right conference, selecting a journal or presenting a paper. Engagement for impact is about extending that thinking so high quality research can be used by people and communities who can benefit from it.

Defining realistic research impact
One of the first things researchers need to explore is what “impact” can mean – and what is truly realistic within a research project.

Impact is not only about policy change which can often lie outside a research team’s sphere of influence. Research by the London School of Economics (2021) defined four crucial areas of impact for development researchers.

• Mutual learning: Training and equipping others to use the evidence.
• Conceptual: Raising awareness and shifting understanding.
• Networks and connectivity: Building links between those who have data and those who use it
• Instrumental / policy change: Direct influence on policies, decisions, or legislation.

Danida Fellowship Centre’s “Research Engagement Influencing and Impact” initiative encourages researchers to recognise that impact can be defined in a multitude of ways and to focus on tracking micro-impacts and stories of change as incremental steps. Research concepts that are in the process of being developed or that do not yet have the language and knowledge them, may define impact in a way that is relevant to communities or stakeholders.

Feedback from our participants say that this wider definition of impact helps.

“The course got me to start thinking about how to create impact. It has set things in motion and while we will most probably not follow the “recipe” taught, the most important thing is to find our own way of creating impact,” explained one of the participants in a feedback survey after the training. Engagement is not a one-size-fits-all formula, but a mindset that researchers adapt to their own unique contexts.

Impact beyond original expectations
Danida-funded researcher Jacqui Goldin, Extraordinary Associate Professor of Anthropology and Water Sciences at the University of the Western Cape, led a citizen science project mapping invisible groundwater in South Africa. She explains how impact in human form was important to her work.

“We are of course interested in the data,” she says, “but we are also concerned with transformation and empowering people, so the aim of this work is to achieve a more just society through the democratisation of knowledge and improved water literacy.” Her project demonstrates how rigorous research can create both scientific data and social transformation by clearly defining the value for the community as empowerment and literacy. Read Jacqui Goldin’s article

How to connect and know what stakeholder’s value
To achieve meaningful engagement, a reason for connecting is needed. Associate Professor, Dr. Abu Hamja from Ahsanullah University of Science and Technology in Bangladesh illustrates that the key to meaningful engagement lies in understanding what matters to others.

“When stakeholders understand how the research outcomes align with their interests, needs, or responsibilities, they are more likely to actively support and contribute to the project. Therefore, identifying and presenting a strong value proposition helps build trust, collaboration, and sustained engagement throughout the research process,” he explains. This was critical in a research project working with a variety of stakeholders in the private sector whose motivations for engaging are different from researchers.

For most researchers, this is a crucial shift in focus. It moves researchers from a mindset of what they want to share to what others want to know, such as what value they get out of engaging in the process or the solution. It is essential to recognise that not every stakeholder is motivated by the same solution as the research team, or is even altruistically motivated. This does not mean that researchers need to change their findings or challenge their values, but they need to recognise that the initial motivator for working with a research project is going to be as unique as the stakeholders themselves.

Small shifts for lasting impact
Recognising some of these shifts in ways of working ultimately leads to better outcomes for research.

1. Clarify the impact goal – what is the research trying to achieve beyond the research itself? This allows a research team to focus on the engagement that truly leads to achieving that goal – distinct from the demands of a university or even a funder.
2. Understand your stakeholders. Achieving a better connection with an understanding of the stakeholders will deepen their engagement with researcher. This will lead to two-way relationships where the stakeholders will be more direct about what they need and how they want to receive it – be it a summary of findings, a policy brief or help with something they are trying to do in their community.
3. Monitor micro impacts. The most powerful shift is continuously monitoring micro-impacts. These could be small things such as stakeholders proactively engaging with the topics or a previously reticent stakeholder requesting more information. Long-term policy changes are often beyond the control and duration of funded projects. But in recording the change in behaviours or attitudes of stakeholders across the project duration, their willingness to engage, and the powerful stories told from and by the community, researchers are more able to demonstrate how their engagement has been making a difference over time.

Returning to Professor Goldin’s project in South Africa, the data has been collected and there is new vital information on groundwater – but the micro-impacts are equally impressive. The residents she engaged with are now curious about water – their most valuable resource – and tribal leaders are supportive of the project. The community members have a sense of belonging to a geographical area beyond their homes, as they are part of a wider project across catchment areas. Trust has formed between commercial farmers and small-scale farmers and also between hydrologists, geologists, anthropologists as well as community members.  As Professor Goldin notes, these results transcend the project itself, providing a foundation for future community regeneration and human development. Their successful engagement is turning time-bound research into a lasting local legacy.

In a similar way, the Danida-supported research project “Innovation and Renewable Electrification in Kenya”(IREK) illustrates how the three points – clarify the impact goal, understand your stakeholder and monitor micro impact – can end up creating the conditions for longer-term policy influence. While the project ultimately contributed to energy policy discussions in Kenya, the foundation for that impact was built much earlier through a participatory research approach. The approach actively involved diverse stakeholder groups, by bringing them all together early on in the project and creating shared understanding around both the challenges and opportunities within renewable electrification. In this sense, the project’s early impact was not the policy change itself, which was more of a consequence, but its ability to bring different actors together and engage them over time. Read more.