On September 12, 2006, the Swiss House for Advanced Research and Education (SHARE) and the Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research at Harvard University (HPCR) convened a panel discussion on the topic of “From Research to Policy: Finding Creative Solutions to Conflict”.

The panelists were Ambassador Thomas Greminger, Head of the Political Affairs Division on Human Security at the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs; Claude Bruderlein, Director of HPCR and Lecturer at the Harvard School of Public Health; Steven Caton, Director of the Center for Middle Eastern Studies and Professor of Contemporary Arab Studies; and Jennifer Leaning, Co-Director of the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative and Professor of the Practice of International Health at the Harvard School of Public Health.

 (J. Leaning, S. Caton, C. Bruderlein, T. Greminger, M. Mahmoud)

The panel delved into the complex and multifaceted relationship between academic research and policy-making. Starting from the premises that scholars and policy-makers oftentimes examine similar issues associated with conflict and end up with outputs that are at variance, the discussion proceeded to inquire as to the extent to which academics can/should impact policy-making and, similarly, how can/should policy-makers make use of academe in a proper manner.

Among the issues raised were the importance of reaching the ‘right’ policy, the normative challenges for scholars in mediating their knowledge in an accessible manner to practitioners, and the role of external qualifiers (and sometimes enablers of conflict) such as community and history.

The speakers highlighted the notion of the dynamic relationship between the production of knowledge as a vehicle for the ‘provision of civilization’. While noting that pure research is a luxury (indeed possibly an impossible situation given funding constraints), they stressed the importance of sharing the knowledge produced with a view to have it used. The time factor was recognized as a key determinant, in relation to both development of research as well as the articulation of longer-term policies. It was also noted that, at the heart of the relationship between these two communities, stood the notion of power which is sometimes articulated in the form of deflection on the part of policy processes that are unwilling or unable to process the ‘wrong’ answers provided by a scientific inquiry. This, too, can lead to marginalization of issues.

The overarching notion of a translation effort (and its implication for methodology, impact, and criteria adopted) was recognized by the participants as the crucial component of the relationship between (academic) creativity and (policy) standards. In closing, the panelists flagged the important of humility, listening, engagement, verification, acknowledgment of self-limitations, and investment in team work as fundamental elements of a creative and quality relationship between research and policy.

Courtesy of Dr. Mohammad-Mahmoud Ould Mohamedou,

Associate Director Program on Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research

Harvard University