EVIDENCE

3.30 It has also been suggested that where civil servants are unfamiliar with research methods, this leads
to frustrated communications and tensions with researchers, and ultimately to delay in publishing
results. There is a great deal of research expertise across government; some of this was exhibited
in the insightful responses to this inquiry. But, research is commissioned, overseen, received
and communicated by a wide range of personnel.
3.31 The government social research competency framework (an addendum to the civil service code)
defines the professional competency for members of the social research profession within government
and devolved governments. On reaching grade 5, chief research officer level, a civil servant is expected
to have a thorough and detailed knowledge of research methodology and the evidence base in the field
of policy they work in and to take responsibility for research publication.
3.32 Government sometimes changes what it wants from the research in the course of the project.
For instance, Dr Christian van Stolk of RAND explained that in evaluating a policy impact, departments
may change the outcome measures because of changes in government policy moving or staff
turnover (mainly in the civil service team directing the research), which can lead to shifting priorities.
It can also happen that at the point of publication government changes the format it wants to publish
results in, although according to van Stolk it is more usually the case that there has been little thought
or discussion about that format until publication is imminent. Such changes to the research protocol can
cause tension and delay, which could be avoided if commissioners of research and researchers worked
closely at the outset not only to set the research question but to agree publication plans.
Uncertainty over what counts as research
and differences in the interpretation of rules
3.33 This inquiry has considered how research, defined as the collection and evaluation of data, is published.
It is necessary to bear in mind the distinction between strategic advice, which carries no expectation
of publication, and the data and analysis that underpin it and ought ordinarily to come from or be put
in the public domain.
Jonathan Portes, said:
“[NIESR does] research on the expectation it will be published. There might
be an exemption for strategic advice, but all policy research and programme
evaluations should be published.”
Dr Sarah Wollaston MP, said:
“Ministers need to ask for strategic advice, but the principle is that public funds
pay for research that informs that advice, so should be publicly available.”
3.34 It is evident from what the inquiry was told both by members of the research community and by civil
servants that there is uncertainty about how evidence supplied by private consultancies is to be handled.
Consultants may provide strategic advice but may also conduct research. There is no reason why this
should create confusion between research and consultancy, even if there is some room for overlap.
Where this might be applicable, civil servants should establish in advance that research findings
and strategic advice will be provided in separate reports.
3.35 There is further uncertainty over how other types of research, such as internal fact-finding or evaluation
studies, fit into the publication rules. Case Study 9 shows that research into the effect of fracking
on house prices was not published because Defra considered it to be an internal report. When it was
released in response to an Environmental Information Request it
was heavily redacted.
There is uncertainty about
how evidence supplied
by private consultancies
is to be handled.
SECTION 3: REASONS FOR THE DELAYED PUBLICATION OR WITHHOLDING OF GOVERNMENT RESEARCH
28