Read the full article here.

Knowledge brokers (KBs) bridge gaps between environmental research and policy by facilitating evidence-informed decision-making. They build trust, align research with policy needs, and foster inclusive knowledge exchange.

Key Findings:

1. Diverse Roles & Activities:

   • KBs operate as individuals, teams, or organizations within research bodies (56%), government agencies (16%), or as independents (25%).

   • Core activities: Facilitating stakeholder interactions (e.g., workshops), aligning research with policy needs, developing engagement tools (e.g., policy briefs), and building capacity.

   • “Invisible work” (e.g., relationship-building, conflict mediation) is critical but often undervalued.

2. Impacts & Challenges:

   • Achieved outcomes: Enhanced social networks (78% of studies), improved knowledge usability (56%), and inclusive stakeholder representation (25%).

   • Barriers: Lack of clear KB strategies, insufficient funding, undervalued “invisible work,” and skills gaps (e.g., facilitation, contextual adaptability).

   • Enablers: Trusted relationships, organizational support, and flexible/responsive approaches.

3. Critical Gaps:

   • Only 19% of studies measured KB impact; evaluation methods are underdeveloped.

   • Dominance of high-income contexts (47% Australia/USA/Canada); LMICs underrepresented.

   • No standardized metrics to assess KB effectiveness or long-term policy influence.

Practical Guidance for Implementation

For Policymakers & Funders:

• Embed KBs strategically:

  • Position KBs in research agencies or policy departments with clear mandates (e.g., “science-policy liaison roles”).

  • Fund dedicated KB teams (not individuals) to cover diverse skills (facilitation, science communication, project management).

• Allocate separate budgets for KB activities (distinct from research funding) to ensure flexibility and sustainability.

• Develop KB-specific incentives: Reward relationship-building and policy impact in performance metrics.

For KBs & Organizations:

• Prioritize “invisible work”: Dedicate 30–50% of time to trust-building and stakeholder engagement.

• Use inclusive practices: Integrate diverse knowledge systems (e.g., Indigenous, local) into policy processes.

• Adopt adaptive strategies: Tailor activities to context (e.g., rapid briefs for crises; long-term dialogues for complex issues).

Evaluation Framework: Track:

• Process metrics: Stakeholder diversity in workshops, policy brief uptake.

• Outcome metrics: New cross-sector partnerships, citations in policy documents.

• Impact metrics: Policy changes linked to KB-facilitated evidence (e.g., revised climate adaptation plans).

Research & Action Priorities

1. Address evidence gaps:

   • Develop KB evaluation tools capturing tacit impacts (e.g., trust, network shifts).

   • Study KB effectiveness in LMICs and crisis contexts (e.g., disaster response).

2. Build KB communities of practice for shared learning and advocacy.

3. Co-design KB roles with policymakers to align with decision windows (e.g., legislative cycles).