In Tower Hamlets, our survey suggests that a wide variety of research methods have been employed, ranging from traditional approaches like surveys, interviews, and focus groups to non-traditional, creative methods such as videos, drawings, gardening, and community dinners. There has also been an active effort to implement findings as part of the research, including community organising, campaigning, and policymaking.
Traditional qualitative and quantitative research methods are most used, particularly by universities (Figure 5). 92% of universities utilise these traditional methods, along with 85% of public sector representatives and 81% of community organisations. Among all stakeholders, public sector representatives use creative, non-traditional 26 methods the least (15% of public sector representatives), while community organisations are more likely to use them (44% of community organisations).
The dominance of traditional research methods and the limited familiarity with creative approaches among policymakers prompts a consideration of several key questions when commissioning, supporting, and conducting P&C research:
- What do different people understand to be the standards of good quality in peer and community research?How can we build a shared understanding of good quality? How can we enable good quality?
- What do we consider as ‘good’ evidence? Are community insights and P&C research evidence valued in the same way that academic evidence is? How might we expand our understandings of credible evidence?
The survey findings identified a need to re-evaluate P&C research methodologies. As one survey participant summarised in a free text comment:
“Part of the process of having community research accepted by policymakers is to also create the environment where this research is accepted as equally rigorous as traditional methods.” (community organisation representative)