I recently co-led a review with Dr Vicky Ward from the University of St Andrews that explores what makes place-based research partnerships work, and where the evidence still falls short. These partnerships are increasingly seen as vital for tackling complex local challenges, but understanding what truly drives success is less clear. In our review, we looked at the existing research, identified common themes, and highlighted gaps that need attention. Our aim is to help practitioners and policymakers build stronger, more effective collaborations that deliver real impact for communities.
Why it matters
Place-based research partnerships are increasingly seen as vital for tackling complex local challenges, from health inequalities to climate resilience. But what does success look like, and how can partnerships deliver real impact? This review brings together academic and practice-based evidence to answer those questions.
Key Findings
1 – Outcomes span multiple levels
Partnerships can deliver benefits for individuals (skills development, career progression), organisations (cultural change, capacity-building), and society (policy influence, improved services). However, most studies rely on participant perceptions rather than independent evaluation, and causal links between partnership structures and outcomes remain unclear.
2 – Infrastructure and systems are critical enablers
Successful partnerships need:
- Formal governance structures with clear decision-making processes.
- Professional coordination roles and dedicated project offices.
- Sustainable funding models that go beyond short-term grants.
- Time for relationship-building, often undervalued but essential for trust and collaboration.
3 – Skills and expertise must be distributed and diverse
Partnerships thrive when technical research skills combine with:
- Knowledge brokering to bridge academic and policy worlds.
- Interpersonal skills like communication and negotiation.
- Leadership and management capabilities to steer collaborative work.
- Contextual knowledge and lived experience to ground research in local realities.
4 – Approaches and methodologies prioritise co-production
Participatory methods – such as community-based participatory research and integrated knowledge translation – shift control from researchers to partners as co-producers of knowledge. Structured collaboration, joint meetings, and continuous learning practices are key.
5 – Behaviours and values underpin success
Trust, respect, reciprocity, and transparency are not abstract ideals; they require active work. Partnerships must address power dynamics, negotiate roles, and embed equity in decision-making. Formal agreements help but cannot replace ongoing relational effort.
Critical Gaps
The review highlights major evidence gaps:
- Early-stage partnership setup: Little guidance exists on initiation, onboarding, and financial governance.
- Evaluation: Few longitudinal studies track partnerships over time or assess effectiveness under different conditions.
- Implementation specifics: While principles are clear, translating them into practice remains challenging.
Implications
- For practitioners: Invest in governance, coordination roles, and time for trust-building.
- For funders: Support longer timelines, flexible funding, and infrastructure, not just research outputs.
- For researchers: Address evidence gaps through systematic evaluation and detailed documentation of partnership processes.
Conclusion
Place-based research partnerships hold huge promise for creating locally relevant solutions. But success depends on more than goodwill; it requires infrastructure, skills, participatory approaches, and sustained attention to values. This review provides a roadmap for designing partnerships that work, while calling for further research to fill critical gaps.
This blog was written by Elizabeth Goodyear, Programme Manager at City-REDI, University of Birmingham. She was assisted by Copilot.
Find out more about the Local Policy Innovation Partnership Hub.
Disclaimer:
The views expressed in this analysis post are those of the authors and not necessarily those of City-REDI or the University of Birmingham.