Can Research Strengthen Democracy?

A strong democracy begins with research that honors the knowledge and wisdom of every community. 

The most meaningful research comes directly from those closest to problems and solutions. It draws on lived experiences, local knowledge, and cultural context to build power with communities. That’s the essence of inclusive research which aims to dismantle systemic biases and rebalance power. 

To better understand what inclusive research looks like in practice, and why it matters in this moment, I spoke with Dr. Kristine Andrews. She is founder and director of Ideas to Impact, which is redefining the meaning of rigorous research. RWJF’s Associate Vice President, Policy, David Adler joined our conversation to explore how inclusive research informs equitable policy that strengthens democracy.

What do we mean by inclusive research? 

Inclusive research is a framework for producing knowledge in a fair, inclusive, and equitable way. It engages diverse voices and perspectives that traditional research designs have too often left out. In doing so, it can inform policies that create opportunities for everyone to live their healthiest lives.

To put this into practice, Dr. Andrews has identified four interconnected methods that paint a fuller picture of a community’s assets and challenges: decolonizing research; culturally responsive and equitable evaluation; anti-racist research; and liberatory research. 

These are essential tools for uncovering bias, challenging assumptions, and confronting unbalanced power dynamics. Her report explains how to use these inclusive research methods. 

Several cross-cutting themes emerge across all four methods:

1. They prioritize lived experience and acknowledge that people closest to an issue have knowledge that surveys and administrative data may miss. 
2. They redistribute power rather than assuming researchers have all the expertise. By sharing decision making, these methods engage communities in influencing and shaping study design and data collection. 
3. Each method honors cultural and historical context, recognizing that what works in one community might not work in another. They acknowledge that past harms influence how communities participate in research and view findings. 

Finally, they all challenge the idea that there is only one right way to collect evidence. Although some claim that traditional research is objective, it carries assumptions about whose knowledge counts and whose voices are heard.

Why is inclusive research an effective tool for driving social change?

Inclusive research makes the invisible visible by capturing what people and communities experience. That’s the key to responsive policymaking.

For example, consider the evaluation of a youth mentoring program. Rather than limiting the evaluation to questions like how many young people completed the program or whether their grades improved, researchers asked community members to define success. That revealed more consequential questions: Did the young people develop a sense of belonging? Did they see themselves in leadership roles? Did the program create a pathway that youth previously didn’t have? 

Using culturally-specific measures and directly asking young people what outcomes they care about helped researchers and their funders understand whether the program was working.

Medicaid studies are another example of using inclusive research to learn how policy affects people’s lives. A look at recently imposed work requirements for eligibility revealed that most people receiving Medicaid are either already working or can’t work due to a disability, caregiving responsibilities, or other constraints. That finding challenged the claim that more people will seek jobs under the new federal mandate. Instead, it showed that more people will lose their health insurance, suggesting that imposing a work requirement weakens access to a life-saving public benefit.

What makes inclusive research a core pillar of democracy?

Democracy requires that everyone has a say in decisions that affect their lives. This principle is under siege with pushback against diversity, equity, and inclusion, academic freedom, and questions researchers can ask. We are witnessing a deliberate effort to narrow ideas about whose knowledge matters, what experiences count, and which voices shape policy. 

That’s why inclusive research is crucial for protecting democracy. By uncovering deeper truths, inclusive research documents harms, articulates needs, and promotes accountability.  It gives communities evidence to advocate for themselves and makes it harder for decisionmakers to ignore inequities or pretend they don’t exist. 

Listening to those with lived experience leads to policies that respond to everyone’s needs. It’s what makes democracy work. And that’s inconvenient to those intent on erasing certain communities from research and maintaining the status quo. 

How do we put inclusive research into practice? 

A key point from this conversation is that research methods are not neutral. They shape what we see, what we miss, and ultimately what we do. RWJF is committed to research that recognizes the many ways of knowing because building evidence that leads to meaningful change means making room for truth in all its forms. 

The attacks on health equity in this country are forcing researchers to navigate enormous political and institutional pressures. So it’s more important than ever to apply inclusive research in shaping equitable policies. Well-designed research that engages diverse communities is a vital tool not only for gathering actionable evidence but also for strengthening democracy. 

That raises an important question that should guide us as we seek out data that can improve lives: “How are the ways in which we gather knowledge and evidence today going to shape the kind of democracy we will have in the future?”

About the Author

Mona Shah is Senior Director, Research, in the Research-Evaluation-Learning department of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation