(S5E2) Working with policymakers with Professor Ilias Trispiotis

Intro: 00:00:00

Welcome to the Research Culture Uncovered podcast, where in every episode we explore what is research culture and what should it be. You'll hear thoughts and opinions from a range of contributors to help you change research culture into what you want it to be.

Ged: 00:00:24

Hi, this is Ged Hall. And for those of you who don't know me, I'm an Academic Development Consultant at the University of Leeds. You are joining us in season five of our Research Culture Uncovered podcast, where we're diving into the effects of research impact on research culture and focusing in on different topics to ensure those effects are positive.

Today I am delighted to be talking to Professor Ilias Trispiotis. Ilias is Professor in Human Rights Law from the School of Law here in Leeds. He's an expert in international European and comparative human rights law, discrimination law, human rights and discrimination theory, law and religion. He's also the School's Co-lead for Impact and Engagement.

In the summer of: 2022

Ilias 00:01:40

Thank you for having me.

Ged: 00:01:42

You're welcome. And, and thank you for, thank you for saying, um, yes to the, to the invitation. It's always great to, it's always great to, uh, to speak to people and, uh, and get, and get some really interesting conversations going. Uh, now before we dive into, talk about your submission to the, to the Engaged for Impact towards last, uh, last year, um, a little bird told me that, um, you are in training for the Leeds 10k race now being, being, um, how can I describe it?

A complaining runner, I think is probably the, the best way of describing it. It's not something I enjoy, but why, why on earth are you putting yourself through the pain, as I see it, of, of racing in, in Leeds soon?

Ilias: 00:02:36

That's a great question, Ged. I, I really like running. I. I don't find it very, very painful. Well, depends on how, on how, how the terrain is.

Um, but um, I started running again like many people during the pandemic, um, and I find the repetitiveness of, of running, um, what calming um, um, and there is this, this sense of, you know, gratification after, after a long run who is not partial to a runner's high. Um, It's also very fitting, I suppose first question because as, as, as we've discussed, I usually listen to podcasts.

Ged: 00:03:17

Yeah.

Ilias: 00:03:17

When, when I run. So I find myself for the first time on the other side of this. Um, so, so yeah. Maybe you should try it a bit more.

Ged: 00:03:28

Okay, I will. And, and hopefully you've got some episodes from this podcast lined up for some of your training runs.

Ilias: 00:03:36

Yes, I have bookmarked a few. It's a great series.

Ged: 00:03:39

Brilliant. That's, um, that's fantastic. And, and the other thing, um, I guess considering that at Leeds our Deputy Vice Chancellor is an ultramarathon runner, I guess it's part of just h how to progress as a researcher at Leeds is to is to run a lot maybe.

Ilias: 00:03:57

Yeah, yeah. Leeds is quite competitive, uh, in, in running.

Ged: 00:04:02

Yeah. And so, Thinking about the, um, the, in the, the submission to the, to the awards, first of all, first question. I wonder if you could, uh, tell us some more about what conversion therapy actually is and, and, uh, and, and do you think we're heading towards, uh, a change in UK law?

Ilias: 00:04:25

Yeah, so conversion therapy, uh, is an umbrella term.

For any, um, quote unquote therapeutic approach, um, that demonstrates an assumption that, um, any sexual orientation or gender identity is inherently preferable to any other, um, and which attempts to change someone's gender identity or sexual orientation or to, to suppress it on that basis, on the basis that it's inherently inferior to, to, to, to others.

And typically it's, um, it's targeting LGBTIQ+ identities for suppression or, or for change. Now the UK Government and I've worked a lot with. The UK, uh, Government's, Equalities office, and other UK NGOs for this project.

The UK Government, they have promised ban conversion therapy in law, uh, multiple times.

of the Queen's speech, uh, in: 2019

And also there is incontrovertible evidence that it doesn't work. So it's also useless. Mm-hmm. Um, so that's why there is advice from most international organisations, um, and NGOs to introduce a legal

ban to it.

Ged: 00:06:55

Yeah. Thank you for that. That's, um, that's really useful and, and a very, very serious topic. I mean, the, um, the award category you submitted to was Making a Positive, uh, Difference to Society, which was a very much around both, um, improvements and preventing harm to, to groups within society.

So, so that is that, uh, I guess that's the, the hook for you, why you went for that, that particular category. Was that prevention of harm, was it?

Ilias: 00:07:28

Yes. I think that banning conversion therapy in law, is a very important first step to protect LGBT+ communities and, um, survivors of those practices from further harm.

So yeah, I think that's, that's a great way of, of putting it.

Ged: 00:07:50

Yeah. You, you mentioned working with, um, a whole range of, uh, of NGOs, uh, and also I, in your, in your submission, you mentioned w working both in the UK and in New Zealand and, and further on in the, um, In the series, uh, we actually speak to somebody in, uh, higher education in New Zealand.

So I also wanted to kind of make some links there and, um, but uh, were there any kind of key points that came from that that you'd like to share? You know, some of the, some of the really interesting things or kind of difficulties in that space in terms of working with a whole range of different groups?

Ilias: 00:08:36

Yeah, I think, I think that's a really. That's a really good question. Um, I, I met with the UN Independent Expert on sexual orientation and gender identity in London, um, a couple of weeks ago, uh, as part of his official visit in the UK. And that meeting, I think, epitomised some of the, um, some of the most enjoyable aspects if you want, working with, with policy makers.

Um, and I think that one of the most enjoyable aspects of working with policy makers is that you can see, um, how academic research can translate to specific action points and could make a difference, at least conceptually, in how policy makers understand, for instance, what conversion therapy is, why conversion therapy is a legal problem, um, and what the legal solutions to it can be.

But it's also, it also has to do with instrumental change. So trying to convince key policy makers, uh, to actually affect the change in law. And I think that's, that's quite enjoyable, quite gratifying. Mm-hmm. Uh, for, for, for an academic researcher. Um, but as you say, I've met with, um, a few NGOs, um, in the UK and internationally, um, you know, with the Equalities Minister of the UK in on two occasions.

I've spoken with the UK, uh, Government Equalities Office, uh, in many occasions. Um, and one of the, I think, and, and there are many similarities and differences in, in, uh, by, by, if you compare those conversations to typical academic conversations, you, you might have with other academics. Um, and there are many similarities in the sense that policy makers I have in mind, the NGOs I have in mind, like academics, they.

They are, their thinking is very much evidence based, so they, the focus in those meetings is on, you know, the rigour of the arguments, the, the rigour of the legal arguments, uh, you know, the quality of the research that backs those arguments. So, for example, um, I had in, in, in all those, in, in many of those meetings, in most of those meetings, we had to go through, you know, lots of counterfactuals that academic papers very often have to go through, uh, you know, to, to strengthen an argument.

We had to go through counterfactuals, like with banning conversion therapy mean that we're banning that we have to ban all hate speech, for example, why is conversion therapy, uh, different to hate speech and so on and so forth. And I, and that's, and that's very, that's a similarity to, to academic research in an academic paper.

Uh, but there's also, you know, huge differences. And first, I think, The first difference that one identifies quite quickly is that policymakers, um, are very much results driven, uh, more results driven than academic research. Academic research sometimes focuses on, you know, theoretical or des or, or descriptive questions, uh, or in the processes or methodologies of research instead, you know, specific outcomes, uh, or solutions, um, and policymakers are interested in.

So what is the right answer? In a few words, what should we do here? What would be the problem if we don't do that? What would be the problem if we do do that? And, and this very much results oriented approach, I think differentiates, uh, policy makers. Mm-hmm. Um, from academic researchers in another, in another way as well.

Not just because it's very much results oriented, but cause uh, policymakers, they need straightforward answers, free of jargon as much as possible. Um, so working with them throughout the project. I had to distill all the research evidence that we have on, on conversion therapy and in favour of a legal ban on conversion therapy to key messages, uh, bullet points, um, to fit their, their need for very specific, straightforward answers, which they can share with, you know, with MPs, um, and with, with, with, uh, law making, uh, more generally processes.

Uh, people with short attention span and not much time in their hands. Mm-hmm. So this was a very, very important lesson for me, learning how to turn academic research into, you know, key bullet points. Um, summarise those, translate those for a different audience if you want.

Ged: 00:13:55

Yeah, sure. So, um, I guess in a sense what you're saying is that they're probably.

Very impact oriented, you know, results, uh, impact is about the specific change and or, or effect that we're, that we're looking for. So, yeah, I guess, uh, I guess the, you know, they, we could frame them in that way.

Ilias: 00:14:16

Yeah, I think that's a very good way of framing that. Yeah.

Ged: 00:14:20

Mm-hmm. So maybe that's, you know, that's where the, where the two worlds overlap is, is in that, uh, is in that.

A, a desire for that change, whatever that, whatever that change is. Um, and I guess this is, this is very much, uh, personal values driven as well for you, is that?

Ilias: 00:14:43

Yeah, I am, I'm committed to, uh, equality, LGBT equality, um, and human rights. This is, this is my, um, area of expertise, but also I think. Reflect my personal values and my academic values.

Mm-hmm. Um, so yeah, there is, there is something personal to this, to this project, uh, for me. And I have, and I've realised that as well. Working with, um, NGOs, uh, meeting survivors of conversion therapy, how important this project, how important introducing a legal ban to those practices is. Um, for so many people, um, and it's very humbling.

Ged: 00:15:31

Mm-hmm.

Yes. Yeah, it's, it's often said that policymakers can react to those personal stories much more, you know, much more understandably and p potentially favourably to the, to the policy change. You are, you are looking for, as a researcher. Did you, did you find that, that they, they were interested both in the um, in the kind of personal stories as well as in those counterfactuals you were talking about that are more, I guess, theoretically, Uh, driven those arguments.

Ilias: 00:16:05

Absolutely. Uh, the personal stories in this project, at least, but more generally, um, have huge power for policymakers. Uh, they can relate some of the legal problems. For example, that conversion therapy poses to, um, specific communities, specific spaces and stories. Um, and this is very important for mobilisation.

Um, and we've seen in the UK at least MPs coming from very different political backgrounds, uh, being united in the willingness to ban this after listening to survivors, after being exposed to. True stories of people in the UK who've gone through, who've been through those, those practices, uh, very recently, some of them.

And hearing, um, what, how they felt, uh, how, how that happened to them. Uh, why did they choose to go through this? And that has been extremely powerful.

Ged: 00:17:20

Mm-hmm.

Yeah, absolutely. So, so you mentioned that, uh, just interested in that, uh, kind of coalition for change, which may be people from all different parts of the political spectrum and lots of different organisations.

As I said, I think you mentioned that you'd worked with over 70 different organisations, um, potentially representing different parts of, uh, of the various communities that, uh, that that could be. It could be affected by, um, by conversion therapy. So, so in terms of that kind of coalition building, what did you find helped with that process and, and, and what did you find challenging about it?

Ilias: 00:18:08

Yeah, that's, that's a really good question. I am, I'm, I'm a member in the Ban Conversion Therapy Coalition, which is a coalition of, um, more than 70 NGOs, uh, in, in the UK, uh, in favour of banning conversion therapy. And I think I'm the only academic member in this, in this coalition. Um, I joined that coalition very, very early on, um, and.

As you say, it's, it's a very, um, broad coalition with NGOs representing very different parts of the LGBT+ community. Um, and the glue here, if you want, is this shared goal, um, the shared goal to ban conversion therapy and challenge those who believe that. Either it doesn't happen, uh, in the UK or, uh, that there have to be some, some exemptions to it.

Um, the, it is, it was eye-opening for me as an academic to be part of a coalition of NGOs. Such a broad coalition of, of NGOs, and I've learned a lot, especially with regards to what we were discussing just a moment ago, the importance of personal stories. Engaging with survivors. I knew that was important in this legal project, but the way you do this most in the, you know, inclusively, sensitively, um, the way NGOs have chosen to share, um, those, those voices, the timing.

Uh, so all those, this, those, this, this campaigning aspect. Uh, of, of the coalition was eye-opening to me, and it goes back to what we were talking about, what impact means, how to achieve it instrumentally in the most effective way. Um, not through Instrumentalising people, but through knowing what the, who the audience is.

Um, and, you know, using. Personal stories, you know, very sensitively, uh, in this context. All this was something that, um, I've learned a lot, but in the, in the coalition. Um, and yeah, I was lucky. I was lucky because Jayne Ozanne, uh, with a, a very well known, um, uh, lesbian activist. Survivor of conversion therapy herself.

Um, um, and, um, a very influential campaigner in this, in this area invited me to join the coalition quite early on. So I saw also the coalition, you know, being built in the past, in the past couple of years. Um, yeah. Yeah, that's very, a very, very, um, useful experience.

Ged: 00:21:23

Mm-hmm. And, and wa was there anything challenging about it?

Did you feel maybe stretched by those different, um, you know, maybe different, thinking about this subject, even if there was a, a glue that held those 70 organisations? Were there any. Was there any kind of, um, disagreements that you kind of had to navigate or you were at the centre of potentially in terms of trying to hold the coalition together?

Ilias: 00:21:56

I, I, it was definitely a steep learning curve for me. Um, and we were talking before about the differences between academic research, um, and working with policy makers. But working with campaigners and many of those NGOs, um, they do have very, you know, uh, rightly, um, they do have a focus on campaigning, um, and mobilising people, uh, for the, for the cause.

Is, is is also a different way of thinking and a different way of presenting academic research. So yeah, there were, there were times that, especially earlier on in the coalition, that I had to present findings of my legal research on conversion therapy. And I, and I, and I, and I learned that how, how to, um, translate those for, for that audience, um, which was a challenge at the time.

Um, but I think it was a very useful lesson for me. Um, there were the, as I said, because there is a shared goal behind the coalition, there is cohesion in the messages coming from the coalition. And although different NGOs represent different parts of the LGBT community, I think there is a, there is an overall agreement that those practices have to be legally banned in the UK and that's, A very useful, um, you know, uh, glue, let's say in this, in this group.

Ged: 00:23:42

Yeah.

So, uh, research is in lots of different disciplines and, uh, and different research areas. Uh, Nearly always, uh, it almost doesn't matter what, what area actually nearly always have to go through some, um, some policy angles. And a lot of them, uh, a lot of them worry about kind of reaching out into that space and, and, you know, maybe worry about, um, negative reactions to the research or getting no reaction to the res, you know, to the research, you know, that the, um, policy community doesn't, doesn't take it up.

Um, is there anything you can say to, to try and help, um, researchers new to that, new to that process kind of, um. Be confident and, and courageous and, and, and go ahead and do it. Is there anything you can give them in terms of tips that that might help or ways to think about the

process?

Ilias: 00:24:44

You, you said it, Ged, uh, be, be confident and courageous and go out and meet with people early on is one of my first piece of advice, um, from my, from my position as co-lead for Impact in the law school.

So I did, it was, I met with, um, with Jayne Ozanne, um, the activist I mentioned earlier on, quite early on in the project. Uh, and it's, it was. Our meeting was eye-opening. Uh, she said that the UK Government, the planning, um, uh, a, an inquiry, um, on, on this. Those are the questions that NGOs are interested in. This is the coalition, you might want to join this, et cetera.

And she was what we call sometimes in the, in our academic impact language, she proved to be a gatekeeper. Mm-hmm. Jayne. Um, so that was, that was a very, um, key moment in, in how the project. Ended up shaping up. Sometimes we academics think that, oh, I've written a great article, a fantastic article, a fantastic book, and people are gonna come to me and say to me, oh, this is fantastic.

We want this, we want to use this in our work. But that doesn't happen very often. Yeah, I'm afraid it happens sometimes, occasionally, but it doesn't, it doesn't happen. That's not how the way. The way impact projects, you know, shape up. It's, it's important to reach out to, um, external stakeholders you think would be interested in your work and almost co-produce the key questions of your project early on.

So this is what I do. Mm-hmm. Um, is that inter, is it of any interest to you? Which questions, uh, in this area are you most concerned with? Um, and then, you know, produce something that combines both those elements. So have those external stakeholders as, you know, just on some level partners in your project from early on.

I think this is, this is my, my, the important tip here. Mm-hmm. Um, but you might. You know, someone might be thinking, yeah, how do you know, how do you know what the gatekeepers, how do you know who to contact? Um, and, and I think that's, you know, it's important to arrange scoping meetings with people early on.

Some of them be fruitful, others might not be as useful. Um, but yeah, it's important to go out and there is, there is support. In the Law School, um, for, for people to, to do that. Um, yeah, it's, it's, it's important to try and start corporate co- producing key questions with important external stakeholders from early on.

That's my main tip to people.

Ged: 00:27:56

Yeah, thank you for that. And we have a couple of, uh, episodes in, in later on in the season looking at, uh, at co-production and I know our Social Sciences Institute, uh, which covers, uh, a range of, uh, a range of faculties at, at Leeds has done a lot of work in that space to try and.

Exemplify really good co-production practices. So yeah, look out for that. We've got a, we've got an interview about that.

Ilias: 00:28:25

Brilliant.

Ged: 00:28:26

Yeah. Yeah, it's, it's really interesting. It's, uh, it's already recorded, so I, I kind of know what's in it, but, uh, but I don't want to give too much away in this, uh, but, you know, look out for that.

It's coming along, uh, later in the season. Um, The, the interesting thing for me, so I've also got somebody from, as I said, somebody from New Zealand coming up and uh, and you mentioned, uh, that you'd also worked with policy makers in that country. Um, now the person from New Zealand said to me in her interview that, uh, because it's a smaller place, The degrees of separation from you to the Prime Minister, um, are smaller than, uh, than it, than it may feel like in the UK.

So what, what was your experience of working with the different policy communities in the two countries?

Ilias: 00:29:20

Yeah,

that's a really interesting question, Ged. I was invited by the Justice Committee of the New Zealand Parliament to give evidence on the ban on conversion therapy that they were discussing there, in New Zealand. There are many similarities in the way that policy makers in New Zealand think, uh, the type of evidence they're most interested in. But there were some key, um, differences. Some, some very, some, some key interesting differences that, that, that, uh, that, that spring to mind. Um, firstly, um, when the Justice Committee published, uh, the call for evidence on conversion therapy. Uh, and I submitted evidence, uh, in that, in that call there was, uh, a tick box that anybody could, could take if they wanted to appear in front of the committee. So that was really interesting because um, the committee did invite specific experts. And, you know, I was one of them, but then many people from all backgrounds did it in front of the committee, uh, to discuss their experience, their views about conversion therapy.

Um, so, um, not experts, but everyday people, uh, but also people from NGOs, activists and religious people. Uh, so a very, very broad range of individuals, um, came before the committee, uh, to discuss their views about the ban. And that was really interesting because of course it gave the Justice Committee a much broader overview compared to the, um, to the UK Parliament, to the Women and Equalities Committee here, which invited just six people.

Mm-hmm. Um, But maybe it has to do as well with the fact that New Zealand is a much smaller country, as as, as, as you were saying. Um, the other, the other, the other element that I found really interesting, um, is that there was a significant, um, um, focus on indigenous people. Uh, there was sensitivity towards the experience of indigenous people with conversion therapy.

Um, and that sensitivity to it is again, uh, I think characteristic, uh, of, of New Zealand. Um, but it also showed this additional layer of sensitivity, uh, in the discussion that I hadn't, uh, really come across in other countries I've worked, I've worked in, uh, for this, for this project.

Ged: 00:32:09

Mm-hmm. That's really interesting.

Um, because. Yeah, there's been a lot of work within the committee structure in the UK parliaments kind of try and diversify, kind of who provides evidence. Um, and I think that's starting, starting to be kind of more successful in the kind of written forms of evidence, you know, where you, where you put stuff in at, at the beginning of the process.

But here in the UK it seems to be that often it's a, it's a kind of selection from that submitted evidence where they go a bit deeper in the oral sessions. So it's interesting that, that you picked out that even the oral sessions seem to be quite, um, diverse and cover a lot of, uh, cover a lot of communities in, in that experience in, in New Zealand.

Maybe that's, that's something that, uh, that our committee structures, uh, in the UK Parliament should, should look at.

Ilias, so, um, since, uh, since winning, um, the award last summer, you've, you've been promoted. So, um, I was just really interested in terms of, you know, how much you talked about the impact side of your work within your promotion application for your, uh, for your, uh, in, in terms of applying to be a professor.

Ilias: 00:33:32

Yeah. Thanks Ged. I did, I did talk a little bit about my impact work in my promotion application. I think that it did play some role, but, um, and I think, and I think that's, that's a, that's a welcome change in the culture of academic research. Um, it's, it is important to publish excellent articles, excellent papers, and my impact work does include those, um, But I think it's important to look outside academia, um, to, um, the policy makers, to the NGOs, uh, to, um, the stakeholders and, actors, that, at least in law, um, could, um, uh, benefit from your research to affect positive change.

Um, and the, the fact that the university and perhaps universities across the UK are looking for that type of work, um, much in, in a, in a much more, um, supportive way, perhaps in, in recent years, I think is a positive change. Um, so yeah, of course I was very passionate about my impact work. Mm-hmm. So it's, so it's, it, it is in my, it's in my promotion application and I was very proud of including it there.

Uh, but through writing the, the application and discussing it with colleagues and the Dean, I've realised that there is this very, very supportive, um, uh, environment for impact projects. Which I think is very positive.

Ged: 00:35:29

Great.

Yeah, it's great to hear that. Um, and that, uh, uh, and that the panels that receive the applications and then, and then conduct the interviews are kind of really, really interested in hearing that work.

So thank you for, thank you for sharing that. Um, so Ilias, some, unfortunately our time is, Is all most up. And, uh, is there any kind of final words you'd want to, you'd want to say in terms of kind of final piece of advice that maybe my questions haven't, haven't unearthed?

Ilias: 00:36:03

I just, I just want to say thank you, uh, Ged, for putting this, this podcast together.

I think it's very important for researchers, uh, around the world to, um, to hear about, um, uh, impact demystify, demystify, what it means. Um, and, and, and it's a great opportunity, uh, through this series for people to reflect on their work, um, and how it can be used, uh, to reach, uh, others outside academia. Um, so congratulations on the podcast.

Ged: 00:36:03

Thank you. Thank you. I'm really hoping, uh, really hoping the listening listener figures go up as a result, so that'll be great. Um, thank you very much for your time this morning and, and, uh, if you'd like to say bye to our listeners. Well, I'll let you go off to whatever's next.

Ilias: 00:36:55

Bye everyone. Thank you, Ged.

Ged: 00:36:57

Thanks, Ilias.

Intro: 00:37:00

Thanks for listening to the Research Culture Uncovered podcast. Please subscribe so you never miss out on our brand new episodes. And if you're enjoying the discussions, give us some love by dropping a five star rating and written review as it helps other research culturists find us and please share with a friend and show them how to subscribe.

Thanks for listening, and here's to you on your research culture.