Academic Contributions to Policymaking Across the Policy Cycle: A Systematic Review of Malaysian University Research Supporting National Digitalization
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24191/6vx7v398Keywords:
Evidence-informed policymaking, digitalization, policy cycle, research universitiesAbstract
This article presents a systematic literature review (SLR) that investigates how digitalization-related research from Malaysian research universities contributes to the policymaking process across six stages of the policy cycle: agenda setting, formulation, legitimization, implementation, evaluation, and review. A total of 30 peer-reviewed articles were analyzed and categorized using the policy cycle framework to uncover the depth and distribution of academic engagement in digital policy development. The findings reveal that research universities contribute most prominently to policy formulation and implementation, offering empirical models, stakeholder analyses, and actionable recommendations in areas such as education, agriculture, healthcare, finance, and innovation. Notably, significant contributions also emerge at the agenda-setting stage, where studies identify policy gaps related to STEM education, digital inclusion, and youth engagement. However, the review highlights a critical absence of academic involvement in the legitimization stage and minimal engagement in policy review, suggesting institutional disconnects that hinder full-cycle policy influence. By applying the policy cycle as an analytical lens, this study offers conceptual clarity and strategic insights into the science-policy interface. It underscores the need for more inclusive, longitudinal, and cross-sectoral mechanisms to translate academic research into sustainable and impactful policy outcomes, especially in developing country contexts like Malaysia, where research-driven governance is essential for national digital transformation.
References
Banda, L. G. (2024). A commentary on Manazir non-linear policy process model. SN Social Sciences.
Bañares-Alcántara, R. (2010). Perspectives on the potential roles of engineers in the formulation, implementation and enforcement of policies. Computers and Chemical Engineering, 34(12), 1995–2004.
Boaz, A., Davies, H., Fraser, A., & Nutley, S. (2019). What works now? Evidence-informed policy and practice. Policy Press.
Cairney, P. (2019). Chapter 2: What is policy and policymaking? In Understanding public policy: Theories and issues (2nd ed.).
Cairney, P., & Kwiatkowski, R. (2017). How to communicate effectively with policymakers: Combine insights from psychology and policy studies. Palgrave Communications, 3(1), 37.
Chapman, A., McLellan, B., & Tezuka, T. (2016). Strengthening the energy policy making process and sustainability outcomes in the OECD through policy design. Administrative Sciences, 6(3), 6.
Clark, N., & Chataway, J. (2009). Pathways to impact in the Global South: Evidence from development studies. IDS Bulletin, 40(2), 52–57.
Day, E., Wadsworth, S. M., Bogenschneider, K., & Thomas-Miller, J. (2019). When university researchers connect with policy: A framework for whether, when, and how to engage. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 11(2), 188–204.
De Oliveira, L. G. D., Natal, S., Felisberto, E., & dos Santos, E. M. (2010). Evaluation model for tuberculosis control program. Ciencia e Saude Coletiva, 15(3), 761–768.
Economic Planning Unit. (2021). Twelfth Malaysia Plan 2021–2025: A prosperous, inclusive, sustainable Malaysia. Prime Minister's Department.
Etzioni, A. (2009). The unique methodology of policy research. In M. Moran, M. Rein, & R. E. Goodin (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy (pp. 791–804). Oxford University Press.
Grin, J. (2024). Causation in policy science: Knowledge, power, meaning, agency and context. In The Routledge Handbook of Causality and Causal Methods.
Gunderson, M. (2007). How academic research shapes labor and social policy. Journal of Labor Research, 28(3), 519–532
Gunn, A., & Mintrom, M. (2016). Higher education policy change in Europe: Academic research funding and the impact agenda. European Education, 48(4), 241–257.
Howlett, M. (2009). Policy analytical capacity and evidence-based policymaking: Lessons from Canada. Canadian Public Administration, 52(2), 153-175.
Howlett, M., Ramesh, M., & Perl, A. (2009). Studying public policy: Policy cycles and policy subsystems (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Ion, G., Stîngu, M., & Marin, E. (2019). How can researchers facilitate the utilization of research by policymakers and practitioners in education? Research Papers in Education, 34(2), 165–182.
ISRA Institute (2025). Malaysia Research Assessment https://inceif.edu.my/research/myra/
Larsson, A., & Ibrahim, O. (2015). Modeling for policy formulation: Causal mapping, scenario generation, and decision evaluation. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 9190, 425–437.
Matthews, P., Rutherfoord, R., Connelly, S., & Vanderhoven, D. (2018). Everyday stories of impact: Interpreting knowledge exchange in the contemporary university. Evidence & Policy, 14(1), 1–21.
Mead, L. M. (2015). Only connect: Why government often ignores research. Policy Sciences, 48(3), 257–272.
Mihut, G., Ozsezer-Kurnuc, S., Morris, R., & Smith, E. (2025). Policy and research engagement in UK higher education: Policymaker and expert perspectives and priorities. Higher Education Quarterly.
Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2020). National Higher Education Strategic Plan Beyond 2020.
Ministry of Science, Technology, and Innovation (MOSTI). (2021). National policy on science, technology and innovation (NPSTI) 2021–2030. https://www.mosti.gov.my
Mitchell, P., Reinap, M., Moat, K. et al (2023). An ethical analysis of policy dialogues. Health Res Policy Sys 21, 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-023-00962-2
Nelson, J. P., Bozeman, B., Bretschneider, S., & Lindsay, S. L. (2024). How do academic public administration and public policy researchers affect policymaking? Functional groupings from survey data. Scientometrics, 129(2), 567–590.
Newman, J., Cherney, A., & Head, B. (2016). Do policymakers use academic research? Reexamining the "two communities" theory of research utilization. Public Administration Review, 76(1), 24–32.
Norhaslinda ZA, Nerda Zura Z.; Khairah Nazurah K. (2017). Strategic planning for MyRA performance: A causal loop diagram approach. AIP Conf. Proc. 1891, 020151
Nutley, S. M., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2019). Past, present, and possible futures for evidence-based policy. In A. Boaz, H. Davies, A. Fraser, & S. Nutley (Eds.), What works now? Evidence-informed policy and practice (pp. 1–23). Policy Press.
Oliver, K., & Boaz, A. (2019). Transforming evidence for policy and practice: Creating space for new conversations. Palgrave Communications, 5, 60.
Petak, Z. (2023). The stages heuristic in public policy: Advantages and limitations of the policy cycle approach. Anali
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Muhammad Aqil Fikry Mohd Annuary, Siti Hasliah Salleh, Nor Ashikin Mohamed Yusof, Intan Sazrina Saimy, Raja Marzyani Raja Mazlan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
