## 2.4. Societal relevance

The societal relevance of your research is determined by the implications that your results have for public debates and choices by citizens and policy makers. Simply stated: the societal relevance paragraph answers the question: “SO WHAT?” There are two types of societal relevance: the relevance for social issues and the practical or policy relevance. If your research tells you that people are happier when they pay others to outsource household tasks they dislike, for instance, citizens can take that as an advice to examine their household budget and the tasks they are not outsourcing to see which ones they dislike. This result is of practical relevance. An example of policy relevance is the conclusion that donations to charity are more effectively encouraged by price reductions in the form of rebates than by matches. The result suggests that income tax deductions for charitable donations are suboptimal.

The question you should answer in the paragraph about the societal relevance is: “Who will be interested in your research and why?”. Or in other words: whose minds are you going to change about what? (King, 2018). In this paragraph you are selling your research. So: present your unique selling points to the audience that is likely to be interested. Determining the composition of that audience is your first task.

2.4.1. Who cares?

When you try to sell your research, think about what kind of audience may be interested, and address that audience. To identify your audience, ask yourself: who cares? Groups of actors that may be interested in your research include: policy makers, in government or in organizations; politicians; consumers; patients; voters; volunteers; donors. Certainly those who are in a position to change the behavior of people and the policies that affect that behavior are part of your audience. But the audience may be much broader: perhaps mankind as a whole should be interested.

2.4.2. Why bother?

Prototypical arguments about societal relevance start with the following observations:

1. A lot of money (time, resources) is at stake. Quote a study from an authoritative source quantifying the amount at stake. For instance: “Each year, an estimated 7 million people in the Netherlands are active as volunteers (Statistics Netherlands, 2011).”
2. People are concerned about your main dependent or independent variable. The concern could be that the desired amount will decline, or that the phenomenon that you are studying will disappear altogether. Refer to statements of politicians, influential views expressed in op-eds, results of surveys and polls on the problem that got into the media.
3. A lot has been tried to avoid or promote your dependent variable, but…
   - … it is not clear whether or to what extent these interventions have worked – i.e. whether the interventions have been effective or not.
   - …it is clear that these interventions have not worked, and now we want to know what kind of alternative solution would work.
   - …it is not clear to what extent the interventions have been efficient.
   - …it is clear that the interventions have not been efficient, and now we want to know what alternative interventions would be more efficient.

When you make the case for your research, make sure to complete the argument about the relevance of your research by relating your research question to the policy implications of various answers to your research question. The starting points above merely indicate to the reader that your topic is relevant. They do not yet tell the reader how your research is going to make a difference. Remember that you are seeking to answer a specific research question about your topic. Your argument should be based on the policy implications of certain answers to your research question.

For instance if your research shows that a certain policy which has been used to tackle a problem is ineffective because it does not involve key stakeholders, your recommendation could be that involving them might help, and future research should investigate what type of involvement is most effective. In the introduction you can make the case that current policy has been ineffective but we don’t know why, and that your research will test two (or more) possibilities. You can then say that policy recommendations would be different depending on which possibility is supported by the evidence. In the discussion section you can elaborate on the advantages and disadvantages of various strategies suggested by the evidence, and the context characteristics that will influence their effectiveness.

2.4.3. How will you contribute?

A good argument for the societal relevance could be that your research helps people make decisions in practice. For instance, your study may demonstrate which of two interventions is more effective in reaching a certain goal. Your study may also reveal new details about people who demonstrate a certain behavior or hold certain opinions. Such knowledge can be useful for people who would like to achieve certain goals or reach a certain audience. However, be careful not to promise too much. It is often very difficult to get from knowledge about what works to a large-scale, successful intervention with the same effect as in the original study. Knowledge about characteristics of people hardly ever tells you what to do to successfully influence them. In order not to disappoint your readers with a zillion qualifications in the discussion, it is better not to promise that your study will have world-changing revolutionary influence.