Policy makers globally often claim to use evidence when making policy decisions, but few studies have documented and evaluated the sources of evidence they rely on. This poses challenges to researchers and decision makers alike, as they struggle to assess the impact of research on policy. This study analysed citations in Australian federal parliamentary committee reports to better understand the role that academic sources play in shaping policy. Results show that academic sources are rarely cited by federal parliamentary committees, and of those that are cited, most are academic inquiry submissions or oral evidence, with very few citations of peer-reviewed research. This finding points towards a need for academics seeking policy impact to engage more pro-actively with government inquiry submission processes. To incentivise this approach, we suggest that changes be made to the way that academic impact is measured within the university sector in order to avoid disincentivising researchers from making submissions to parliamentary inquiries.

中文翻译：

---

分析澳大利亚联邦议会委员会使用的证据类型

全球政策制定者经常声称在制定政策决策时使用证据，但很少有研究记录和评估他们所依赖的证据来源。这给研究人员和决策者带来了挑战，因为他们难以评估研究对政策的影响。本研究分析了澳大利亚联邦议会委员会报告中的引文，以更好地了解学术资源在制定政策中所起的作用。结果表明，学术资料很少被联邦议会委员会引用，在被引用的资料中，大多数是学术调查提交或口头证据，很少引用同行评议的研究。这一发现表明，寻求政策影响的学者需要更积极地参与政府调查提交流程。为了激励这种方法，