No abstract

No abstract

Early investigation led the Evaluative Study of Action Research (ESAR) team to conclude that the complexity of a global, large scale study (evaluation of more than 100 highly diverse action research [AR] projects) called for an overarching research evaluation framework that differed from traditional frameworks. This article details the flexible, rigorous, Evaluative Action Research (EvAR) framework developed to meet the complex demands of the diverse AR projects and the intent to conduct high engagement research evaluation. The EvAR fulfilled multiple overarching needs to: authentically collaborate, engage, and enhance ownership from the ESAR team and the AR project participants and boundary partners evaluated; be informed in decision making via strong reference support; be responsive and flexible yet meet accountability demands to track, demonstrate, and measure process, outcomes, and impacts of projects; use mixed-method data collection to enhance rigor of findings; and utilize a highly reflective and reflexive approach to the evaluation. Many of the latter needs align with underpinning principles and values in AR itself; that is, it is collaborative, consultative, democratic, reflective, reflexive, dialogical, and improvement oriented. Rationale for the framework is provided alongside full details of phases and implementation elements using the ESAR as an example. Throughout the article, features are highlighted that distinguish this new EvAR framework from others. The advantages of adopting a flexible framework, which aims to enhance engagement of those evaluated, are highly relevant to contexts beyond AR if ownership of evaluation outcomes is a goal.

No abstract

Acknowledgments v 1 BackgroundObjective of the review 2 Methods 2.1 Search terms 2.2 Database searches 2.3 Targeted journal searches 2.4 Specialist and supplementary searches 2.5 Limitations 2.6 Inclusion criteria 2.7 Critical appraisal 2.8 Data extraction 3 Data synthesis and products 3.1 Synthesis 3.2 Products 4 References List of tables 1 Search terms 2 Search strings 3 Inclusion criteria for title screen 4 Inclusion criteria for abstract and full article screens 5 Critical appraisal framework 6 Data extraction guide This research was carried out by CIFOR as part of the CGIAR Research Program on Forests, Trees and Agroforestry (CRP-FTA). This collaborative program aims to enhance the management and use of forests, agroforestry and tree genetic resources across the landscape from forests to farms. CIFOR leads CRP-FTA in partnership with Bioversity International, CATIE, CIRAD, the International Center for Tropical Agriculture and the World Agroforestry Centre. cifor.org blog.cifor.orgResearch increasingly seeks not only to generate knowledge, but also to have impact. In this context, traditional academic definitions of research quality may be insufficient. This article presents a protocol for the systematic review of new and emerging definitions, criteria and indicators of research quality in applied, inter-and transdisciplinary contexts. It seeks to clarify arguments for or against expanding the definitions of research quality and to identify appropriate definitions and measures, with an emphasis on natural resource management research. The primary research question is: What are appropriate criteria and indicators for defining and measuring the quality of transdisciplinary research in natural resource management research? The proposed review will be based on literature sourced from a search of Scopus, Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar. The search terms and strings to be used were developed and tested iteratively, based on a benchmark set of references and incrementally refined searches designed to be comprehensive and to reduce irrelevant results. To select relevant articles, two reviewers will independently perform three rounds of screening by scanning (1) titles, (2) abstracts and (3) articles. The articles selected will then be reviewed for the following: arguments for or against expanding definitions of research quality; purposes for research quality evaluation; proposed principles of research quality; proposed criteria for research quality assessment; proposed indicators and measures of research quality; and proposed processes for evaluating transdisciplinary research. The results will be synthesized to provide an overview of the literature, to summarize the arguments and approaches for expanding definitions of research quality, and to identify and discuss the main purposes, principles, indicators and measures of research quality in transdisciplinary and applied contexts.CIFOR Occasional Papers contain research results that are significant to tropical forest issues. This content has been peer reviewed in...