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...

This paper describes how a Small Grants initiative evolved to support the aims of a large, multi-sector community-university research project. It explores how the giving of small amounts of project funding to community groups enabled a deepening of community engaged scholarship across a large community-university research alliance. We present the Think&EatGreen@School Small Grants initiative as a case study on how the distribution of small amounts of funding can encourage the role of community voices in research, create opportunities for resource and knowledge sharing, generate rich information and valuable data, support and contribute to networks of support and resource sharing, and articulate the interests of a broad diversity of stakeholders.