Evaluating stakeholder engagement in collaborative research: co-producing knowledge for climate resilience

Abstract

This study describes the development, implementation, and evaluation of an initial stakeholder engagement experience designed to facilitate knowledge co-production. The engagement experience is part of a collaborative research framework (CRF), which facilitates iterative interactions among diverse researchers and stakeholders around the topic of enhanced climate resilience. Here, we describe the: (1) need for and development of a CRF as it relates to stakeholder engagement and knowledge co-production; (2) implementation of the initial engagement experience, focused around individual semi-structured interviews, in the context of a snow-dependent, arid river basin where historical water over allocation, climate change, and diversified water uses challenge the basin’s resilience; and (3) formative evaluation of the engagement experience using an online survey to inform the development of more effective engagement practices. Results of the evaluation indicate that, after participating, most stakeholders understand and recognize the importance of research goals, demonstrate positive attitudes toward collaborative research and researchers, view their contribution of knowledge and expertise as critical to research, and perceive researchers as eager to use their expertise. Moreover, stakeholders emphasized various context-specific goals for knowledge co-production, such as finding innovative ways to adapt to increased competition for diminishing water supplies. To achieve these goals, stakeholders suggested researchers learn about their basin, including its water allocation history and agricultural practices. These results highlight the importance of centering stakeholder engagement experiences within a broader CRF and formatively evaluating such experiences to adapt them to achieve research goals.

Development of a Hospital-Stakeholder Collaboration Tool Using Mixed Methods to Assess Stakeholder Perspectives for Hospital Service Improvement

“…Starting with the FGD to build the commitment ( 24 , 27 ) of stakeholders; namely, by understanding their respective roles ( 26 , 28 ) and approving service improvement efforts ( 13 , 28 – 30 ). It is followed by FGD, to build common goals ( 31 , 32 ), to find the goals of service improvement ( 31 , 32 ) and to understand the goals that have been set ( 33 , 34 ). Next, in the second week, the FGD dissemination of results was carried out; namely, reporting the list of perspectives and need assessments of stakeholders ( 31 , 32 ).…”

“…The third week focused on the initiation of service improvement through action and behavioral change in business services by OPD ( 34 , 35 ). Service improvement implementers are staff at OPD who refer to the improvement implementation guide containing POA.…”

Bridging research-policy gaps: An integrated approach

“…Indeed, many challenges remain, such as ambiguity, balancing priorities, lack of empirical approaches, and metrics for tracking progress. 30 During the ISEE-EM workshop, participants engaged in thoughtful deliberations about these diverse constraints. The issue was examined through a scientific lens, with an emphasis on the value of personal responsibility.…”

“…Indeed, many challenges remain, such as ambiguity, balancing priorities, lack of empirical approaches, and metrics for tracking progress. 30 …”

Theory of change: community engagement as an intervention to create disaster resilience

“…Indeed, integrating community engagement in hazards and disaster research is not new. Applying tenets of diffusion of innovation theory, social and health sciences are the "early adopters" (see Wells et al, 2013;Pfefferbaum et al, 2015;Meyer et al, 2018;Singletary et al, 2022), and now it is time for "the majority" to latch on. Engineering researchers and multidisciplinary teams are already engaging too.…”