Flows of knowledge, expertise and influence: a method for assessing policy and practice impacts from social science research

Meagher, Laura; Lyall, Catherine; Nutley, Sandra

doi:10.3152/095820208x331720

Cited by 179 publications

(131 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

124

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…19]. This draws in broader debates about the limitations of involving users in research [20], the spectrum of roles that users can play [1] and the challenges of measuring impact [21], all of which are especially relevant in the context of transdisciplinarity.…”

Section: The Uk Research Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

A rose by any other name? Transdisciplinarity in the context of UK research policy

Lyall

Meagher²,

Bruce

2015

Futures

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper assesses developments in transdisciplinary research in the UK. While we support the thesis that transdisciplinarity is still not mainstream and is rarely supported per se by funders of research, this paper examines the extent to which UK research policy has embraced the concept of transdisciplinarity. Five empirical case studies provide data about the interrelationship between the interdisciplinary and impact or knowledge exchange aspirations of Research Council UK (RCUK) investments. We find evidence that, to an extent, UK research funding policy is achieving some elements of transdisciplinarity in practice, if not in name.Drawing on broader debates about the limitations of knowledge mobilisation and the challenges of conducting interdisciplinary research, we reflect on how the situation has changed since our original 2004 paper. The evidence suggests that the absence of the 'transdisciplinary' label is not necessarily impeding the framing of research funding schemes oriented towards societal issues. Nevertheless, several areas where capacitybuilding is required, including training for early career interdisciplinary researchers; improved research leadership skills; and the capacity to evaluate the quality of transdisciplinary processes and to learn from such evaluations, are identified.

show abstract

Section: The Uk Research Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

A rose by any other name? Transdisciplinarity in the context of UK research policy

Lyall

Meagher²,

Bruce

2015

Futures

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The article ends with a description of the outcomes of this activity and concludes with recommendations for implementation. (Meagher, Lyall, & Nutley, 2008). Similarly, Jacobson, Butterill, and Goering (2004) report that research summaries are a useful KMb tool but that writing for non-academic audiences is not recognized as legitimate scholarship so there are few incentives for researchers to produce their work in non-scholarly formats.…”

Section: Kmb Servicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A report detailing the development of a university-based knowledge mobilization unit that enhances research outreach and engagement

Phipps

2012

SRC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This field note presents reflections from the perspective of a knowledge mobilization (KMb) practitioner after 5 years of developing and delivering KMb services in a university-based environment. This field note is a “how to” based on experience from the field of KMb practice and places that experience in the context of academic literature. The paper concludes that KMb is not a single event or process but a system, a suite of services that work together to support the multi-directional connection of researchers with decision makers. The six KMb services that comprise the KMb system are informed by four broad KMb methods: producer push, user pull, knowledge exchange and co-production. Examples of each KMb service are provided along with key observations that allow others interested in developing institutional KMb support services to implement these services in their own context. The field note concludes with clear recommendations for individuals and organizations interested in developing their own system of KMb services.

show abstract

“…Our methods for analyzing the case studies were similar to Meagher et al (2008), who conducted a retrospective analysis of the impacts of social science research on policy and practice. We developed the evaluative framework (described above) and then collected data using multiple methods including semistructured interviews, document analysis (project proposals, interim, and final reports, and project outputs), and experimented with use of observational data collection by developing several tools to gather data, such as detailed record sheets to count and categorize interactions at project-related meetings.…”

Section: Coding and Indicator Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing Evaluation Indicators to Improve the Process of Coproducing Usable Climate Science

Wall

Meadow

Horganic

2017

Weather, Climate, and Society

164

146

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resource managers and decision-makers are increasingly tasked with integrating climate change science into their decisions about resource management and policy development. This often requires climate scientists, resource managers, and decision-makers to work collaboratively throughout the research processes, an approach to knowledge development that is often called ''coproduction of knowledge.'' The goal of this paper is to synthesize the social science theory of coproduction of knowledge, the metrics currently used to evaluate usable or actionable science in several federal agencies, and insights from experienced climate researchers and program managers to develop a set of 45 indicators supporting an evaluation framework for coproduced usable climate science. Here the proposed indicators and results from two case studies that were used to test the indicators are presented, as well as lessons about the process of evaluating the coproduction of knowledge and collaboratively producing climate knowledge.

show abstract

Flows of knowledge, expertise and influence: a method for assessing policy and practice impacts from social science research

Cited by 179 publications

References 9 publications

A rose by any other name? Transdisciplinarity in the context of UK research policy

A rose by any other name? Transdisciplinarity in the context of UK research policy

A report detailing the development of a university-based knowledge mobilization unit that enhances research outreach and engagement

Developing Evaluation Indicators to Improve the Process of Coproducing Usable Climate Science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About