Priority water research questions as determined by UK practitioners and policy makers☆

Brown, Lee E.; Mitchell, Gordon; Holden, Joseph; Folkard, Andrew M.; Wright, Nigel; Beharry-Borg, Nesha; Berry, Gregory R.; Brierley, Bill; Chapman, P. J.; Clarke, Stewart J.; Cotton, Lynyonne; Dobson, Michael; Dollar, Evan S.J.; Fletcher, M.; Foster, John Bellamy; Hanlon, Alison; Hildon, S.; Hiley, P.; Hillis, Peter; Hoseason, J.; Johnston, Kerrylyn; Kay, Paul; McDonald, Adrian; Parrott, Amy; Powell, Anne; Slack, Roger; Sleigh, Andrew; Spray, Chris; Tapley, Kelvin N.; Underhill, Richard E; Woulds, Clare

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.09.040

Cited by 69 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, the research questions generated in the present study share some similarities with those generated in the ecology domain (Sutherland et al, 2006) and in the water policy domain (Brown et al, 2010). Firstly, many of the survey responses to the initial survey are on closely related topics, indicating a consensus on areas where major challenges exist -for example, in this work, a cluster of responses were received relating to energy demand and behaviour in cities.…”

Section: Attributes Of Question Identifiedmentioning

confidence: 58%

“…The method used on a demonstration basis (see section 1) to identify a set of priority research questions was built upon similar work in the water and ecology domains (Brown et al, 2010;Sutherland et al, 2006) and involved collaboration between academics, practitioners and policy makers. The approach consists of four stages detailed below.…”

Section: Demonstration Of the Development Of Priority Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here we modified the approach used to identify priority research in the water domain (Brown et al, 2010), where survey participants were asked to submit research questions. The rationale for our approach was to avoid the potential problems of (a) the term 'research question' not being meaningful or being misinterpreted by non-academics; and (b) a request to generate research questions leading to a lower response rate due to the time to formulate research questions.…”

Section: Stage 1 -Online Surveymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Still, though, we would judge it somewhat less common within the research community to collaboratively generate scientific research questions with practitioners and other stakeholders, such that stakeholder views on what is important are considered from the beginning of the scientific process. In the UK, examples include Brown et al (2010) in the case of fresh water resources and Sutherland et al (2006) in the case of ecology.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This process enabled UK stakeholders and members of the research community to collaboratively identify priority research questions based on the perceptions of stakeholders. The research questions that we elicited were developed through an adapted form of the deliberative processes used in the water and ecology cases referred to earlier (Brown et al, 2010;Sutherland et al, 2006), essentially consisting of an online questionnaire survey and associated workshop. In the following sections we first provide an overview of the problem domain, low-carbon energy supply and demand in cities; we then set out definitions and methods, followed by results consisting of: (a) key themes on low-carbon energy and cities evident in the academic literature; (b) the workshop output of 51 unordered questions, grouped by topic, and the top 10 priority questions; (c) a discussion of the nature of the questions and reflections on the process, and finally conclusions and proposals for further work.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Energy in low carbon cities and social learning: A process for defining priority research questions with UK stakeholders

Martin

Taylor

Upham

et al. 2014

Sustainable Cities and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

City-level decision-making requires timely access to a wide range of relevant and comprehensible data and information.Although a wide range of research on energy and cities is on-going across the social, engineering and natural sciences, it cannot be taken for granted that the questions being asked and the way questions are structured reflect practitioner perspectives and requirements. This paper discusses the ways in which research questions are formed and interpreted by actors in academic research and research user communities. We also report a set of research questions produced via an initial trial of a two stage, participative process consisting of (a) a survey targeted at city-focussed practitioners in the United Kingdom (UK) with an interest in lower carbon energy futures; and (b) a workshop integrating practitioner and academic perspectives. Comparing the set of research questions identified with themes in the academic literature, we find that research and practitioner communities concur on the importance of reducing energy demand and also on a number of cross-cutting issues. However, we also find that academic research places a greater emphasis on the interfaces between the energy system and other urban systems. We conclude that the two stage, participative process followed can serve to generate and legitimate city-related research questions through collaboration between stakeholders and academic researchers.

show abstract

Section: Attributes Of Question Identifiedmentioning

confidence: 58%

Section: Demonstration Of the Development Of Priority Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Stage 1 -Online Surveymentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Energy in low carbon cities and social learning: A process for defining priority research questions with UK stakeholders

Martin

Taylor

Upham

et al. 2014

Sustainable Cities and Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Research to Policy and Practice

Gupta

2021

Water, Climate Change, and Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Are harmful algal blooms becoming the greatest inland water quality threat to public health and aquatic ecosystems?

Brooks

Lazorchak

Howard

et al. 2015

Enviro Toxic and Chemistry

483

226

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-In this Focus article, the authors ask a seemingly simple question: Are harmful algal blooms (HABs) becoming the greatest inland water quality threat to public health and aquatic ecosystems? When HAB events require restrictions on fisheries, recreation, and drinking water uses of inland water bodies significant economic consequences result. Unfortunately, the magnitude, frequency, and duration of HABs in inland waters are poorly understood across spatiotemporal scales and differentially engaged among states, tribes, and territories. Harmful algal bloom impacts are not as predictable as those from conventional chemical contaminants, for which water quality assessment and management programs were primarily developed, because interactions among multiple natural and anthropogenic factors determine the likelihood and severity to which a HAB will occur in a specific water body. These forcing factors can also affect toxin production. Beyond site-specific water quality degradation caused directly by HABs, the presence of HAB toxins can negatively influence routine surface water quality monitoring, assessment, and management practices. Harmful algal blooms present significant challenges for achieving water quality protection and restoration goals when these toxins confound interpretation of monitoring results and environmental quality standards implementation efforts for other chemicals and stressors. Whether HABs presently represent the greatest threat to inland water quality is debatable, though in inland waters of developed countries they typically cause more severe acute impacts to environmental quality than conventional chemical contamination events. The authors identify several timely research needs. Environmental toxicology, environmental chemistry, and risk-assessment expertise must interface with ecologists, engineers, and public health practitioners to engage the complexities of HAB assessment and management, to address the forcing factors for HAB formation, and to reduce the threats posed to inland surface water quality. Environ Toxicol Chem 2016;35:6-13. # 2015 SETAC

show abstract

Priority water research questions as determined by UK practitioners and policy makers☆

Cited by 69 publications

References 38 publications

Energy in low carbon cities and social learning: A process for defining priority research questions with UK stakeholders

Energy in low carbon cities and social learning: A process for defining priority research questions with UK stakeholders

Research to Policy and Practice

Are harmful algal blooms becoming the greatest inland water quality threat to public health and aquatic ecosystems?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About