Using Social Network Analysis to Monitor and Assess the Effectiveness of Knowledge Brokers at Connecting Scientists and Decision‐Makers: An Australian case study

Abstract

Despite growing rhetoric regarding the potential benefits of using knowledge brokers in relation to environmental challenges and decision‐making processes, the evidence in support of such claims is mostly anecdotal. This is, in part, due to the lack of established methods to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of knowledge brokers. To address this gap we assess the utility of social network analysis (SNA) to evaluate the effectiveness of knowledge brokers in connecting scientists and decision‐makers. Specifically, using a case‐study approach, we undertake longitudinal SNA over a 12‐month period to evaluate the extent to which the knowledge broker developed networks between producers and users of knowledge across different organizations. We also undertook a qualitative survey of scientists (n = 29) who worked in the same organization as the knowledge broker to understand the extent to which the knowledge broker increased the impact of scientific research for decision‐making purposes. Results show that the knowledge broker developed an extensive stakeholder network of 192 individuals spanning over 30 organizations. The results of the SNA found that over time this network increased in density and became more cohesive, both key elements underpinning successful knowledge exchange. Furthermore, the qualitative survey found that the knowledge broker also had a positive impact in other ways, including helping researchers understand the operating environments within decision‐making agencies and the best approaches for engaging with specific decision‐makers. Thus, this study demonstrates the value of SNA for evaluating knowledge brokers and provides empirical support for the use of knowledge brokers in the environmental sector. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Examining partnerships within an international knowledge translation network focused on youth mental health promotion

“…As such, the Frayme secretariat is uniquely positioned to act as a broker among partners. Other research has found that brokers serve unique roles in that they are able to make personal connections to support new partnerships, span inter-disciplinary and intersectoral boundaries and overcome power differentials within KT networks [19,25]. KT networks interested in bridging interdisciplinary boundaries and creating new avenues for exchange of ideas might benefit from analysing network connections to identify weak ties.…”

“…In addition, one-third of survey participants noted that they were involved in projects that were not directly funded by the KT network, but that were the result of partnerships that were created through network membership and three-quarters of respondents described changes in their practice that had resulted through participation in the network. Researchers have identified that knowledge brokers can also successfully grow stakeholder networks in the pursuit of increasing uptake of scientific evidence [25]. In addition, they can enhance stakeholder understanding of the knowledge needs of other network members, including the nature of operating environments allowing for more focused delivery of knowledge exchange [25].…”

“…Researchers have identified that knowledge brokers can also successfully grow stakeholder networks in the pursuit of increasing uptake of scientific evidence [25]. In addition, they can enhance stakeholder understanding of the knowledge needs of other network members, including the nature of operating environments allowing for more focused delivery of knowledge exchange [25]. Knowledge brokers may also help to overcome partnership challenges related with crossing interdisciplinary boundaries that result from the highly specialised nature of many disciplines and hegemonic variation among collaborators [19].…”

Network analysis of workshop activities reveals increasing transdisciplinarity of German biodiversity research community

“…Only with effective, transparent and credible knowledge brokers at the interfaces between different disciplines and societal sectors, decision-makers can be informed and different perspectives comprehensively integrated (Neßhöver et al, 2016;Morin et al, 2017;Sarkki et al, 2019). Network analyses can help to assess knowledge exchange flows within a given network and identify or evaluate knowledge brokers (Toikka, 2010;Crona and Parker, 2011;Weiss et al, 2012;Cvitanovic et al, 2017), as demonstrated by the presented analysis.…”

A collaboratively derived international research agenda on legislative science advice

“…One participant said that their role was neither as user, provider, nor producer, but to facilitate connections between all three groups. This example demonstrates that while knowledge brokering can include knowledge dissemination (Lemos et al, 2014;Lomas, 2007), it may also focus primarily on network growth and capacity building (Cvitanovic et al, 2017).…”