Latest contribution

Recent contributions

How could research ethics governance better support participatory, transdisciplinary, and transformation-oriented research?

By Ying-Syuan (Elaine) Huang and Julia Wittmayer.

authors_ying-syuan-huang_julia-wittmayer
1. Ying-Syuan (Elaine) Huang (biography)
2. Julia Wittmayer (biography)

How can we design an ethics governance system that can better respond when ethical dilemmas emerge after institutional approval has been granted? 

This question is increasingly pressing for researchers engaged in participatory, transdisciplinary, and transformative work. Ethical concerns often arise in-situ where partnerships evolve, power dynamics shift, community expectations change, and research begins to have effects beyond the original project design.

These concerns do not fit neatly into conventional ethics review procedures at universities, which still tend to be organised around upfront review: researchers submit an application, a committee assesses it, and approval is granted before the research begins. This model matters for safeguarding participants, researchers, and institutions. But it is increasingly misaligned with the type of engaged research that emphasises social learning and democratically deliberative process for positive societal change.

Read more

Leading with Lived Experience across the research life cycle

By Catherine Brasier, Dan Chamberlain and Sarah Wilson.

authors_brasier_chamberlain_wilson
1. Catherine Brasier (biography)
2. Dan Chamberlain (biography)
3. Sarah Wilson (biography)

How can researchers and people with Lived Experience expertise effectively and authentically work together in Lived-Experience-centred research?

Along with colleagues, we have developed a structured approach, namely the “Wellways Six Steps of the Research Life Cycle,” which is shown in the figure below and described, along with 16 key actions. The aim is to help researchers and people with Lived Experience expertise to “work it out together.”

People with Lived Experience expertise demonstrate deep understanding of the following elements to drive their input:

  1. their own personal experience of the issue at hand
  2. their understanding of other people’s Lived Experiences
  3. Lived Experience values and practices
  4. the history of the Lived Experience movement – including the impact of the systemic and social factors.

Read more

Accountability in two different teamwork environments: The jigsaw puzzle and the collage

By Allison Dalton, Yvonne Pelling and Gaetano R. Lotrecchiano.

authors_dalton_pelling_lotrecchiano
1. Allison Dalton (biography)
2. Yvonne Pelling (biography)
3. Gaetano R. Lotrecchiano (biography)

How can teams demonstrate accountability in two different collaborative environments?

Accountability refers to the ways, both tangible and intangible, of showing up for ourselves and the rest of the team throughout a collaborative project. It gives rise to trust and forward momentum which impacts team functioning and ultimately the outcome of the work.

Here we look at accountability in two different collaborative environments, which we refer to using the metaphors of the jigsaw puzzle and the collage.

A team tasked with assembling a jigsaw puzzle deals with a finite set of clearly distinguished pieces, each to be fitted together in one correct way, and a reference image to demonstrate what the outcome will look like.

Read more

Transdisciplinary research in the Global South: Challenges and recommendations

By Laila Sandroni and Marcel Bursztyn.

authors_laila-sandroni_marcel-bursztyn
1. Laila Sandroni (biography)
2. Marcel Bursztyn (biography)

What are the key challenges in conducting research that aims to bridge science, policy and grassroots demands? How can such challenges be addressed?

This i2Insights contribution is based on transdisciplinary research that we and colleagues undertook with local communities in Brazil (Sandroni et al., 2026) and we suggest that the challenges and recommendations have broader relevance. Some are relevant to all transdisciplinary research, while others have particular resonance in Global South contexts.

Challenges

Key challenges centre around timing; tensions in worldviews; urgency and impact of climate change; process-oriented research and academic outputs; and language, concepts, and translation.

Timing

The differing rhythms of academia, public policy, and local actors can be challenging.

Read more

Highlighted contributions

Institutionalizing evidence-informed policy-making in Latin America and the Caribbean / Institucionalizando la toma de decisiones informadas por evidencias en Latinoamérica y el Caribe/ Institucionalizando a formulação de políticas informadas em evidências na América Latina e Caribe

By Directors and Coordinators of the Latin American and the Caribbean Evidence Hub

authors_directors-coordinators-latin-american-and-caribbean-evidence-hub
Author biographies

A Spanish version and a Portuguese version of this post are available

How is the routine use of evidence in policy in Latin America and the Caribbean progressing? How is it being institutionalized?

We provide a brief history of key initiatives to institutionalize evidence-informed policy making mechanisms in the region.

Read more

Decolonising research capacity development

By Maru Mormina and Romina Istratii

authors_maru-mormina_romina-istratii
1. Maru Mormina (biography)
2. Romina Istratii (biography)

Why do many countries in the Global South remain behind when it comes to knowledge production and use, despite decades-long efforts to strengthen research capacity?

We think this is because the North still looks at the South with a ‘deficit mentality,’ according to which the latter has the problems and the former the solutions. From this standpoint, northern-led capacity development initiatives fail to recognise the South’s rich and diverse knowledge traditions and systems. Instead, they continue to impose monolithic blueprints of knowledge production, therefore re-inscribing colonial patterns of intellectual Western hegemony.

Of course, in many countries, research systems need support but current approaches are at best producing mixed results. A decolonial lens can help us identify alternative models.

Decolonising research capacity development in principle

Read more

Five core competency areas for participatory modeling

By Sondoss Elsawah, Elena Bakhanova, Raimo P. Hämäläinen and Alexey Voinov

mosaic_authors_sondoss-elsawah_elena-bakhanova_raimo-hamalainen_alexey-voinov
1. Sondoss Elsawah (biography)
2. Elena Bakhanova (biography)
3. Raimo P. Hämäläinen (biography)
4. Alexey Voinov (biography)

What knowledge and skills do individuals and teams need to be effective at participatory modeling?

We suggest that five core competency areas are essential for participatory modeling:

  1. systems thinking
  2. modeling
  3. group facilitation
  4. project management and leadership
  5. operating in the virtual space.

These are illustrated in the figure below.

These competency areas have naturally overlapping elements and should therefore be seen as a holistic and interdependent set.

Read more

Pragmatism and critical systems thinking: Back to the future of systems thinking

By Michael C. Jackson

michael-c-jackson
Michael C. Jackson (biography)

Would systems thinking realize its potential as a force for good in the world if it rediscovered and developed its pragmatist roots? Does the link between the past and future of systems thinking lie through critical systems thinking and practice?

In brief, I suggest that:

  • Pragmatism provides an appropriate philosophy for systems thinking.
  • Systems thinking has pragmatist roots.
  • Critical systems thinking and practice shows how to develop those roots.
  • Pragmatism can help systems thinking realize its potential and systems thinking can help pragmatism achieve what it set out to do.

What is pragmatism?

Read more