Research implementation – Page 7 – Integration and Implementation Insights

Ten lessons from a transdisciplinary PhD program in sustainable development

September 10, 2024March 9, 2017

By Marianne Penker

Should a doctoral student specialise in transdisciplinary sustainable development research? What are the opportunities and challenges associated with undertaking a program that requires research integration and implementation?

At the University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna in Austria, teams of PhD-students and academic supervisors collaborated with representatives from regions, cities, public authorities, businesses or civil society to solve pressing and often wicked sustainability problems. We learnt the following ten lessons.

Designing for impact in transdisciplinary research

February 18, 2025February 16, 2017

By Cynthia Mitchell, Dena Fam and Dana Cordell

authors_cynthia-mitchell_dena-fam_dana-cordell — 1. Cynthia Mitchell (biography)
2. Dena Fam (biography)
3. Dana Cordell (biography)

Starting with richly articulated pictures of where we would like to be at some defined point in the future has powerful consequences for any human endeavour. How can we use such “Outcome Spaces” to guide the conception, design, implementation, and evaluation of transdisciplinary research?

Our Outcome Spaces Framework (Mitchell et al., 2017) considers three essential impacts:

(1) improving the situation,
(2) generating relevant stocks and flows of knowledge, and
(3) mutual and transformational learning by the researcher/s and involved participants.

Whose side are we on and for whom do we write?

December 18, 2024February 14, 2017

By Jon Warren and Kayleigh Garthwaite

authors_jon-warren_kayleigh-garthwaite — 1. Jon Warren (biography)
2. Kayleigh Garthwaite (biography)

In 1967 Howard Becker posed the question – to academics – “Whose side are we on?”.

Becker was discussing the question during the time of civil rights, the Vietnam war and widespread social change in the US. He sparked a debate about objectivity and value neutrality which had long featured as part of the social sciences’ methodological foundations and which has implications beyond the social sciences for all academics.

What relevance do these ideas have now, in an era when academics and their research are becoming increasingly commodified? Academics are increasingly pressured by their own institutions and fellow professionals to gain more funding, publish more papers and make more impact. Questions of social justice and professional integrity are at risk of being swamped by these forces allied to unscrupulous careerism.

We argue that the question now is not only who academics serve but also who we write for.

Building a better bridge: The role of research mediators

December 27, 2021February 7, 2017

By Jessica Shaw

What, and who, are research mediators? And are they the key to linking research with policy and practice?

There has long existed a gap, perhaps a chasm, between the worlds of research and of policy and practice. All too often, policymakers and practitioners do not use research evidence when making key decisions, while researchers design entire programs of research without a complete understanding of the needs of those on the ground doing the work. Because of this divide, we’re left wondering—how do we get individuals to use the most relevant research findings when making personal healthcare decisions? how do we get school officials to choose evidence-based curriculum? how do we get legislators to develop scientifically-sound policies?

Six actions to mobilise knowledge in complex systems

December 18, 2024January 31, 2017

By Bev J. Holmes and Allan Best

authors_bev-holmes_allan-best — 1. Bev J. Holmes (biography)
2. Allan Best (biography)

What are the practical implications of mobilising knowledge in complex systems? How can the rules, regulations, incentives and long-entrenched power structures of a system be changed so that knowledge mobilisation is maximized?

We propose six interdependent actions, briefly described below, undertaken at two levels, by those who: (1) are managing specific knowledge mobilization initiatives (initiative managers), and (2) are in a position to make the environment more receptive to change (key influencers). These people may not necessarily be involved in specific initiatives.

Four simple questions for navigating the knowledge mobilisation swamp

January 7, 2022December 6, 2016

By Vicky Ward

How can knowledge mobilisers – people who move knowledge into action – make sense of diverse definitions, navigate through the fragmented literature and better describe their work? It all starts with a few simple questions…

Over the past 15-20 years, research and practical activity focusing on how knowledge can be better shared and used has grown at what sometimes seems like an alarming rate. For many, the diverse range of literature, terminology, models and tools can seem overwhelming and bewildering. In 2010, for example, McKibbon and colleagues identified 100 different terms used to describe the activities and processes involved in linking knowledge and practice (McKibbon et al., 2010). And in 2014 Huw Davies and colleagues found 71 substantial reviews of research literature on this topic across health, social care and education (Davies et al., 2015).

Advocate or Honest Broker?

November 30, 2022November 22, 2016

By Gabriele Bammer

To mark the first anniversary of the Integration and Implementation Insights blog, we launch an occasional series of “synthesis blog posts” drawing insights across blog posts on related topics.

What is our social obligation as researchers to see our findings implemented? And how should we do it? When is it appropriate to advocate loudly to drive change? When should we focus on informing decision makers, stepping back ourselves from direct action? How can we know that our research is ‘good enough’ to act on and not compromised by our own values, interests, cognitive biases and blind spots?

A co-creation challenge: Aligning research and policy processes

August 24, 2022October 13, 2016

By Katrin Prager

How does the mismatch between policy and research processes and timelines stymie co-creation? I describe an example from a project in Sachsen-Anhalt state in Germany, along with lessons learnt.

The project, initiated by researchers, aimed to use a more participatory approach to developing agri-environmental schemes, in order to improve their effectiveness. Officers from the Agricultural Payments department of the Sachsen-Anhalt Ministry for Agriculture were invited to participate in an action research project that was originally conceived to also involve officers from the Conservation department of the same ministry, farmer representatives and conservation groups.

The ‘methods section’ in research publications on complex problems – Purpose

September 5, 2024October 11, 2016

By Gabriele Bammer

Do we need a protocol for documenting how research tackling complex social and environmental problems was undertaken?

Usually when I read descriptions of research addressing a problem such as poverty reduction or obesity prevention or mitigation of the environmental impact of a particular development, I find myself frustrated by the lack of information about what was actually done. Some processes may be dealt with in detail, but others are glossed over or ignored completely.

For example, often such research brings together insights from a range of disciplines, but details may be scant on why and how those disciplines were selected, whether and how they interacted and how their contributions to understanding the problem were combined. I am often left wondering about whose job it was to do the synthesis and how they did it: did they use specific methods and were these up to the task? And I am curious about how the researchers assessed their efforts at the end of the project: did they miss a key discipline? would a different perspective from one of the disciplines included have been more useful? did they know what to do with all the information generated?

Creating a pragmatic complexity culture / La creación de una cultura pragmática de la complejidad

August 24, 2022September 29, 2016

By Cristina Zurbriggen

An English version of this post is available

¿Cómo pueden los gobiernos, las comunidades y el sector privado efectivamente trabajar juntos para lograr un cambio social hacia el desarrollo sostenible?

En este blog describo los procesos claves que permitieron a Uruguay lograr uno de los regímenes más avanzados de protección del suelo de tierras de cultivo de secano en el mundo. Una explicación del proceso es la creación de una cultura pragmática de la complejidad, una cultura inclusiva, deliberativa que reconoce la naturaleza compleja del problema y abraza el potencial de lo posible.

Five principles for achieving impact

September 5, 2024September 27, 2016

By Mark Reed

What key actions can help research have impact? Interviews with 32 researchers and stakeholders across 13 environmental management research projects lead to the five principles and key issues described below (Reed et al., 2014).

1. Design:

• Understand what everyone wants. This can help in managing expectations of different stakeholders and project members and identifying potential issues/problems early on.
• Understand the context of the project. Use local characteristics, traditions, norms and past experiences as a starting point for planning the project.
• Take your time. Knowledge exchange is time consuming if done properly.
• Design your knowledge exchange activities carefully. Spend time researching the context, the stakeholders, and possible approaches. Design for flexibility, get feedback, and adapt your plans to suit changing circumstances.

Where are the stakeholders in implementation science?

August 24, 2022September 8, 2016

By Allison Metz and Annette Boaz

authors_allison-metz_annette-boaz — 1. Allison Metz (biography)
2. Annette Boaz (biography)

Should implementation science make more room for consultation, collaboration and co-creation with stakeholders? Would finding more active roles for stakeholders in implementation science be a promising approach to increasing the use of research evidence for improvements in policy and services?

The goal of implementation science is to promote the sustainable implementation of research evidence at scale to improve population outcomes, especially in health and human services. Nevertheless, the mobilization of research evidence on the frontlines of health and human services has been quite limited, especially in public agencies serving the vast majority of consumers.