Suppr超能文献

利益相关者的参与并不能保证产生影响:基于模型的干旱研究的协同生产视角。

Stakeholder engagement does not guarantee impact: A co-productionist perspective on model-based drought research.

机构信息

Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden.

University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

出版信息

Soc Stud Sci. 2024 Apr;54(2):210-230. doi: 10.1177/03063127231199220. Epub 2023 Sep 27.

Abstract

Stakeholder engagement has become a watchword for environmental scientists to assert the societal relevance of their projects to funding agencies. In water research based on computer simulation modelling, stakeholder engagement has attracted interest as a means to overcome low uptake of new tools for water management. An increasingly accepted view is that more and better stakeholder involvement in research projects will lead to increased adoption of the modelling tools created by scientists in water management. However, we cast doubt on this view by drawing attention to how the freedom of stakeholder organizations to adopt new scientific modelling tools in their regular practices is circumscribed by the societal context. We use a modified concept of co-production in an analysis of a case of scientific research on drought in the UK to show how relationships between actors in the drought governance space influence the uptake of scientific modelling tools. The analysis suggests an explanation of why stakeholder engagement with one scientific project led to one output (data) getting adopted by stakeholders while another output (modelling tools) attracted no discernible interest. Our main objective is to improve the understanding of the limitations to stakeholder engagement as a means of increasing societal uptake of scientific research outputs.

摘要

利益相关者参与已成为环境科学家强调其项目对资助机构的社会相关性的口号。在基于计算机模拟建模的水研究中,利益相关者参与作为克服新的水管理工具采用率低的一种手段引起了人们的兴趣。越来越多的人认为,更多更好的利益相关者参与研究项目将导致科学家在水管理中创建的建模工具的采用率提高。然而,我们通过关注利益相关者组织在其常规实践中采用新的科学建模工具的自由是如何受到社会背景限制的,对这种观点提出了质疑。我们在对英国干旱问题科学研究的案例分析中使用了改良的共同生产概念,以展示干旱治理空间中行为者之间的关系如何影响科学建模工具的采用。分析表明,对为什么利益相关者参与一个科学项目导致一个输出(数据)被利益相关者采用,而另一个输出(建模工具)没有引起明显兴趣,可以做出一种解释。我们的主要目的是增进对利益相关者参与作为提高科学研究成果社会采用率的一种手段的局限性的理解。

相似文献

1
Stakeholder engagement does not guarantee impact: A co-productionist perspective on model-based drought research.
Soc Stud Sci. 2024 Apr;54(2):210-230. doi: 10.1177/03063127231199220. Epub 2023 Sep 27.
2
Stakeholder engagement in the study and management of invasive alien species.
J Environ Manage. 2019 Jan 1;229:88-101. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.04.044. Epub 2018 Aug 1.
4
How to engage stakeholders in research: design principles to support improvement.
Health Res Policy Syst. 2018 Jul 11;16(1):60. doi: 10.1186/s12961-018-0337-6.
5
Stakeholder engagement in European brain research: Experiences of the Lifebrain consortium.
Health Expect. 2023 Jun;26(3):1318-1326. doi: 10.1111/hex.13747. Epub 2023 Mar 29.
7
Operationalizing Stakeholder Engagement Through the Stakeholder-Centric Engagement Charter (SCEC).
J Gen Intern Med. 2022 Apr;37(Suppl 1):105-108. doi: 10.1007/s11606-021-07029-4. Epub 2022 Mar 29.
9
How the COVID-19 pandemic changed stakeholder engagement processes in sustainability research in the long-term.
F1000Res. 2024 May 7;13:458. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.145238.1. eCollection 2024.

本文引用的文献

1
Impact, theory of change, and the horizons of scientific practice.
Soc Stud Sci. 2021 Feb;51(1):100-120. doi: 10.1177/0306312720950830. Epub 2020 Aug 25.
2
Enhancing nature-based solutions acceptance through stakeholders' engagement in co-benefits identification and trade-offs analysis.
Sci Total Environ. 2020 Apr 15;713:136552. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.136552. Epub 2020 Jan 9.
4
A flood of models: Mekong ecologies of comparison.
Soc Stud Sci. 2020 Feb;50(1):76-93. doi: 10.1177/0306312719871616. Epub 2019 Sep 20.
5
Metadata accounts: Achieving data and evidence in scientific research.
Soc Stud Sci. 2019 Oct;49(5):732-757. doi: 10.1177/0306312719863494. Epub 2019 Jul 27.
6
We get the algorithms of our ground truths: Designing referential databases in digital image processing.
Soc Stud Sci. 2017 Dec;47(6):811-840. doi: 10.1177/0306312717730428. Epub 2017 Sep 26.
7
What Difference Does Quantity Make? On the Epistemology of Big Data in Biology.
Big Data Soc. 2014 Jun 1;1(1). doi: 10.1177/2053951714534395.
8
Dissolving decision making? Models and their roles in decision-making processes and policy at large.
Sci Context. 2014 Dec;27(4):631-57. doi: 10.1017/s0269889714000234.
9
Models at work--models in decision making.
Sci Context. 2014 Dec;27(4):561-77. doi: 10.1017/s0269889714000209.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验