French Matthew A, Barker S Fiona, Henry Rebekah, Turagabeci Amelia, Ansariadi Ancha, Tela Autiko, Ramirez-Lovering Diego, Awaluddin Fitriyanty, Latief Ihsan, Vakarewa Isoa, Taruc Ruzka R, Wong Tony, Davis Brett, Brown Rebekah, Leder Karin
Faculty of Art, Design and Architecture, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.
Office of the Deputy Vice Chancellor and Senior Vice President, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.
Res Policy. 2024 Sep;53(7):105048. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2024.105048.
The number, scale and ambition of transdisciplinary research initiatives between the global north and the global south is increasing, yet there is very little theoretical or empirical scholarship on how to lead and manage implementation to promote responsible practice. Within science, technology and innovation (STI) studies and decolonising research frameworks, and utilising collaborative autoethnography, this study codifies experience with implementing the 'Revitalising Informal Settlements and their Environments' (RISE) program (2017-2020). Our specific aim is to explore the leadership and management tensions and challenges of implementing transboundary transdisciplinary research. The findings reaffirm the importance of research leaders and managers carefully operationalising north-south research by critically reflecting on power asymmetries between disciplines, partners and locations, leveraging the potential for transdisciplinary consortia to build research capabilities in the global south, and creating a culture of reflexivity on the historical and social positionality in which research is designed, funded, implemented and evaluated. The findings foreground the role of boundary-spanning 'integrators' and 'pracademics', roles that have received little attention to date but are essential for effective delivery and societal impact beyond scientific advances. A framework for implementing north-south transdisciplinary research is outlined with five domains: (1) collaborative leadership; (2) agile management; (3) flexible consortia; (4) researcher positionality; and (5) co-design and participation. The framework can support efforts for responsibly designing and implementing large, transdisciplinary, cross-country research programs in line with ambitions for decolonising north-south research.
全球北方和南方之间跨学科研究倡议的数量、规模和抱负不断增加,但关于如何引领和管理实施过程以促进负责任实践的理论或实证研究却非常少。本研究在科学、技术与创新(STI)研究及去殖民化研究框架内,并运用协作式自我民族志方法,整理了实施“振兴非正式住区及其环境”(RISE)项目(2017 - 2020年)的经验。我们的具体目标是探讨实施跨界跨学科研究中的领导与管理方面的紧张关系和挑战。研究结果再次强调了研究领导者和管理者通过批判性反思学科、合作伙伴和地点之间的权力不对称,谨慎开展南北研究的重要性,利用跨学科联盟在全球南方建设研究能力的潜力,并营造一种对研究设计、资助、实施和评估所处的历史和社会位置进行反思的文化氛围。研究结果突出了跨越边界的“整合者”和“实践学者”的作用,这些角色迄今为止很少受到关注,但对于有效实施以及超越科学进步的社会影响至关重要。本文概述了一个实施南北跨学科研究的框架,该框架包含五个领域:(1)协作式领导;(2)灵活管理;(3)灵活的联盟;(4)研究者的位置性;(5)共同设计与参与。该框架可支持按照去殖民化南北研究的抱负,负责任地设计和实施大型、跨学科、跨国研究项目的努力。