Climate Change Data Portal
| DOI | 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.12.012 |
| Evaluating knowledge exchange in interdisciplinary and multi-stakeholder research | |
| Fazey I.; Bunse L.; Msika J.; Pinke M.; Preedy K.; Evely A.C.; Lambert E.; Hastings E.; Morris S.; Reed M.S. | |
| 发表日期 | 2014 |
| ISSN | 0959-3780 |
| 卷号 | 25期号:1 |
| 英文摘要 | Interdisciplinary and multi-stakeholder research is increasingly being promoted and implemented to enhance understanding of global environment change, identify holistic policy solutions, and assist implementation. These research activities are social processes aiming to enhance the exchange and translation of knowledge. Emphasis on the design and management of knowledge exchange is increasing, but learning about how to do this better is hampered by lack of conceptual development and appropriate methods to evaluate complex and multifaceted knowledge exchange processes. This paper therefore develops principles for the evaluation of knowledge exchange in interdisciplinary, multi-stakeholder environmental change research. The paper is based on an analysis of 135 peer-reviewed evaluations of knowledge exchange from diverse disciplines. The results indicate strong relationships between the field of study (e.g. health care, environmental management), the way knowledge and knowledge exchange were conceptualised and implemented, the approach used for the evaluation, and the outcomes being evaluated. A typology of seven knowledge exchange evaluations is presented to guide discussions about the underlying assumptions of different approaches to knowledge exchange and its evaluation. Five principles for knowledge exchange evaluation are also identified: (i) design for multiple end users; (ii) be explicit about why a particular approach to knowledge exchange is expected to deliver its outcomes; (iii) evaluate diverse outcomes; (iv) use evaluations as part of the process of delivering knowledge exchange; and (v) use mixed methods to evaluate knowledge exchange. We conclude that a catch-all approach to evaluation is neither appropriate nor desirable. Instead, approaches that focus on understanding the underlying processes of knowledge exchange, assess the relative contribution of other factors in shaping outcomes in addition to knowledge exchange, and that involve multiple stakeholders in implementing evaluations, will be the most appropriate for evaluating knowledge exchange in interdisciplinary global environmental change research. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. |
| 英文关键词 | Co-design; Co-management; Co-production; Interdisciplinary research; Knowledge transfer; Participatory research |
| 语种 | 英语 |
| 来源期刊 | Global Environmental Change
 |
| 文献类型 | 期刊论文 |
| 条目标识符 | http://gcip.llas.ac.cn/handle/2XKMVOVA/117801 |
| 作者单位 | School of Environment, University of Dundee, Perth Road, Dundee DD1 4HN, United Kingdom; The James Hutton Institute, Invergowrie, Dundee DD2 5DA, United Kingdom; Project MAYA CIC, 54 Tetherdown, London N10 1NG, United Kingdom; The James Hutton Institute, Craigiebuckler, Aberdeen AB15 8QH, United Kingdom; Centre for Environment and Society Research, Birmingham School of the Built Environment, Birmingham City University, Millennium Point, Curzon Street, Birmingham B4 7XG, United Kingdom |
| 推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Fazey I.,Bunse L.,Msika J.,et al. Evaluating knowledge exchange in interdisciplinary and multi-stakeholder research[J],2014,25(1). |
| APA | Fazey I..,Bunse L..,Msika J..,Pinke M..,Preedy K..,...&Reed M.S..(2014).Evaluating knowledge exchange in interdisciplinary and multi-stakeholder research.Global Environmental Change,25(1). |
| MLA | Fazey I.,et al."Evaluating knowledge exchange in interdisciplinary and multi-stakeholder research".Global Environmental Change 25.1(2014). |
| 条目包含的文件 | 条目无相关文件。 | |||||
除非特别说明，本系统中所有内容都受版权保护，并保留所有权利。
