In real-world laboratories (RwLs), researchers do more than conventional research. They slip into different roles. Why do they “change faces”? Based on comparisons of three urban RwLs, we analyse the process steps and conditions influencing the choices made by researchers
to adopt certain roles.Real-world laboratories (RwLs) often put researchers in highly demanding research contexts regarding their roles and self-conceptions. Helpful roles of researchers have been described but still little is known about the factors influencing the adoption of certain
roles. Using data from three parallel RwLs in Wuppertal, Germany, we found four roles of researchers: the reflective scientist, the facilitator, the change agent and the (self-)reflexive scientist. We sequenced the RwLs into situations and analysed them by RwL process
steps and conditions, considering the roles of researchers as outcomes. Although the conditions convey only limited explanatory power, there was a consistent picture that being pressured to carry out real-world action, having a practice partner with fewer resources and working without a functional
project group is (in conjunction) sufficient to cause the researcher to partake in activities beyond conventional research. Process steps played a minor role. Our research on factors influencing the adoption of roles may help RwL researchers to perform their roles as intended.
At the heart of transition research lies the question of how to “scale up” sustainable alternatives from a protected niche to the creation of mainstream practices.While upscaling processes are often seen as an essential element that contributes to societal transformation,
upscaling itself remains a fuzzy concept.We argue that some fundamental dilemmas of upscaling can be identified, for example, the different understanding of the concept by researchers and practitioners. The dilemmas should be addressed in a more reflexive way by those from the worlds of science
and practice who are involved in collaborative research settings.
To tackle complex sustainability problems, science and practice must join forces and interact in the processes of knowledge co-production. This central claim of sustainability science requires all actors to do more than simply participate in a workshop or carry out traditional research. It is essential to provide clarity to actors about the roles to adopt in these processes, especially in terms of planning collaborations—with whom, when, and how. Therefore, in this paper we identify, describe, and discuss 15 roles for actors involved in such processes. We undertook a systematic literature review to identify papers with precise descriptions of transdisciplinary (td) and transformative (tf) research processes. We focused on the common occurrence of activities undertaken by actors by applying 72 activity codes a total of 549 times. Subclusters of activities were identified by means of a hierarchical cluster analysis and these were condensed into 15 roles. The roles can be categorised in four activity realms: field, academia, boundary management, and knowledge co-production. The roles of the Data Supplier, the Field Expert, and the Application Expert are adopted by actors who originate from the field, whereas the roles of the Scientific Analyst and the Knowledge Collector are primarily adopted by researchers. Furthermore, we identified 10 roles within the activity realms of the knowledge co-production process and boundary management. The high number and diversity of roles, especially in the realm of boundary management, reveals the importance of a comprehensive approach to coordination, communication, and process design.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.