No abstract

Process-oriented transdisciplinary research is generally seen as a promising approach to facilitate sustainability transitions. This type of research requires new participatory roles for researchers. These new roles may conflict with traditional, more academic roles that researchers often maintain next to their new roles. Using the Dutch transdisciplinary Knowledge-Action Programme on Water (KAP Water) as a case study, we highlight tensions that researchers adopting these new roles experience. We have observed both practical and more fundamental tensions between roles of researchers in process-oriented sustainability research. In particular, it proved difficult to combine more engaged roles, where researchers are involved in dialogues for change, with knowledge-oriented roles, where researchers focus on knowledge provision and are further removed from ‘real-world action’. Tensions arise from three sources: (1) researchers’ self-perception and expectations; (2) expectations from transdisciplinary partners, funders and researchers’ home institutions; and (3) societal convictions about what scientific knowledge is and how it should be developed. This paper contributes to the literature by enhancing the understanding of the interactions and tensions between the roles of researchers in transdisciplinary research.

No abstract

The user may reproduce, distribute and share this work and make derivative works from it. Material by third parties which is used in the work and which are subject to intellectual property rights may not be used without prior permission from the relevant third party. The user must attribute the work by stating the name indicated by the author or licensor but may not do this in such a way as to create the impression that the author/licensor endorses the use of the work or the work of the user. The user may not use the work for commercial purposes.Wageningen Economic Research accepts no liability for any damage resulting from the use of the results of this study or the application of the advice contained in it.

No abstract

Summary Although the Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union has broadened its objectives to integrate social issues, several hard‐to‐reach groups of farmers and workers continue to be ignored by advisory services and associated policies. Connecting with these groups has a strong potential to increase the economic and social cohesion of European agricultures. We interviewed over 1,000 farmers across Europe and identified features of these groups that are often overlooked by advisory services. We critically reflected on the social cohorts omitted from advisory services and how they could be better reached; they include farm labourers, new entrants or ‘career changers’, and later adopters. We clarify the different types of advisors in the advisory landscape, distinguishing between those who are linked to or independent from sales of inputs or technologies. We make concrete recommendations about how to engage advisors with hard‐to‐reach groups, with approaches suited to different national contexts of Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems (AKIS); thus contributing to the ‘AKIS dimension of National Strategic Plans of the next Common Agricultural Policy, 2023–2027. We argue for the more effective use of advances in the social sciences through a better understanding of advice as social interaction which can bolster the inclusiveness of public policies.

Dutch Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality within the context of the Knowledge Base programme 'Food Security and Valuing Water' (Transition pathways: project number KB-35-006-001).

No abstract