No abstract

No abstract

External actor interventions in community forest management (CFM) attempt to support communities with developing forest institutions and/ or improving their livelihoods portfolio. Common pool resource (CPR) scholars Uniting forest and livelihood outcomes? 533 argue that forest institutions are required to prevent overharvesting of the forest resource stock (appropriation dilemma), and to encourage investment in its maintenance (provision dilemma). The sustainable livelihoods approach (SLA) has been widely used to analyse the influence of interventions on rural livelihoods portfolios. As interventions in CFM span the academic divide between CPR and SLA literatures, analysis of such interventions through either a CPR or SLA lens risks overlooking intervention activities, significant outcomes of the intervention, and the interplay between these outcomes. We propose here an analytical framework which combines CPR and SLA insights and ascertain its applicability by analysing interventions in a forest dependent community in Andhra Pradesh, India. We developed multiple indicators to measure the community's ability to deal with appropriation and provision dilemmas, and their livelihoods portfolio. Using data from forest plots, household questionnaires, focus group meetings and interviews, we analysed the intervention approaches, activities and outcomes. Our results show that a community's ability to deal with appropriation and provision dilemmas both affects, and is affected by its livelihoods portfolio. These intricate and dynamic interplays strongly influence the direct and indirect outcomes of intervention activities. Incorporating the synergy between the CPR and SLA perspectives in our analytical framework led us to a much more nuanced understanding of intervention approaches, activities and outcomes than would have otherwise been gained from a single perspective framework.Keywords: Common pool resources, community forestry, India, interventions, rural development, sustainable livelihoods Acknowledgements: We are extremely grateful to all the community members in East Godavari, Andhra Pradesh for sharing their experiences with us, logistical support and hospitality. We also greatly appreciate the time and patience shown by the external actors at the heart of this research whose honest responses to our questions enabled us to gain valuable insights into their daily work. We thank the reviewers for their thoughtful comments and suggestions.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to assess the contributions of graduate research to social innovation and change for learning and improved transdisciplinary practice. Universities, as centers of teaching and research, face high demand from society to address urgent social and environmental challenges. Faculty and students are keen to use their research to contribute to social innovation and sustainable development. As part of the effort to increase societal impact, research approaches are evolving to be more problem-oriented, engaged and transdisciplinary. Therefore, new approaches to research evaluation are also needed to learn whether and how research contributes to social innovation, and those lessons need to be applied by universities to train and support students to do impactful research and foster an impact culture. Design/methodology/approach This paper uses a theory-based evaluation method to assess the contributions of three completed doctoral research projects. Each study documents the project’s theory of change (ToC) and uses qualitative data (document review, surveys and interviews) to test the ToC. This paper uses a transdisciplinary research (TDR) quality assessment framework (QAF) to analyze each projects’ design and implementation. This paper then draws lessons from the individual case studies and a comparative analysis of the three cases on, namely, effective research design and implementation for social transformation; and training and support for impactful research. Findings Each project aimed to influence government policy, organizational practice, other research and/or the students’ own professional development. All contributed to many of their intended outcomes, but with varying levels of accomplishment. Projects that were more transdisciplinary had more pronounced outcomes. Process contributions (e.g. capacity-building, relationship-building and empowerment) were as or more important than knowledge contributions. The key recommendations are for: researchers to design intentional research, with an explicit ToC; higher education institutions (HEI) to provide training and support for TDR theory and practice; and HEIs to give more attention to research evaluation. Originality/value This is the first application of both the outcome evaluation method and the TDR QAF to graduate student research projects, and one of very few such analyses of research projects. It offers a broader framework for conceptualizing and evaluating research contributions to social change processes. It is intended to stimulate new thinking about research aims, approaches and achievements.

No abstract

No abstract

Achieving societal effects is crucial for transdisciplinary research. In this article, we present key characteristics of impact evaluation of transdisciplinary research. We compare different approaches in sustainability, public health, and development research to advance joint learning and define common challenges.To address complex societal problems, transdisciplinary approaches are increasingly being employed in research to achieve both scientific and societal effects. Comparing experiences of different impact evaluation approaches enables mutual learning across research fields. We provide an overview of the key characteristics of different approaches to assess the impact of transdisciplinary research across the fields of public health, development, and sustainability; uncover commonalities and challenges in applying these approaches; and suggest how they can be overcome by drawing on examples from specific approaches and fields. We find commonalities in terms of conceptual framing as well as data collection and analysis from which we derive the following key challenges:1. evidencing causal claims, 2. including multiple perspectives on effects, and 2. sustaining continuous monitoring and evaluation. We conclude that impact evaluation of transdisciplinary research must capture the interplay and effects of multiple actors, processes, and impact pathways to promote learning and empirical rigour and suggest how funders can support this endeavour.

No abstract