Assessing research impact potential: using the transdisciplinary Outcome Spaces Framework with New Zealand’s National Science Challenges

Abstract

Calls for science to have impact as well as excellence have been loud and clear from research funders, policymakers and research institutions for some time. Transdisciplinary research (TDR) is expected to deliver impact by connecting scientists with stakeholders and end users to co-produce knowledge to respond to complex issues. While New Zealand's science system is geared to deliver excellence, its capability to also deliver impact beyond academic institutions is less clear. This paper has two interconnected aims. Firstly, it presents findings from testing innovations to the TDR Outcome Spaces Framework (OSF+) with four National Science Challenges (NSCs). We conclude that OSF+ is a useful tool for planning for multiple outcomes and assessing the potential for impact. Secondly, it presents findings of how using OSF+ to assess research impact potential revealed a range of implicit theories of change (i.e. catalyst, deficit, engagement and collaboration) across the NSCs. The findings raise important questions about the prospects for New Zealand's science system to deliver the envisaged and needed levels of research impact when current institutional settings, expectations, recognition systems, career paths and measures of success are not yet able to adequately accommodate TDR to deliver the research impact.

Communication tools and their support for integration in transdisciplinary research projects

“…They manage the interface between science and practice and are supposed to promote integration. However, the naming and definition of this role vary widely, e.g., from communicator, mediator or intermediary (Hilger et al, 2021), epistemediator (Wiek, 2007), knowledge broker (Duncan et al, 2020;Hilger et al, 2021), process facilitator (Hilger et al, 2021;Pohl et al, 2010) to science consultant (Mogalle, 2001) or boundary spanner (Harris and Lyon, 2013). Like Bammer (2013), Bammer et al (2020), andPohl et al (2021), we use the term "integration expert", who specialises in managing transdisciplinary integration (Hoffmann et al, 2022;Pohl et al, 2021).…”

Transdisciplinary science and the importance of Indigenous knowledge

“…A transdisciplinary approach requires long‐term partnerships and relationships that sometimes stretch beyond the more narrowly defined boundaries of typical science projects. The outputs generated are not easy to calculate at the beginning of the project, and they endure beyond the conclusion of it (Brown et al, 2010; Duncan et al, 2018, 2020; Fam et al, 2017).…”

A Partnership Outcome Spaces framework for purposeful student–staff partnerships

“…Similar to studentstaff partnerships, transdisciplinary academic practice crosses boundaries of disciplinary knowledge and incorporates contextualised, local and practice-based knowledges (Polk and Knutsson 2008;Scholz and Steiner 2015). As with student-staff partnerships, the experience and benefits of transdisciplinary engagement can be difficult to articulate (Duncan, Robson-Williams, and Fam 2020). Mitchell, Cordell, and Fam (2015) developed the transdisciplinary outcome spaces framework to specifically grapple with this challenge, presenting one way to think about the purpose, scale and impact of process-oriented transdisciplinary initiatives.…”