Understanding and evidencing a broader range of ‘successes’ that can occur at the interface of marine science and policy

Cvitanovic, Christopher; Mackay, Mary; Shellock, Rebecca; Putten, EI van; Karcher, Db.; Dickey‐Collas, Mark

doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2021.104802

Cited by 22 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 78 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This requires providing change-makers (e.g., NGO partners, community groups, policy makers) with solutions-oriented, measurable, actionable, and timely research (Sherman 2011 ; Chapman et al 2015 ; Dlouhá et al 2019 ) and ensuring that researchers are equipped with the mindset to do this work (Gale et al 2021 ). There has been an increasing focus on how to achieve impact at the interface between science and policy (Cvitanovic et al 2021b ; Karcher et al 2021 ). An accessible resource for ECRs seeking to achieve policy impact has been created by Evans and Cvitanovic ( 2018 ), in which they identify approaches to research as well as personal attributes to facilitate the relationships between science, policy, and practice.…”

Section: Big-picture Goals and Considerations For Transdisciplinary F...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Goals, challenges, and next steps in transdisciplinary fisheries research: perspectives and experiences from early-career researchers

Nyboer

Reid

Jeanson

et al. 2022

Rev Fish Biol Fisheries

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fisheries are highly complex social-ecological systems that often face ‘wicked’ problems from unsustainable resource management to climate change. Addressing these challenges requires transdisciplinary approaches that integrate perspectives across scientific disciplines and knowledge systems. Despite widespread calls for transdisciplinary fisheries research (TFR), there are still limitations in personal and institutional capacity to conduct and support this work to the highest potential. The viewpoints of early career researchers (ECRs) in this field can illuminate challenges and promote systemic change within fisheries research. This paper presents the perspectives of ECRs from across the globe, gathered through a virtual workshop held during the 2021 World Fisheries Congress, on goals, challenges, and future potential for TFR. Big picture goals for TFR were guided by principles of co-production and included (i) integrating transdisciplinary thinking at all stages of the research process, (ii) ensuring that research is inclusive and equitable, (iii) co-creating knowledge that is credible, relevant, actionable, and impactful, and (iv) consistently communicating with partners. Institutional inertia, lack of recognition of the extra time and labour required for TFR, and lack of skill development opportunities were identified as three key barriers in conducting TFR. Several critical actions were identified to help ECRs, established researchers, and institutions reach these goals. We encourage ECRs to form peer-mentorship networks to guide each other along the way. We suggest that established researchers ensure consistent mentorship while also giving space to ECR voices. Actions for institutions include retooling education programs, developing and implementing new metrics of impact, and critically examining individualism and privilege in academia. We suggest that the opportunities and actions identified here, if widely embraced now, can enable research that addresses complex challenges facing fishery systems contributing to a healthier future for fish and humans alike.

show abstract

Section: Big-picture Goals and Considerations For Transdisciplinary F...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Goals, challenges, and next steps in transdisciplinary fisheries research: perspectives and experiences from early-career researchers

Nyboer

Reid

Jeanson

et al. 2022

Rev Fish Biol Fisheries

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It also has to be considered that positive outcomes are much more diverse than products, and often rather relate to processes. Such 'alternative' metrics include the use of knowledge in decisionmaking, as well as impacts on individuals, group interactions, organizations, and political processes -which may be intangible (relationships, trust, changes in attitude, mutual learning) (Cooke et al, 2020;Cvitanovic et al, 2021a;Karcher et al, 2021). This calls for a diversification of 'excellence' criteria (i.e., going beyond 'traditional' metrics such as impact factors, funding acquired, number of publications and citations) when considering hiring/ promotion, and considering alternative metrics reflective of societal impact, actor engagement, or applicability (e.g.…”

Section: Institutional Levelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disentangling Obstacles to Knowledge Co-Production for Early-Career Researchers in the Marine Sciences

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Knowledge co-production involving researchers and non-academic actors is becoming increasingly important for tackling sustainability issues. Coastal and marine social-ecological systems are one example where knowledge co-production is important, yet also particularly challenging due to their unique characteristics. Early-Career Researchers (ECRs) often face specific obstacles when engaging in the process of knowledge co-production. In this perspective paper, we shed light on the particular characteristics of knowledge co-production in marine social-ecological systems and the obstacles ECRs in the marine sciences face. Based on these obstacles, we discuss actions that can be taken at various organizational levels (institutional, community, supervisor, and individual) in order to leverage change towards a more inclusive environment for ECRs engaging in knowledge co-production. We conclude that both bottom-up (individual to institutions) and top-down (institutions to individual) actions are required. However, we emphasize the responsibilities of institutions to create conditions in which the needs of ECRs are met. This will be necessary to adequately support ECRs engaging in knowledge co-production and thus contribute to tackling sustainability challenges in coastal and marine social-ecological systems.

show abstract

“…This has led increasingly to an instrumentalization of impact, reflected in institutional mission statements, research strategies and the establishment of new institutional structures (e.g., Hart et al 2015;Reed et al 2022). These 'impacts' can manifest across a range of scales, for example, (i) impacts on individuals, (ii) impacts on research, (iii) impacts on organisations, (iv) impacts on ecosystems, and (v) impacts on society at large (Cvitanovic et al 2021a). Open Science introduces the further need to involve citizen communities in the evaluation of impact.…”

Section: The Subjectivity Of Research Impactmentioning

confidence: 99%

Re-thinking research impact: voice, context and power at the interface of science, policy and practice

Reed

Rudman

2022

Sustain Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The world is facing unprecedented challenges on a scale that has never been seen before, and the need for evidence-informed solutions has never been greater. As a result, academics, policy-makers, practitioners, and research funders are increasingly seeking to undertake or support research that achieves tangible impacts on policy and practice. However, the impact of research is inherently subjective, with the same outcome perceived as either beneficial or negative by different groups, or by the same group in different contexts. It is therefore important to consider factors that may increase the likelihood that outcomes from research are perceived as beneficial (or otherwise) by interested/affected groups and non-academic partners, to help researchers avoid causing potentially harmful impacts, despite their best intentions. In this overview article, we discuss three considerations for re-thinking how research can deliver such outcomes: (i) sensitivity to context, (ii) representation and legitimisation of diverse voices and (iii) the management of power dynamics. We then discuss how these can be enacted in research and engagement processes that are designed to incorporate multiple ways of viewing reality and knowledge, as researchers become increasingly aware of their positionality, privilege, assumptions and biases. By considering how research and impact generation processes are mediated by context, power and voice, it may be possible to envision just transformations of knowledge systems that foreground the knowledge and needs of diverse groups, including those who have been historically marginalised, and without systematically recognising or privileging one group over another.

show abstract

Understanding and evidencing a broader range of ‘successes’ that can occur at the interface of marine science and policy

Cited by 22 publications

References 78 publications

Goals, challenges, and next steps in transdisciplinary fisheries research: perspectives and experiences from early-career researchers

Goals, challenges, and next steps in transdisciplinary fisheries research: perspectives and experiences from early-career researchers

Disentangling Obstacles to Knowledge Co-Production for Early-Career Researchers in the Marine Sciences

Re-thinking research impact: voice, context and power at the interface of science, policy and practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About