Abteilung Umweltsozialwissenschaften

array(2 items)
   publications => '22292,19890,19310,18945,17243' (29 chars)
   libraryUrl => '' (0 chars)

array(5 items)
   0 => Snowflake\Publications\Domain\Model\Publicationprototypepersistent entity (uid=22292, pid=124)
      originalId => protected22292 (integer)
      authors => protected'Deutsch, L.; Belcher, B.; Claus, R.; Hoffmann, S.' (69 chars)
      title => protected'Leading inter- and transdisciplinary research: lessons from applying theorie
         s of change to a strategic research program' (119 chars)
      journal => protected'Environmental Science and Policy' (32 chars)
      year => protected2021 (integer)
      volume => protected120 (integer)
      issue => protected'' (0 chars)
      startpage => protected'29' (2 chars)
      otherpage => protected'41' (2 chars)
      categories => protected'interdisciplinary; transdisciplinary; theory of change; leadership; urban wa
         ter management; research programs' (109 chars)
      description => protected'Theory of Change (ToC) has been promoted as a useful tool in sustainability 
         research for visioning, planning, communication, monitoring, evaluation and 
         learning. It involves a mapping of steps towards a desired long-term goal su
         pplemented with continuous reflection on how and why change is expected to h
         appen in a particular context. However, there is limited reported experience
          with the development and application of ToCs in inter- and transdisciplinar
         y research contexts. While some previous publications have focused on ex-pos
         t application, there has been little discussion about the process of develop
         ing and using ToCs in strategic planning and monitoring in large inter- and 
         transdisciplinary research programs. This article reports challenges and les
         sons learned from the experience of developing and using ToCs in the inter- 
         and transdisciplinary research program <em>Wings</em> (<em>W</em>ater and sa
         nitation <strong>i</strong>nnovations for <em>n</em>on-<em>g</em>rid <em>s</
         em>olutions). Challenges include (1) managing time constraints, (2) balancin
         g between concrete and abstract discussions, (3) ensuring diversity in group
          composition, (4) fluctuating between reservations and appreciation, and (5)
          fulfilling both service and science roles while leading the ToC process. Th
         e experience highlights the importance of alternating formal and informal in
         teraction formats throughout the process, ensuring heterogenous group format
         ion, involving early career scientists, being responsive to emergent needs a
         nd making the added value of developing and using ToCs explicit and tangible
          for all participants. Although these lessons are mainly derived from develo
         ping ToCs within the interdisciplinary program team, they can support other 
         programs in both their inter- and transdisciplinary research endeavors.' (1819 chars)
      serialnumber => protected'1462-9011' (9 chars)
      doi => protected'10.1016/j.envsci.2021.02.009' (28 chars)
      uid => protected22292 (integer)
      _localizedUid => protected22292 (integer)modified
      _languageUid => protectedNULL
      _versionedUid => protected22292 (integer)modified
      pid => protected124 (integer)
   1 => Snowflake\Publications\Domain\Model\Publicationprototypepersistent entity (uid=19890, pid=124)
      originalId => protected19890 (integer)
      authors => protected'Pohl,&nbsp;C.; Fam,&nbsp;D.; Hoffmann,&nbsp;S.; Mitchell,&nbsp;C.' (65 chars)
      title => protected'Exploring Julie Thompson Klein's framework for analysis of boundary work' (72 chars)
      journal => protected'Issues in Interdisciplinary Studies' (35 chars)
      year => protected2019 (integer)
      volume => protected37 (integer)
      issue => protected'2' (1 chars)
      startpage => protected'62' (2 chars)
      otherpage => protected'89' (2 chars)
      categories => protected'boundary crossing; boundary work; facilitating expertise; facilitating leade
         rship; interdisciplinarity; Julie Thompson Klein; transdisciplinarity' (145 chars)
      description => protected'Julie Thompson Klein’s contributions to interdisciplinary and transdiscipl
         inary research have enriched the way collaboration is discussed and handled 
         by introducing concepts of boundary work and boundary crossing from the fiel
         d of Science and Technology Studies. In recent years, she has been integrati
         ng those concepts into crossdisciplinarity, an effort culminating in the dev
         elopment of a framework for a forthcoming book <em>(Beyond Interdisciplinari
         ty: Boundary Work, Collaboration, and Communication in the 21st Century)</em
         >. With her permission, we have used an earlier version of her framework to 
         analyze boundary work and boundary crossing in transdisciplinary sustainable
          water management projects in Australia and Switzerland. The aim of using th
         e framework has been twofold: to explore and assess the heuristic value of t
         he framework, i.e. how it improves our conceptualization of boundary work in
          the two projects, and to examine the framework itself, i.e. whether some of
          the seven concepts involved are hard to work with or should be further deve
         loped.' (1070 chars)
      serialnumber => protected'1081-4760' (9 chars)
      doi => protected'' (0 chars)
      uid => protected19890 (integer)
      _localizedUid => protected19890 (integer)modified
      _languageUid => protectedNULL
      _versionedUid => protected19890 (integer)modified
      pid => protected124 (integer)
   2 => Snowflake\Publications\Domain\Model\Publicationprototypepersistent entity (uid=19310, pid=124)
      originalId => protected19310 (integer)
      authors => protected'Hoffmann,&nbsp;S.; Thompson Klein,&nbsp;J.; Pohl,&nbsp;C.' (57 chars)
      title => protected'Linking transdisciplinary research projects with science and practice at lar
         ge: introducing insights from knowledge utilization' (127 chars)
      journal => protected'Environmental Science and Policy' (32 chars)
      year => protected2019 (integer)
      volume => protected102 (integer)
      issue => protected'' (0 chars)
      startpage => protected'36' (2 chars)
      otherpage => protected'42' (2 chars)
      categories => protected'transdisciplinary research; socially robust knowledge; knowledge disseminati
         on; knowledge utilization; conceptual model; sustainability' (135 chars)
      description => protected'Recent empirical studies show a persistent gap between 'socially robust' kno
         wledge produced by transdisciplinary research projects and its ability to pr
         omote change on a large scale. Current discourses about the 'project-to-scie
         nce-and-practice-at-large gap' have focused mainly on exploring various cond
         itions that need to be fulfilled to produce 'socially robust' knowledge. Yet
         , those discourses have rarely built on the broader literature of knowledge 
         utilization, which Greenhalgh and Wieringa (2011) emphasize acknowledges 'th
         e fundamentally social ways in which knowledge emerges, circulates, and gets
          applied in practice.' Their insights are helpful in advancing our understan
         ding of why transdisciplinary research projects do or do not contribute to s
         ustainability on a large scale. Expanding Jahn et al. (2012)'s model of tran
         sdisciplinary research, we present a revised conceptual model of an ideal-ty
         pical, interactive and iterative transdisciplinary research process that add
         s two new phases from the field of knowledge utilization to their original t
         hree-phase model and accounts for the social and relational nature of knowle
         dge utilization. The revised model includes five phases through which transd
         isciplinary projects operate in different order: (i) defining sustainability
          problems, (ii) producing new knowledge, (iii) assessing new knowledge, (iv)
          disseminating new knowledge in realms of both science and practice and (v) 
         using new knowledge in both realms.' (1479 chars)
      serialnumber => protected'1462-9011' (9 chars)
      doi => protected'10.1016/j.envsci.2019.08.011' (28 chars)
      uid => protected19310 (integer)
      _localizedUid => protected19310 (integer)modified
      _languageUid => protectedNULL
      _versionedUid => protected19310 (integer)modified
      pid => protected124 (integer)
   3 => Snowflake\Publications\Domain\Model\Publicationprototypepersistent entity (uid=18945, pid=124)
      originalId => protected18945 (integer)
      authors => protected'Hitziger,&nbsp;M.; Aragrande,&nbsp;M.; Berezowski,&nbsp;J.&nbsp;A.; Canali,&
         nbsp;M.; Del Rio Vilas,&nbsp;V.; Hoffmann,&nbsp;S.; Igrejas,&nbsp;G.; Keune,
         &nbsp;H.; Lux,&nbsp;A.; Bruce,&nbsp;M.; Palenberg,&nbsp;M.&nbsp;A.; Pohl,&nb
         sp;C.; Radeski,&nbsp;M.; Richter,&nbsp;I.; Robledo Abad,&nbsp;C.; Salerno,&n
         bsp;R.&nbsp;H.; Savic,&nbsp;S.; Schirmer,&nbsp;J.; Vogler,&nbsp;B.&nbsp;R.; 
         Rüegg,&nbsp;S.&nbsp;R.' (403 chars)
      title => protected'EVOLvINC: evaluating knowledge integration capacity in multistakeholder gove
         rnance' (82 chars)
      journal => protected'Ecology and Society' (19 chars)
      year => protected2019 (integer)
      volume => protected24 (integer)
      issue => protected'2' (1 chars)
      startpage => protected'36 (16 pp.)' (11 chars)
      otherpage => protected'' (0 chars)
      categories => protected'knowledge integration; process evaluation; multistakeholder governance; poli
         cy cycle; transdisciplinarity' (105 chars)
      description => protected'Research and policy processes in many fields, such as sustainability and hea
         lth, are increasingly relying on transdisciplinary cooperation among a multi
         tude of governmental, nongovernmental, and private actors from local to glob
         al levels. In the absence of hierarchical chains of command, multistakeholde
         r governance may accommodate conflicting or diverse interests and facilitate
          collective action, but its effectiveness depends on its capacity to integra
         te systems, transformation, and target knowledge. Approaches to foster such 
         governance are nascent and quickly evolving, and methodological standards to
          facilitate comparison and learning from best practice are needed. However, 
         there is currently no evaluation approach that (i) comprehensively assesses 
         the capacity for knowledge integration in multistakeholder governance, (ii) 
         draws on the best available knowledge that is being developed in various fie
         lds, and (iii) combines a systematic and transferable methodological design 
         with pragmatic feasibility.<br /><br /> We brought together 20 experts from 
         institutions in nine countries, all working on evaluation approaches for col
         laborative science–policy initiatives. In a synthesis process that include
         d a 2-day workshop and follow-up work among a core group of participants, we
          developed a tool for evaluating knowledge integration capacity in multistak
         eholder governance (EVOLvINC). Its 23 indicators incorporate previously defi
         ned criteria and components of transdisciplinary evaluations into a single, 
         comprehensive framework that operationalizes the capacity for integrating sy
         stems, target, and transformation knowledge during an initiative’s (a) des
         ign and planning processes at the policy formulation stage, (b) organization
          and working processes at the implementation stage, and (c) sharing and lear
         ning processes at the evaluation stage of the policy cycle. EVOLvINC is (i) 
         implemented through a questionnaire, (ii) builds on established indicators w
         here possible, (iii) off...' (3041 chars)
      serialnumber => protected'1708-3087' (9 chars)
      doi => protected'10.5751/ES-10935-240236' (23 chars)
      uid => protected18945 (integer)
      _localizedUid => protected18945 (integer)modified
      _languageUid => protectedNULL
      _versionedUid => protected18945 (integer)modified
      pid => protected124 (integer)
   4 => Snowflake\Publications\Domain\Model\Publicationprototypepersistent entity (uid=17243, pid=124)
      originalId => protected17243 (integer)
      authors => protected'Maag,&nbsp;S.; Alexander,&nbsp;T.&nbsp;J.; Kase,&nbsp;R.; Hoffmann,&nbsp;S.' (75 chars)
      title => protected'Indicators for measuring the contributions of individual knowledge brokers' (74 chars)
      journal => protected'Environmental Science and Policy' (32 chars)
      year => protected2018 (integer)
      volume => protected89 (integer)
      issue => protected'' (0 chars)
      startpage => protected'1' (1 chars)
      otherpage => protected'9' (1 chars)
      categories => protected'knowledge brokering; evaluation; contribution analysis; process indicators; 
         attributable results indicators' (107 chars)
      description => protected'An increasing number of knowledge brokers work at the interface between rese
         arch, policy and practice. Their function is to facilitate processes to fost
         er mutual learning among research, policy and practice. For some knowledge b
         rokers, practical methodologies to assess the quality of their work is an im
         portant concern. While frameworks exist for assessing research impact at the
          level of a project or program, few are available for assessing contribution
         s of individual knowledge brokers. In response to this, we have compiled a s
         et of indicators to measure the quantity and quality of the contributions of
          individual knowledge brokers to projects, programs or platforms at the inte
         rface between research, policy and practice. The set is based on a review of
          the literature and the experience of a group of knowledge brokers active in
          water research and management in Switzerland, including the co-authors of t
         his article. The set can be used by knowledge brokers to identify ways to im
         prove the effectiveness of their practices and to demonstrate the benefit of
          their work to their employers and other stakeholders. Our approach is flexi
         ble enough that it can be applied where there are limited resources availabl
         e for assessment.' (1233 chars)
      serialnumber => protected'1462-9011' (9 chars)
      doi => protected'10.1016/j.envsci.2018.06.002' (28 chars)
      uid => protected17243 (integer)
      _localizedUid => protected17243 (integer)modified
      _languageUid => protectedNULL
      _versionedUid => protected17243 (integer)modified
      pid => protected124 (integer)