IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v111y2020ics1389934118303186.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

German forest management stakeholders at the science-society interface: Their views on problem definition, knowledge production and research utilization

Author

Listed:
  • Juerges, Nataly
  • Jahn, Stephanie

Abstract

Facing ever more pressing global environmental problems, applied sciences like forest research are expected to benefit society beyond the mere production of new knowledge. However, newly gained scientific knowledge is often not brought into practical application. While scholarly conceptualizations on how to design the science-society interface accordingly have been widely discussed in academia, little attention has been paid to the stakeholders’ views thereof.

Suggested Citation

  • Juerges, Nataly & Jahn, Stephanie, 2020. "German forest management stakeholders at the science-society interface: Their views on problem definition, knowledge production and research utilization," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:111:y:2020:i:c:s1389934118303186
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2019.102076
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934118303186
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2019.102076?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Green, Kathryn E. & Lund, Jens Friis, 2015. "The politics of expertise in participatory forestry: a case from Tanzania," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 27-34.
    2. Jahn, Thomas & Bergmann, Matthias & Keil, Florian, 2012. "Transdisciplinarity: Between mainstreaming and marginalization," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1-10.
    3. Klenk, Nicole Lisa & Wyatt, Stephen, 2015. "The design and management of multi-stakeholder research networks to maximize knowledge mobilization and innovation opportunities in the forest sector," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 77-86.
    4. Nowotny, Helga, 1999. "The place of people in our knowledge," European Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 247-262, May.
    5. Christian Pohl & Stephan Rist & Anne Zimmermann & Patricia Fry & Ghana S Gurung & Flurina Schneider & Chinwe Ifejika Speranza & Boniface Kiteme & Sébastian Boillat & Elvira Serrano & Gertrude Hirsch H, 2010. "Researchers' roles in knowledge co-production: experience from sustainability research in Kenya, Switzerland, Bolivia and Nepal," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(4), pages 267-281, May.
    6. Juerges, Nataly & Newig, Jens, 2015. "How interest groups adapt to the changing forest governance landscape in the EU: A case study from Germany," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 228-235.
    7. Pregernig, Michael, 2000. "Putting science into practice: the diffusion of scientific knowledge exemplified by the Austrian `Research Initiative Against Forest Decline'," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 165-176, August.
    8. Brandt, Patric & Ernst, Anna & Gralla, Fabienne & Luederitz, Christopher & Lang, Daniel J. & Newig, Jens & Reinert, Florian & Abson, David J. & von Wehrden, Henrik, 2013. "A review of transdisciplinary research in sustainability science," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 1-15.
    9. Salomaa, Anna & Paloniemi, Riikka & Hujala, Teppo & Rantala, Salla & Arponen, Anni & Niemelä, Jari, 2016. "The use of knowledge in evidence-informed voluntary conservation of Finnish forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 90-98.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stevanov, Mirjana & Krott, Max, 2021. "Embedding scientific information into forestry praxis: Explaining knowledge transfer in transdisciplinary projects by using German case," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hubeau, Marianne & Marchand, Fleur & Coteur, Ine & Mondelaers, Koen & Debruyne, Lies & Van Huylenbroeck, Guido, 2017. "A new agri-food systems sustainability approach to identify shared transformation pathways towards sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 52-63.
    2. Robert Axelsson & Magnus Ljung & Malgorzata Blicharska & Michael Frisk & Marianne Henningsson & Grzegorz Mikusiński & Lennart Folkeson & Görgen Göransson & Sofia Jönsson-Ekström & Anders Sjölund & Jan, 2020. "The Challenge of Transdisciplinary Research: A Case Study of Learning by Evaluation for Sustainable Transport Infrastructures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-24, August.
    3. Siebenhüner, Bernd, 2018. "Conflicts in Transdisciplinary Research: Reviewing Literature and Analysing a Case of Climate Adaptation in Northwestern Germany," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 117-127.
    4. Stephanie Jahn & Jens Newig & Daniel J. Lang & Judith Kahle & Matthias Bergmann, 2022. "Demarcating transdisciplinary research in sustainability science—Five clusters of research modes based on evidence from 59 research projects," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(2), pages 343-357, April.
    5. Arora-Jonsson, Seema, 2016. "Does resilience have a culture? Ecocultures and the politics of knowledge production," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 98-107.
    6. Patricia Romero-Lankao & Daniel M. Gnatz & Olga Wilhelmi & Mary Hayden, 2016. "Urban Sustainability and Resilience: From Theory to Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-19, November.
    7. Viola Hakkarainen & Katri Mäkinen‐Rostedt & Andra Horcea‐Milcu & Dalia D'Amato & Johanna Jämsä & Katriina Soini, 2022. "Transdisciplinary research in natural resources management: Towards an integrative and transformative use of co‐concepts," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(2), pages 309-325, April.
    8. Adena R. Rissman & Lori Barrow, 2019. "Characteristics of collaborative, interdisciplinary, and engaged research among graduate students in environmental conservation," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 9(3), pages 297-310, September.
    9. Schneidewind, Uwe & Singer-Brodowski, Mandy & Augenstein, Karoline & Stelzer, Franziska, 2016. "Pledge for a transformative science: A conceptual framework," Wuppertal Papers 191, Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy.
    10. Troullaki, Katerina & Rozakis, Stelios & Kostakis, Vasilis, 2021. "Bridging barriers in sustainability research: Α review from sustainability science to life cycle sustainability assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    11. Lauren Rosenberg & Mark Swilling & Walter J V Vermeulen, 2018. "Practices of Third Wave Coffee: A Burundian Producer's Perspective," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 199-214, February.
    12. Adela Itzkin & Jai Kumar Clifford-Holmes & Mary Scholes & Kaera Coetzer, 2022. "Approaches to Enhance Integration and Monitoring for Social-Ecological Systems," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-24, October.
    13. Hoffmann, Sabine & Pohl, Christian & Hering, Janet G., 2017. "Exploring transdisciplinary integration within a large research program: Empirical lessons from four thematic synthesis processes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 678-692.
    14. Spangenberg, Joachim H. & Görg, Christoph & Settele, Josef, 2015. "Stakeholder involvement in ESS research and governance: Between conceptual ambition and practical experiences – risks, challenges and tested tools," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 201-211.
    15. Melissa Robson-Williams & Bruce Small & Roger Robson-Williams & Nick Kirk, 2021. "Handrails through the Swamp? A Pilot to Test the Integration and Implementation Science Framework in Complex Real-World Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-23, May.
    16. Evelien de Hoop, 2020. "More Democratic Sustainability Governance through Participatory Knowledge Production? A Framework and Systematic Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-30, July.
    17. Tobias Luthe, 2017. "Success in Transdisciplinary Sustainability Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-24, January.
    18. Schmidt, Laura & Falk, Thomas & Siegmund-Schultze, Marianna & Spangenberg, Joachim H., 2020. "The Objectives of Stakeholder Involvement in Transdisciplinary Research. A Conceptual Framework for a Reflective and Reflexive Practise," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    19. Ana Guzmán Ruiz & Meredith Dobbie & Rebekah Brown, 2017. "Insights and future directions of transdisciplinary practice in the urban water sector," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 7(2), pages 251-263, June.
    20. Claire Lamine, 2018. "Transdisciplinarity in Research about Agrifood Systems Transitions: A Pragmatist Approach to Processes of Attachment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-18, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:111:y:2020:i:c:s1389934118303186. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.