IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v30y2021i1p26-38..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating socially engaged climate research: Scientists’ visions of a climate resilient U.S. Southwest
[A How-to Guide for Coproduction of Actionable Science]

Author

Listed:
  • Gigi Owen

Abstract

Socially engaged science and collaborative research practices offer promising ways to address complex environmental and societal problems like climate variability and climate change. However, it is unclear if and how these types of collaborative knowledge production result in tangible impacts. Drawing from a 6-year evaluation, this article investigates the outcomes and contributions of ten collaborative research projects supported by a federally funded climate research program in the US Southwest. Based on a series of narratives that outline researchers’ objectives, anticipated outcomes are compared to those that emerged over a 6-year period. Results indicate several contributions that the program has made toward raising awareness about climate issues in the US Southwest, increasing capacity to adapt to climate change and climate variability, and building lasting individual and institutional collaborative relationships. However, researchers sometimes envision direct applications of their work, such as informing policy, planning, and decision-making, to be different than what occurred within the 6-year timeframe. Further exploration of these results reveals implicit assumptions in understanding how scientific information translates into use. This article offers insight into how researchers envision their impact, the management and development of a mission-oriented research program, and the use of evaluation to understand how collaborative research contributes to societal and environmental change.

Suggested Citation

  • Gigi Owen, 2021. "Evaluating socially engaged climate research: Scientists’ visions of a climate resilient U.S. Southwest [A How-to Guide for Coproduction of Actionable Science]," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(1), pages 26-38.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:30:y:2021:i:1:p:26-38.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvaa028
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    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:oup:rseval:v:30:y:2021:i:1:p:26-38.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    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.