IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v11y2024i1d10.1057_s41599-024-02891-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mainstreaming social sciences expertise in UK environment policy and practice organisations: retrospect and prospect

Author

Listed:
  • Carol Morris

    (University of Nottingham)

  • Beth F. T. Brockett

    (Forest Research)

  • Sara Selwood

    (Unaffiliated)

  • Victoria Carr

    (Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB))

  • Jilly Hall

    (Supporting the People who Support Nature (SPSN))

  • Joelene Hughes

    (RSPB)

  • Bianca Ambrose-Oji

    (Forest Research)

Abstract

Building upon the concept of mainstreaming social sciences within conservation, we consider their mainstreaming, and so integration, within UK environment policy and practice (EPP) organisations. The paper responds to increasing calls to recognise the essential role of social sciences in addressing global environmental crises across policy, practice and research. An actor-oriented approach was deployed, producing empirical information from a multi-stage, co-designed, collaborative study involving 19 social scientists from a range of EPP organisations, to understand how they experience the mainstreaming of social sciences. The findings contribute to debates about the politics of knowledge in organisational domains other than those focused on research, specifically EPP organisations. Evidence was found of recent positive changes in how social sciences are perceived, resourced and utilised within EPP, as well as examples of positive impact. However, although EPP organisations are recognising the opportunities that social sciences expertise brings, in practice social sciences still face barriers to effective integration. Many of the challenges faced by the social sciences within academic multi-discipline research (e.g., late, narrow, or selective enrolment) were also experienced in EPP organisations, along with some unique challenges. Informed by the findings, the paper proposes a set of integration indicators designed to assess organisational progress toward addressing the observed challenges. It is recommended that these indicators are employed at a strategic level by EPP organisations seeking to better integrate social sciences expertise into their work.

Suggested Citation

  • Carol Morris & Beth F. T. Brockett & Sara Selwood & Victoria Carr & Jilly Hall & Joelene Hughes & Bianca Ambrose-Oji, 2024. "Mainstreaming social sciences expertise in UK environment policy and practice organisations: retrospect and prospect," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-11, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-02891-z
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-024-02891-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-024-02891-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-024-02891-z?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. Jessica H. Phoenix & Lucy G. Atkinson & Hannah Baker, 2019. "Creating and communicating social research for policymakers in government," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-11, December.
    2. Nadine Marshall & Neil Adger & Simon Attwood & Katrina Brown & Charles Crissman & Christopher Cvitanovic & Cassandra De Young & Margaret Gooch & Craig James & Sabine Jessen & Dave Johnson & Paul Marsh, 2017. "Empirically derived guidance for social scientists to influence environmental policy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-9, March.
    3. Noel Castree & William M. Adams & John Barry & Daniel Brockington & Bram Büscher & Esteve Corbera & David Demeritt & Rosaleen Duffy & Ulrike Felt & Katja Neves & Peter Newell & Luigi Pellizzoni & Kate, 2014. "Changing the intellectual climate," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(9), pages 763-768, September.
    4. Cary Coglianese & Shana M. Starobin, 2020. "Social Science and the Analysis of Environmental Policy," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(5), pages 578-604, September.
    5. Jane Mills & Hannah Chiswell & Peter Gaskell & Paul Courtney & Beth Brockett & George Cusworth & Matt Lobley, 2021. "Developing Farm-Level Social Indicators for Agri-Environment Schemes: A Focus on the Agents of Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-22, July.
    6. Carol Morris & Minna Kaljonen & Kadri Aavik & Bálint Balázs & Matthew Cole & Ben Coles & Sophia Efstathiou & Tracey Fallon & Mike Foden & Eva Haifa Giraud & Mike Goodman & Eleanor Hadley Kershaw & Ric, 2021. "Priorities for social science and humanities research on the challenges of moving beyond animal-based food systems," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, December.
    7. Maxwell Boykoff & David Oonk, 2020. "Evaluating the perils and promises of academic climate advocacy," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(1), pages 27-41, November.
    8. Michael Hallsworth, 2023. "A manifesto for applying behavioural science," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(3), pages 310-322, March.
    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. Fateh Belaïd & Charlotte Unger, 2024. "Crafting effective climate, energy, and environmental policy: time for action," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-5, December.

    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. Christopher Cvitanovic & Marie F Löf & Albert V Norström & Mark S Reed, 2018. "Building university-based boundary organisations that facilitate impacts on environmental policy and practice," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-19, September.
    2. Ogawa, Keishi & Garrod, Guy & Yagi, Hironori, 2023. "Sustainability strategies and stakeholder management for upland farming," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    3. Kenji Otsuka, 2022. "Co‐optation in co‐production: Maintaining credibility and legitimacy in transboundary environmental governance in East Asia," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(6), pages 771-797, November.
    4. Georgios Archimidis Tsalidis, 2020. "Integrating Individual Behavior Dimension in Social Life Cycle Assessment in an Energy Transition Context," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-20, November.
    5. Zwartkruis, Joyce V. & Berg, Holger & Hof, Andries F. & Kok, Marcel T.J., 2020. "Agricultural nature conservation in the Netherlands: Three lenses on transition pathways," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    6. Оlha Flyarkovska & Viktoria Melnychuk & Ryslan Dumenko, 2023. "A Comprehensive Approach To The Management Of Psychological Services In The Education System Of Ukraine: Economic Component," Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, Publishing house "Baltija Publishing", vol. 9(5).
    7. Prager, Katrin, 2022. "Implementing policy interventions to support farmer cooperation for environmental benefits," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    8. Sergii Stepanenko & Karina Nemashkalo & Liudmyla Salionovych, 2023. "Toolkit For Social Responsibility Of Business In The System Of Inclusive Corporate Management Of Sustainable Development Of Ukrainian Agricultural Companies," Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, Publishing house "Baltija Publishing", vol. 9(5).
    9. Fulvio Biddau & Sonia Brondi & Paolo Francesco Cottone, 2022. "Unpacking the Psychosocial Dimension of Decarbonization between Change and Stability: A Systematic Review in the Social Science Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-28, April.
    10. Turnheim, Bruno & Nykvist, Björn, 2019. "Opening up the feasibility of sustainability transitions pathways (STPs): Representations, potentials, and conditions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 775-788.
    11. Wim Carton & Adeniyi Asiyanbi & Silke Beck & Holly J. Buck & Jens F. Lund, 2020. "Negative emissions and the long history of carbon removal," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(6), November.
    12. Stephan Hügel & Anna R. Davies, 2020. "Public participation, engagement, and climate change adaptation: A review of the research literature," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), July.
    13. Muradian, Roldan & Pascual, Unai, 2020. "Ecological economics in the age of fear," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    14. Rodrigo Luiz Morais-da-Silva & Eduardo Guedes Villar & Germano Glufke Reis & Hermes Sanctorum & Carla Forte Maiolino Molento, 2022. "The expected impact of cultivated and plant-based meats on jobs: the views of experts from Brazil, the United States and Europe," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-14, December.
    15. Julia Bentz, 2020. "Learning about climate change in, with and through art," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(3), pages 1595-1612, October.
    16. Harriet Hawkins & Anja Kanngieser, 2017. "Artful climate change communication: overcoming abstractions, insensibilities, and distances," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(5), September.
    17. Nicole Klenk & Anna Fiume & Katie Meehan & Cerian Gibbes, 2017. "Local knowledge in climate adaptation research: moving knowledge frameworks from extraction to co‐production," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(5), September.
    18. E. Lisa F. Schipper & Navroz K. Dubash & Yacob Mulugetta, 2021. "Climate change research and the search for solutions: rethinking interdisciplinarity," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 1-11, October.
    19. Ingram, Julie & Maye, Damian & Bailye, Clive & Barnes, Andrew & Bear, Christopher & Bell, Matthew & Cutress, David & Davies, Lynfa & de Boon, Auvikki & Dinnie, Liz & Gairdner, Julian & Hafferty, Caitl, 2022. "What are the priority research questions for digital agriculture?," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    20. Breslow, Sara Jo, 2015. "Accounting for neoliberalism: “Social drivers” in environmental management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 420-429.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-02891-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    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.