Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Developping a transdisciplinary research project - a case study

348 views

Published on

How to develop an impactful transdisciplinary project trough co-creation? Design principles and best practice example case study from Failand to Winland.

Published in: Science
  • Be the first to comment

Developping a transdisciplinary research project - a case study

  1. 1. CASE: FROM FAILAND TO WINLAND DEVELOPPING A TRANSDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH PROJECT Iina Koskinen DEMOS HELSINKI @iinakos iina.koskinen@demoshelsinki.fi
  2. 2. OUTLINE DESIGN PRINCIPLES OF A TRANSDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH PROJECT HOW WE PROMOTE TRANSDISCIPLINARITY IN WINLAND?
  3. 3. 10/5/16 DESIGN PRINCIPLES OF A TRANSDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH PROJECT
  4. 4. Sustainability challenges needs new ways of collaboration, knowledge production and decision-making HOW CAN SCIENCE HELP TO SOLVE THESE CHALLENGES?
  5. 5. TRANSDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH Rexflexive, integrative method-driven scientific principle aiming at the solution or transition of societal problems and concurrently of related scientific problems by differentiating and integrating knowledge from various scientific and societal bodies of knowledge - Daniel Lang et al. 2012
  6. 6. Knowledge production beyond problem analysis and towards transformation and change Involvement of various communities of knowledge Co-creation of research among scientists and stakeholders Design principles
  7. 7. Knowledge production beyond problem analysis and towards transformation and change ● focus on societally relevant problems ● knowledge for both scientific and societal practice Knowledge concerning the current situation SYSTEM’S KNOWLEDGE Knowledge concerning the target situation TARGET KNOWLEDGE Shaping the transition from the current to the target situation TRANSFORMATION KNOWLEDGE IMPLEMENTATION From: ProClim, Research on Sustainability and Global Change - Visions in Science Policy by Swiss Researchers, 1997 Design principle I
  8. 8. CO-CREATION COMMUNICATION RESEARCH IMPACT INTERACTION CHANGE Science shaping society
  9. 9. IMPACT CO-CREATION COMMUNICATION RESEARCH INTERACTION CHANGE Agency: capabilities, motivation Understanding and learning: roles and responsabilities Shared experience and anticipation: allies, partnerships New paradigm / systemic change Incremental change Society: Public opinion, policy, laws, structures Organization: Code of conduct, new products and services Individual: News way of thinking and acting Knowledge products: articles, reports, policy briefs etc Other products: patents, technologies etc Concepts: New models for products, business etc Networks
  10. 10. Involvement of various communities of knowledge: Various disciplines ● Scientific excellence (e.g. research questions are scientifically sound) ● Broader and alternative perspectives and time frames ● Understanding of the interconnections and background of the phenomena People outside academia - stakeholders ● integrate the best available knowledge on real life practices ● values, norms and preferences ● create ownership for solutions and options STAKEHOLDER: Person/group affecting or affected by the research A gatekeeper who can promote or inhibit transformation in society. NGO’s, business, ministries, decision-makers, citizens Design principle II
  11. 11. Co-creation of research Challenge: How to promote transformation? ● Increase in knowledge does not correlate with change of actions ● lack of knowledge of real-world practices Solution: ● Co-creation: Joint framing of research problems, questions and co-production of knowledge among researchers and stakeholders ● Impact collaboration: scientific and societal impact Benefits: ● knowledge that answers to stakeholders needs, that is credible and useful for them ● Continuous dialogue anticipates and mitigates conflicts ● Enforcing the capabilities of stakeholders to understand research and research results - easier communication of results Design principle III
  12. 12. Preliminary collaboration: Identifying stakeholders and mapping needs Co-creation in a research project Co-creation of policy recommendations and key messages Dissemination and implementation of results in scientific and societal practice Joint framing of research problems, questions and end-products Research phase: interviews, consutaltion and collaboration CO M M U N ICA TIO N CO-PRODUCTION OF RESEARCH CO-DESIGN OF RESEARCH TRANSFORMATION IMPACT COLLABORATION Adopted from Future Earth Initial Design Report 2012
  13. 13. 10/5/16 HOW WE PROMOTE TRANSDISCIPLINARITY IN WINLAND?
  14. 14. Who is Winland?
  15. 15. • Strategic research funding instrument by the Academy of Finland • Themes proposed by the Prime Minister’s Office: Skilled Employees – Successful Labour Market, Health, Welfare and Lifestyles, Security in a Networked World, Urbanising Society • 13 consortiums in 2016–2019 - total funding 50,2 million € Funding
  16. 16. Why Winland? Kuva: Marko Keskinen CHALLENGE: traditional focus on political and economical changes, environmental security security, i.e. food, energy and water security and their connections crucial to comprehensive security What kind of security threats and risks could paralyse Finland so fundamentally that “Winland becomes “Failand”? HYPOTESES (Security equation): Sudden shocks and slowly developing pressures to our energy and food system and wrong and insufficient policy measures can threaten Finland’s comprehensive security in the future
  17. 17. What is Winland? How do the shocks, pressures and policy measures affect comprehensive security of Finland? How can we improve resilience of Finnish society to food and energy security-related threats? The key scientific objectives: i) to study in interdisciplinary manner the critical aspects related to food and energy security and resilient planning and policy-making processes ii) to establish an integrative methodological ecosystem combining cutting-edge analytical research methods with integrative approaches The key societal objectives: For key stakeholders in relevant sectors of comprehensive security: i) a systemic view on critical water, food and energy security aspects in Finland, including their regional and global linkages ii) enhanced capability to prepare Finland to overcome food- and energy-related threats iii) increased dialogue between key actors on Finland’s internal and external security threats.
  18. 18. Resilience and learning Law and policy Decision making THEMES PROCESSES Scenarios: from Failand to Winland Co-creation with the researchers and stakeholders COMPREHENSIVE SECURITY Energy security Food security Water security and climate How Winland? Quantitative (modelling, statistics, spatial analysis) Qualitative (policy and legal analysis, problem structuring and decision-analysis)
  19. 19. Interaction in Winland
  20. 20. Impact goals and key messages DESIRED CHANGE: Long-term goal: Stakeholders adapt new paradigm of comprehensive security Short-term goal: Specific strategy and legislative processes (such Security strategy of Finland) take interconnections among energy, food and water security into consideration Outcome: Security strategy of Finland has adapted the multidimensional concept of comprehensive security, stakeholder’s improved understanding KEY MESSAGES: Energy, food and water lay the basis for the functioning of our society. Security strategies recognize them sectionally but their interdependencies and global, regional and local pressures have been neglected. This negligence threatens Finland’s security and may lead to collapse of Finnish society. Winland aims to prevent this collapse by providing understanding of these interdepedencies and policy recommendations to support resilient Finnish society.
  21. 21. Stakeholder analysis KNOWLEDGE USER Who: uses research in work / everyday life Inner circle: support Winland’s agenda (certain ministries, companies, public institutions for security supply, research institution etc) - consultation and co-creation Outer circle: strong views about security issues What: targeted communication to build a dialogue (certain ministries, especially of interior and defense) GATEKEEPER Who: can promote or inhibit change in society (decision-makers, key persons from ministries) What: continuous contact and big effort INFLUENCED Who: persons who have limited power but are influenced negatively or positively by the knowledge (consumers/citizens, NGO’s, regional decision-makers and civil servants) What: communication of agenda and results STAKEHOLDER ADVISORY BOARD
  22. 22. Deepen I Awareness-raising Policy recommendations from research Solve Solutions, policy recommendation Share co-creation of key messages, dissemation 2016 2017 2017 2018 2018 2019 Preparedness exercise of the National Emergy Supply organization Start Research themes: relevance, knowledge needs, end-products Networks and capabilities 2016 2017 2018 2019 Stakeholders/process analysis, Impact goals Key messages Identifying and joining public discussion Policy impact - building relations - communication of results III Subproject/researchers own interaction and co-creation throughout the project II Joint interaction of the consortium I Co-creation workshops Deepen II scenarios Towards joint Winland vision Interaction activities Scenarios: Towards joint Failand vision Collaboration with ministries, NGO’s, business etc.
  23. 23. THANK YOU! Iina Koskinen DEMOS HELSINKI @iinakos iina.koskinen@demoshelsinki.fi www.demoshelsinki.fi

×