This brief synthesizes the findings of a recently conducted workshop that identified the challenges of uniting practitioners, researchers and funders for better Water, Sanitation & Hygiene programs outcomes.
This document discusses the challenges of linking research to end users and decision makers. It identifies several challenges, including researchers and end users speaking different languages, difficulties defining practical problems as research questions, and uncertainties around how research will be applied. It then provides solutions such as collaborating with end users early in the research process, using knowledge brokers to facilitate communication, providing case studies and funding to support knowledge translation activities, and connecting researchers and end users through databases and forums. The overall goal is to improve how research informs real-world policy and practice decisions.
This document provides guidelines for developing case studies about architectural projects. It includes sections on project abstracts, perspectives, analysis, and submission guidelines. The intended purpose is to create a body of knowledge about architecture practice through rigorous case studies. Case studies can be used for education in schools of architecture and continuing education for practitioners. They provide context and lessons about the complexity of projects and decision making in architectural practice.
A Step By Step Guide To Monitoring And EvaluationHeather Strinden
This document provides an overview of monitoring and evaluation (M&E) for community groups working on climate change and energy projects. It discusses why M&E is important, including improving projects, demonstrating effectiveness, and contributing to the evidence base. The document outlines key steps for groups to take in planning and implementing M&E, such as deciding what to monitor, involving stakeholders, clarifying objectives, and identifying relevant questions. It also provides examples of M&E methods and links to additional resources.
Public engagement with postgraduate research june 2013VreckaScott
This document discusses public engagement with postgraduate research. It begins by introducing a project aimed at embedding public engagement within the research culture of the Open University. It then discusses the concept of scholarship of engagement and different types of thinking around public engagement. The rest of the document focuses on planning public engagement activities, the current UK agenda around public engagement, and considerations for career development and practical planning regarding public engagement.
Supporting mutual learning around impact pathways and research to policy proc...The Impact Initiative
This document discusses supporting mutual learning around impact pathways and research to policy processes. It identifies several key barriers to impact, including engaging with non-academic audiences, building mutual learning, developing networks and relationships, and addressing incentives. It outlines lessons learned, such as planning engagement from the start, partnering with non-academic actors, and focusing events on relationship building. The document proposes that the Impact Lab can help by co-producing learning guides on effective engagement approaches and sharing case studies of impact strategies and lessons learned from research teams.
This document discusses challenges in linking research to policymaking and efforts to address this "know-do gap." It describes participatory action research (PAR) as an approach that can help bridge this gap by involving stakeholders like policymakers, citizens, and researchers in jointly understanding problems and designing potential solutions through collaborative and iterative research, action, and reflection. The document suggests that PAR could help policymakers by providing a starting point for deliberations on challenges they face.
This document proposes a South-South collaboration called CESSAF between the Asian subcontinent and Africa to share knowledge on sustainable urban living. It discusses establishing the PEI-Science, Technology, and Resource Centre in New Delhi to facilitate knowledge sharing activities between partner institutions. This would include joint research, training programs, student and faculty exchanges to build capacity and further sustainable development goals in both regions.
This document discusses the challenges of linking research to end users and decision makers. It identifies several challenges, including researchers and end users speaking different languages, difficulties defining practical problems as research questions, and uncertainties around how research will be applied. It then provides solutions such as collaborating with end users early in the research process, using knowledge brokers to facilitate communication, providing case studies and funding to support knowledge translation activities, and connecting researchers and end users through databases and forums. The overall goal is to improve how research informs real-world policy and practice decisions.
This document provides guidelines for developing case studies about architectural projects. It includes sections on project abstracts, perspectives, analysis, and submission guidelines. The intended purpose is to create a body of knowledge about architecture practice through rigorous case studies. Case studies can be used for education in schools of architecture and continuing education for practitioners. They provide context and lessons about the complexity of projects and decision making in architectural practice.
A Step By Step Guide To Monitoring And EvaluationHeather Strinden
This document provides an overview of monitoring and evaluation (M&E) for community groups working on climate change and energy projects. It discusses why M&E is important, including improving projects, demonstrating effectiveness, and contributing to the evidence base. The document outlines key steps for groups to take in planning and implementing M&E, such as deciding what to monitor, involving stakeholders, clarifying objectives, and identifying relevant questions. It also provides examples of M&E methods and links to additional resources.
Public engagement with postgraduate research june 2013VreckaScott
This document discusses public engagement with postgraduate research. It begins by introducing a project aimed at embedding public engagement within the research culture of the Open University. It then discusses the concept of scholarship of engagement and different types of thinking around public engagement. The rest of the document focuses on planning public engagement activities, the current UK agenda around public engagement, and considerations for career development and practical planning regarding public engagement.
Supporting mutual learning around impact pathways and research to policy proc...The Impact Initiative
This document discusses supporting mutual learning around impact pathways and research to policy processes. It identifies several key barriers to impact, including engaging with non-academic audiences, building mutual learning, developing networks and relationships, and addressing incentives. It outlines lessons learned, such as planning engagement from the start, partnering with non-academic actors, and focusing events on relationship building. The document proposes that the Impact Lab can help by co-producing learning guides on effective engagement approaches and sharing case studies of impact strategies and lessons learned from research teams.
This document discusses challenges in linking research to policymaking and efforts to address this "know-do gap." It describes participatory action research (PAR) as an approach that can help bridge this gap by involving stakeholders like policymakers, citizens, and researchers in jointly understanding problems and designing potential solutions through collaborative and iterative research, action, and reflection. The document suggests that PAR could help policymakers by providing a starting point for deliberations on challenges they face.
This document proposes a South-South collaboration called CESSAF between the Asian subcontinent and Africa to share knowledge on sustainable urban living. It discusses establishing the PEI-Science, Technology, and Resource Centre in New Delhi to facilitate knowledge sharing activities between partner institutions. This would include joint research, training programs, student and faculty exchanges to build capacity and further sustainable development goals in both regions.
This document describes a challenge to develop a system to connect patients and stakeholders with researchers. It provides criteria for evaluating proposed conceptual models or prototypes for a matching system. The challenge aims to facilitate meaningful engagement throughout the research process, as required by PCORI funding announcements. Winners will receive $10,000 or $40,000 to further develop their proposal. The submission deadline is April 15th, with winners to be announced at a spring conference. The evaluation will focus on technical feasibility, usability, scalability, and maximizing patient-centeredness and scientific rigor.
The document is the 2014 annual report of the Purdue Center for the Environment. It provides an overview of the Center's activities in 2014, including renewing its strategic vision with a focus on human health, ecosystems, and environmental decision-making. It summarizes new faculty hires in sustainability-related fields and increased external grant funding. The Director expresses excitement over undergraduate research involvement and soundscape education projects emerging from earlier Center funding.
This document outlines the scope and limitations of a proposed study exploring the efficacy of using social media platforms for online English classes. The study will focus on examining teaching approaches, student engagement levels, and the overall effectiveness of social media. However, it acknowledges limitations such as results only applying to specific platforms and demographics studied, inability to capture the full range of teaching methods, and lack of consideration for all cultural and contextual factors. Defining limitations is important to understand the context of the study's findings and avoid overly broad generalizations.
The document discusses an organization called Research in Practice that aims to promote the use of research evidence to improve outcomes for children and families. It does this through Change Projects, which involve practitioners collaborating to develop tools to apply research findings in practice. The document describes a recent Change Project focused on re-engaging young people in learning at key stage 3. Participants were introduced to research on disengagement and will work to inform local policies and support practitioners on this issue.
RECODE, an initiative lead by McConnell Foundation, and UpSocial are researching how Canadian post-secondary institutions could adapt to more adequately address community needs.
Laura Eyre and Martin Marshall: Researchers in residence Nuffield Trust
Laura Eyre, Research Associate and Martin Marshall, Professor of Healthcare Improvement at UCL give an inside perspective on moving improvement research closer to practice.
This document discusses research uptake strategies presented by Farah Ahmed at a conference in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. It defines research uptake as the effective use of research evidence by decision-makers to improve policy and development outcomes. An effective uptake strategy involves stakeholder engagement, capacity building, communications, and monitoring and evaluation. It should have clear objectives, identify target audiences, and determine how to communicate research findings. The document provides examples of uptake approaches like partnerships, stakeholder mapping, and developing communication products tailored to specific audiences. It also discusses barriers to uptake like institutional policies and leadership, and questions to consider around stakeholder engagement, capacity building, communications planning, and monitoring impact.
In Episode 2 of Research to Action's 'Cup of tea with' webinar series Yaso Kunaratnam Policy & Research Officer at UKCDS spoke about competition, collaboration and impact from the perspective of donors and funders of development research. The webinar took a slightly different approach to the topic stakeholder engagement, looking at the under explored area of how funders can collaborate more. Yaso presented findings from UKCDS' latest report about how funders can better support research uptake and impact.
The Ecology of Sharing: Synthesizing OER ResearchOER Hub
Arguably, Open Educational Resources (OER) are starting to enter the mainstream, though some fundamental questions about their value and impact remain to be answered or supported with appropriate evidence. Much early OER activity was driven by ideals and interest in finding new ways to release content, with less direct research and reflection on the process. Furthermore, the majority of OER studies are localised, making extrapolation problematic. At the same time there are considerable practical experiences and ideas that it would be valuable to share. This presentation introduces the 'hub' as metaphor for the kind of networked research that is needed by the OER movement. The Open University's OER Research Hub project (2012-2014) works across eight primary research collaborations augmented with additional fellowships and connections with organisation to collate and synthesize research into OER across a range of sectors and stakeholders (K12, College Entry, Higher Education, Informal). The guiding research hypotheses are grounded in preparatory work in discourse analysis and collective intelligence as part of the OLnet project (McAndrew et al., 2012). We then describe the research methodology for OER Research Hub, showing how claims about 'openness' may be validated in different contexts. The argument presented is that through (1) integrating and co-ordinating research methods and (2) developing open data policies it is possible to build an evidence base for the kinds of claims that the OER movement wants to make. Thus, through an 'ecology of sharing' researchers can build and participate in a research network that is greater than the sum of its parts. We will also show how this is working in practice by highlighting some of the activities that are taking place within some collaborations, showing how harmonizing the questions we ask in surveys and interviews across the different collaborations enhances our ability to make normative claims which apply in the broadest range of educational contexts.
Using research findings to inform policy and practice: the approach taken in ...Mike Blamires
The Adoption Research Initiative (ARI) was established to use research findings to inform adoption policy and practice in the UK. The ARI includes 7 large studies on topics like permanency planning and adoption support. Stakeholders from policy, practice, and service users have been engaged throughout the research process. Barriers to using research include lack of time, relevance, and skills to critically evaluate findings. The ARI aims to overcome these barriers through dissemination strategies like briefing papers, training, and conferences. Early research from the ARI on adoption costs has already informed policy discussions, and more impact will be evaluated over time.
Research in the CGIAR: An urgent need for systems analysis and more integrati...ILRI
Presented by Anne-Marie Izac (CGIAR Consortium) at the Livestock and Fish Expert Workshop on Systems Analysis for Value Chain Transformation, Amsterdam, 19 November 2014
This document discusses researchers' perspectives and practices around sharing research data. It finds that while data gathering is not usually the primary focus of research, complete data sharing is important for validation and avoiding duplication. However, researchers face many barriers to sharing, including lack of incentives, time, skills and standards. It also examines funder policies encouraging data sharing and the need to build infrastructure and address cultural and career issues to better support a research culture of open data.
Write 300-400 words review of the paper using your own words and n.pdftrishacolsyn25353
Write 300-400 words review of the paper \"using your own words and not copying anything
form the article\".
Karin Slegers
CUO | Social Spaces
KU Leuven - iMinds
Parkstraat 45, bus 3605
3000 Leuven, Belgium karin.slegers@soc.kuleuven.be
Pieter Duysburgh
SMIT, VUB - iMinds Pleinlaan 9
1050 Brussels, Belgium pieter.duysburgh@vub.ac.be
Abstract
Niels Hendriks
Social Spaces | CUO
LUCA - KU Leuven
C-Mine 5
3600 Genk, Belgium niels.hendriks@luca-arts.be
Author Keywords
Participatory design; Ethics; Cognitive impairments; Sensory impairments;
ACM Classification Keywords
H.5.m. Information interfaces and presentation (e.g., HCI): Miscellaneous.
Introduction
It has been acknowledged that doing participatory design with people living with cognitive or
sensory impairments can be quite difficult. As the experiences of persons living with
impairments, such as autism spectrum disorder, Alzheimer’s disease or hearing impairments,
might be fundamentally different from their own, it is more difficult for researchers and
designers to identify with or relate to their users [8,11].
An additional complicating issue is the fact that many participatory design methods fail in their
inclusiveness with regard to people living with impairments [13]. In participatory design,
researchers should provide their participants with appropriate tools for expressing themselves
[14]. However, common participatory design tools may not be appropriate when working with
people living with impairments. Such tools frequently draw upon exactly those skills that people
living with cognitive or sensory impairments have problems with.
Ethical Issues in Participatory Design with People living with Cognitive or Sensory Impairments
Participatory design with people living with cognitive or sensory impairments poses several
challenges on researchers and designers, due to differences in their mutual experiences and due
to the fact that many methods and techniques may not be appropriate and need adjustment. Many
of those challenges are related to ethical issues. This paper describes several of such challenges
that emerged during a series of three academic workshops focusing on adjusting participatory
design approaches when working with people living with cognitive or sensory impairments. We
plead for a new tradition of sharing experiences in order for researchers and designers to learn
from one another in the form of codesign stories.
Many methods are, for instance, based on verbal or visual expressions, and use visual and/or
hands-on techniques. Also, higher order cognitive skills are often required [2,14], such as
abstraction, conceptualization or creative thinking. As a result, common participatory design
techniques, and research approaches in general, may not be usable, or at least need adjustment.
This idea that the involvement of people living with impairments in the design process requires a
different, more appropriate approach, matches recent views on disability. Traditionally, the
medical.
The document discusses plans for Future Earth in Asia. It notes that a regional workshop was held with 51 participants from 21 countries. The workshop identified several key research themes and priorities for the region, including natural hazards, urbanization, coastal impacts, climate issues, social pressures, and environmental challenges. The document recommends establishing a coordination facility for Asia to pursue the priorities of coordination/convergence, learning/capacity building, and strengthening science-policy interfaces. The facility would develop common understandings of sustainability, broker partnerships, provide training, and facilitate science-policy dialogue. Next steps proposed include establishing the coordination office, obtaining funding, planning the work, and beginning implementation.
This document summarizes a presentation on knowledge management and repackaging research outputs from the CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food (CPWF). It discusses why knowledge management is important for demonstrating impact and ensuring cost-effective research. The CPWF's Phase 1 projects produced many useful results that could benefit from repackaging into more accessible formats like posters, briefing notes, and sourcebooks. Examples are given of sourcebooks created from CPWF projects in Lao PDR that brought together researchers, extension agents, and educators to make results more widely available. The document emphasizes simplifying scientific findings and focusing on the most essential ideas and stories in order to enhance research utilization and uptake.
This document discusses guidelines for conducting action research in education. It provides the rationale for action research, which is to help teachers address problems in their classrooms and improve teaching and learning. The setting is described as research done within school environments to study classroom issues. Previous literature establishes the importance of research skills and positive attitudes towards research for teachers. The general objective is to provide science teachers with a research manual to guide them through the action research process. This will help address commonly faced problems and lead to classroom improvements. The scope is limited to a specific school and subject area, and limitations include constraints of the research design and methodology. Hypotheses are proposed to test differences in students' writing skills before and after an educational intervention.
This document summarizes insights from a CIFAR symposium on building effective collaborations between academic and community partners. The key points are:
1) Prioritize strong relationships from the start by taking time to build trust and understanding between partners, establishing clear roles and expectations, and engaging community members affected by the research.
2) Improve capacity to support partnerships through sharing research frameworks, training staff, using evaluations for learning, and creating steering committees.
3) Communicate and mobilize research findings into action by allocating time and resources to knowledge translation, engaging stakeholders, and advocating to decision-makers to influence policy change.
Participatory agricultural research in CGIAR: Challenges and opportunities ILRI
Presented by Beth Cullen and Katherine Snyder at the Expert meeting on participatory agricultural research: Approaches, design and evaluation, Oxford, 9-13 December 2013
Food safety, prepare for the unexpected - So what can be done in order to be ready to address food safety, food Consumers, food producers and manufacturers, food transporters, food businesses, food retailers can ...
More Related Content
Similar to Global Practice, Research & Funding for WASH Workshop 1f4wash
This document describes a challenge to develop a system to connect patients and stakeholders with researchers. It provides criteria for evaluating proposed conceptual models or prototypes for a matching system. The challenge aims to facilitate meaningful engagement throughout the research process, as required by PCORI funding announcements. Winners will receive $10,000 or $40,000 to further develop their proposal. The submission deadline is April 15th, with winners to be announced at a spring conference. The evaluation will focus on technical feasibility, usability, scalability, and maximizing patient-centeredness and scientific rigor.
The document is the 2014 annual report of the Purdue Center for the Environment. It provides an overview of the Center's activities in 2014, including renewing its strategic vision with a focus on human health, ecosystems, and environmental decision-making. It summarizes new faculty hires in sustainability-related fields and increased external grant funding. The Director expresses excitement over undergraduate research involvement and soundscape education projects emerging from earlier Center funding.
This document outlines the scope and limitations of a proposed study exploring the efficacy of using social media platforms for online English classes. The study will focus on examining teaching approaches, student engagement levels, and the overall effectiveness of social media. However, it acknowledges limitations such as results only applying to specific platforms and demographics studied, inability to capture the full range of teaching methods, and lack of consideration for all cultural and contextual factors. Defining limitations is important to understand the context of the study's findings and avoid overly broad generalizations.
The document discusses an organization called Research in Practice that aims to promote the use of research evidence to improve outcomes for children and families. It does this through Change Projects, which involve practitioners collaborating to develop tools to apply research findings in practice. The document describes a recent Change Project focused on re-engaging young people in learning at key stage 3. Participants were introduced to research on disengagement and will work to inform local policies and support practitioners on this issue.
RECODE, an initiative lead by McConnell Foundation, and UpSocial are researching how Canadian post-secondary institutions could adapt to more adequately address community needs.
Laura Eyre and Martin Marshall: Researchers in residence Nuffield Trust
Laura Eyre, Research Associate and Martin Marshall, Professor of Healthcare Improvement at UCL give an inside perspective on moving improvement research closer to practice.
This document discusses research uptake strategies presented by Farah Ahmed at a conference in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. It defines research uptake as the effective use of research evidence by decision-makers to improve policy and development outcomes. An effective uptake strategy involves stakeholder engagement, capacity building, communications, and monitoring and evaluation. It should have clear objectives, identify target audiences, and determine how to communicate research findings. The document provides examples of uptake approaches like partnerships, stakeholder mapping, and developing communication products tailored to specific audiences. It also discusses barriers to uptake like institutional policies and leadership, and questions to consider around stakeholder engagement, capacity building, communications planning, and monitoring impact.
In Episode 2 of Research to Action's 'Cup of tea with' webinar series Yaso Kunaratnam Policy & Research Officer at UKCDS spoke about competition, collaboration and impact from the perspective of donors and funders of development research. The webinar took a slightly different approach to the topic stakeholder engagement, looking at the under explored area of how funders can collaborate more. Yaso presented findings from UKCDS' latest report about how funders can better support research uptake and impact.
The Ecology of Sharing: Synthesizing OER ResearchOER Hub
Arguably, Open Educational Resources (OER) are starting to enter the mainstream, though some fundamental questions about their value and impact remain to be answered or supported with appropriate evidence. Much early OER activity was driven by ideals and interest in finding new ways to release content, with less direct research and reflection on the process. Furthermore, the majority of OER studies are localised, making extrapolation problematic. At the same time there are considerable practical experiences and ideas that it would be valuable to share. This presentation introduces the 'hub' as metaphor for the kind of networked research that is needed by the OER movement. The Open University's OER Research Hub project (2012-2014) works across eight primary research collaborations augmented with additional fellowships and connections with organisation to collate and synthesize research into OER across a range of sectors and stakeholders (K12, College Entry, Higher Education, Informal). The guiding research hypotheses are grounded in preparatory work in discourse analysis and collective intelligence as part of the OLnet project (McAndrew et al., 2012). We then describe the research methodology for OER Research Hub, showing how claims about 'openness' may be validated in different contexts. The argument presented is that through (1) integrating and co-ordinating research methods and (2) developing open data policies it is possible to build an evidence base for the kinds of claims that the OER movement wants to make. Thus, through an 'ecology of sharing' researchers can build and participate in a research network that is greater than the sum of its parts. We will also show how this is working in practice by highlighting some of the activities that are taking place within some collaborations, showing how harmonizing the questions we ask in surveys and interviews across the different collaborations enhances our ability to make normative claims which apply in the broadest range of educational contexts.
Using research findings to inform policy and practice: the approach taken in ...Mike Blamires
The Adoption Research Initiative (ARI) was established to use research findings to inform adoption policy and practice in the UK. The ARI includes 7 large studies on topics like permanency planning and adoption support. Stakeholders from policy, practice, and service users have been engaged throughout the research process. Barriers to using research include lack of time, relevance, and skills to critically evaluate findings. The ARI aims to overcome these barriers through dissemination strategies like briefing papers, training, and conferences. Early research from the ARI on adoption costs has already informed policy discussions, and more impact will be evaluated over time.
Research in the CGIAR: An urgent need for systems analysis and more integrati...ILRI
Presented by Anne-Marie Izac (CGIAR Consortium) at the Livestock and Fish Expert Workshop on Systems Analysis for Value Chain Transformation, Amsterdam, 19 November 2014
This document discusses researchers' perspectives and practices around sharing research data. It finds that while data gathering is not usually the primary focus of research, complete data sharing is important for validation and avoiding duplication. However, researchers face many barriers to sharing, including lack of incentives, time, skills and standards. It also examines funder policies encouraging data sharing and the need to build infrastructure and address cultural and career issues to better support a research culture of open data.
Write 300-400 words review of the paper using your own words and n.pdftrishacolsyn25353
Write 300-400 words review of the paper \"using your own words and not copying anything
form the article\".
Karin Slegers
CUO | Social Spaces
KU Leuven - iMinds
Parkstraat 45, bus 3605
3000 Leuven, Belgium karin.slegers@soc.kuleuven.be
Pieter Duysburgh
SMIT, VUB - iMinds Pleinlaan 9
1050 Brussels, Belgium pieter.duysburgh@vub.ac.be
Abstract
Niels Hendriks
Social Spaces | CUO
LUCA - KU Leuven
C-Mine 5
3600 Genk, Belgium niels.hendriks@luca-arts.be
Author Keywords
Participatory design; Ethics; Cognitive impairments; Sensory impairments;
ACM Classification Keywords
H.5.m. Information interfaces and presentation (e.g., HCI): Miscellaneous.
Introduction
It has been acknowledged that doing participatory design with people living with cognitive or
sensory impairments can be quite difficult. As the experiences of persons living with
impairments, such as autism spectrum disorder, Alzheimer’s disease or hearing impairments,
might be fundamentally different from their own, it is more difficult for researchers and
designers to identify with or relate to their users [8,11].
An additional complicating issue is the fact that many participatory design methods fail in their
inclusiveness with regard to people living with impairments [13]. In participatory design,
researchers should provide their participants with appropriate tools for expressing themselves
[14]. However, common participatory design tools may not be appropriate when working with
people living with impairments. Such tools frequently draw upon exactly those skills that people
living with cognitive or sensory impairments have problems with.
Ethical Issues in Participatory Design with People living with Cognitive or Sensory Impairments
Participatory design with people living with cognitive or sensory impairments poses several
challenges on researchers and designers, due to differences in their mutual experiences and due
to the fact that many methods and techniques may not be appropriate and need adjustment. Many
of those challenges are related to ethical issues. This paper describes several of such challenges
that emerged during a series of three academic workshops focusing on adjusting participatory
design approaches when working with people living with cognitive or sensory impairments. We
plead for a new tradition of sharing experiences in order for researchers and designers to learn
from one another in the form of codesign stories.
Many methods are, for instance, based on verbal or visual expressions, and use visual and/or
hands-on techniques. Also, higher order cognitive skills are often required [2,14], such as
abstraction, conceptualization or creative thinking. As a result, common participatory design
techniques, and research approaches in general, may not be usable, or at least need adjustment.
This idea that the involvement of people living with impairments in the design process requires a
different, more appropriate approach, matches recent views on disability. Traditionally, the
medical.
The document discusses plans for Future Earth in Asia. It notes that a regional workshop was held with 51 participants from 21 countries. The workshop identified several key research themes and priorities for the region, including natural hazards, urbanization, coastal impacts, climate issues, social pressures, and environmental challenges. The document recommends establishing a coordination facility for Asia to pursue the priorities of coordination/convergence, learning/capacity building, and strengthening science-policy interfaces. The facility would develop common understandings of sustainability, broker partnerships, provide training, and facilitate science-policy dialogue. Next steps proposed include establishing the coordination office, obtaining funding, planning the work, and beginning implementation.
This document summarizes a presentation on knowledge management and repackaging research outputs from the CGIAR Challenge Program on Water and Food (CPWF). It discusses why knowledge management is important for demonstrating impact and ensuring cost-effective research. The CPWF's Phase 1 projects produced many useful results that could benefit from repackaging into more accessible formats like posters, briefing notes, and sourcebooks. Examples are given of sourcebooks created from CPWF projects in Lao PDR that brought together researchers, extension agents, and educators to make results more widely available. The document emphasizes simplifying scientific findings and focusing on the most essential ideas and stories in order to enhance research utilization and uptake.
This document discusses guidelines for conducting action research in education. It provides the rationale for action research, which is to help teachers address problems in their classrooms and improve teaching and learning. The setting is described as research done within school environments to study classroom issues. Previous literature establishes the importance of research skills and positive attitudes towards research for teachers. The general objective is to provide science teachers with a research manual to guide them through the action research process. This will help address commonly faced problems and lead to classroom improvements. The scope is limited to a specific school and subject area, and limitations include constraints of the research design and methodology. Hypotheses are proposed to test differences in students' writing skills before and after an educational intervention.
This document summarizes insights from a CIFAR symposium on building effective collaborations between academic and community partners. The key points are:
1) Prioritize strong relationships from the start by taking time to build trust and understanding between partners, establishing clear roles and expectations, and engaging community members affected by the research.
2) Improve capacity to support partnerships through sharing research frameworks, training staff, using evaluations for learning, and creating steering committees.
3) Communicate and mobilize research findings into action by allocating time and resources to knowledge translation, engaging stakeholders, and advocating to decision-makers to influence policy change.
Participatory agricultural research in CGIAR: Challenges and opportunities ILRI
Presented by Beth Cullen and Katherine Snyder at the Expert meeting on participatory agricultural research: Approaches, design and evaluation, Oxford, 9-13 December 2013
Similar to Global Practice, Research & Funding for WASH Workshop 1f4wash (20)
Food safety, prepare for the unexpected - So what can be done in order to be ready to address food safety, food Consumers, food producers and manufacturers, food transporters, food businesses, food retailers can ...
Combined Illegal, Unregulated and Unreported (IUU) Vessel List.Christina Parmionova
The best available, up-to-date information on all fishing and related vessels that appear on the illegal, unregulated, and unreported (IUU) fishing vessel lists published by Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOs) and related organisations. The aim of the site is to improve the effectiveness of the original IUU lists as a tool for a wide variety of stakeholders to better understand and combat illegal fishing and broader fisheries crime.
To date, the following regional organisations maintain or share lists of vessels that have been found to carry out or support IUU fishing within their own or adjacent convention areas and/or species of competence:
Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR)
Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT)
General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM)
Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC)
International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT)
Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC)
Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organisation (NAFO)
North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC)
North Pacific Fisheries Commission (NPFC)
South East Atlantic Fisheries Organisation (SEAFO)
South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRFMO)
Southern Indian Ocean Fisheries Agreement (SIOFA)
Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC)
The Combined IUU Fishing Vessel List merges all these sources into one list that provides a single reference point to identify whether a vessel is currently IUU listed. Vessels that have been IUU listed in the past and subsequently delisted (for example because of a change in ownership, or because the vessel is no longer in service) are also retained on the site, so that the site contains a full historic record of IUU listed fishing vessels.
Unlike the IUU lists published on individual RFMO websites, which may update vessel details infrequently or not at all, the Combined IUU Fishing Vessel List is kept up to date with the best available information regarding changes to vessel identity, flag state, ownership, location, and operations.
This report explores the significance of border towns and spaces for strengthening responses to young people on the move. In particular it explores the linkages of young people to local service centres with the aim of further developing service, protection, and support strategies for migrant children in border areas across the region. The report is based on a small-scale fieldwork study in the border towns of Chipata and Katete in Zambia conducted in July 2023. Border towns and spaces provide a rich source of information about issues related to the informal or irregular movement of young people across borders, including smuggling and trafficking. They can help build a picture of the nature and scope of the type of movement young migrants undertake and also the forms of protection available to them. Border towns and spaces also provide a lens through which we can better understand the vulnerabilities of young people on the move and, critically, the strategies they use to navigate challenges and access support.
The findings in this report highlight some of the key factors shaping the experiences and vulnerabilities of young people on the move – particularly their proximity to border spaces and how this affects the risks that they face. The report describes strategies that young people on the move employ to remain below the radar of visibility to state and non-state actors due to fear of arrest, detention, and deportation while also trying to keep themselves safe and access support in border towns. These strategies of (in)visibility provide a way to protect themselves yet at the same time also heighten some of the risks young people face as their vulnerabilities are not always recognised by those who could offer support.
In this report we show that the realities and challenges of life and migration in this region and in Zambia need to be better understood for support to be strengthened and tuned to meet the specific needs of young people on the move. This includes understanding the role of state and non-state stakeholders, the impact of laws and policies and, critically, the experiences of the young people themselves. We provide recommendations for immediate action, recommendations for programming to support young people on the move in the two towns that would reduce risk for young people in this area, and recommendations for longer term policy advocacy.
karnataka housing board schemes . all schemesnarinav14
The Karnataka government, along with the central government’s Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY), offers various housing schemes to cater to the diverse needs of citizens across the state. This article provides a comprehensive overview of the major housing schemes available in the Karnataka housing board for both urban and rural areas in 2024.
Jennifer Schaus and Associates hosts a complimentary webinar series on The FAR in 2024. Join the webinars on Wednesdays and Fridays at noon, eastern.
Recordings are on YouTube and the company website.
https://www.youtube.com/@jenniferschaus/videos
Global Practice, Research & Funding for WASH Workshop 1f4wash
1. Workshop Brief: Research, Practice & Funding Nexus for WASH
Workshop #1
Page 1 of 4
Breaking Barriers: Uniting Funders, Researchers, and Practitioners in Water, Sanitation, and Solid Waste
Initiatives
The interaction between funders, researchers, and practitioners in the fields of water, sanitation, and solid waste
presents specific challenges that impede societal outcomes of their interventions. This brief presents the
knowledge co-creation outcomes of the first global workshop that interrogated these interactions setting pace
for a way forward to resolving existing and emerging challenges.
To help you navigate, this brief is divided into seven sections starting by outlining the barriers and then an
overview of opportunities. It then presents specific recommendations for funders, practitioners, and researchers,
and the next steps for future workshops. It concludes with information about the workshop series and how you
can be involved. Let us dive in.
i. The barriers
Funders often struggle to identify suitable implementers
or researchers, resulting in projects being led by
individuals who lack a deep understanding of the
geographical and cultural context in which the initiatives
are intended to take place. Moreover, there is a prevalent
bias among funders towards funding implementation
activities rather than research, which limits the
availability of resources for post-project activities for both
researchers and practitioners.
Both researchers and practitioners encounter difficulties
in securing funding for their work. Smaller organizations,
particularly in low and middle-income countries, face
limited capacity in developing fundable proposals and
often lack awareness of potential funding sources.
Additionally, there is often a tendency among funders to
favor funding new projects at the expense of supporting
the implementation of existing known solutions,
hindering the adoption and scaling up of proven
approaches.
Another area of concern is the limited availability of
funding specifically targeted toward youth-oriented
initiatives, which hampers the involvement of young
people in addressing water, sanitation, and solid waste
challenges.
Summary of barriers:
1.Funders hurdles in identifying suitable
implementers or researchers
2.Researchers and practitioners difficulty in securing
funding
3.Project implementation funds often lack an
embedded research component
4.Limited funding targeted to the youth
5.Researchers difficulties in locating funders
6.Research questions that misalign with the
context-specific questions and challenges of
practitioners
7.Funders overlook the uncertainties and potential
opportunities that researchers face.
8.Research context and object biases are also
prevalent (urban vs rural or water vs sanitation)
9.Difficulties in sustaining awareness of existing
knowledge from science to practice
10. Knowledge appropriation and ownership claims
from commons to private
2. Page 2 of 4
The relationship between practitioners and researchers is
also constrained. A key barrier here is the perception that
practitioners often have that research results are too
abstract, too ivory tower, not directly relevant for them.
They therefore abstain from engaging with research
outputs.
The relationship between funders and researchers also
presents challenges. Researchers often struggle to locate
funders, especially in low and middle-income countries,
resulting in limited financial support for their work.
Funders, on the other hand, may overlook the
uncertainties and potential opportunities that
researchers face, particularly the "unknown unknowns."
There is a need for funders to acknowledge and support
research that explores uncharted territories and has the
potential to uncover innovative solutions.
Researchers face their own set of challenges within this
dynamic. Research questions do not always align with the
context-specific questions and challenges faced by
practitioners, leading to a gap between research findings
and practical applications. There is also a bias against
rural-oriented research in water, sanitation, and solid
waste, often neglecting the unique challenges faced
there. Researchers further struggle to sustain awareness
of existing knowledge, and there is a need to establish
impact pathways beyond traditional academic journals to
ensure that research findings reach the intended
audience and are translated into practice effectively.
Additionally, there is a wealth of decentralized and
unpublished research in Africa that often is claimed by
others through publications, leading to a loss of local
ownership and recognition.
ii. The opportunities
Moving forward, addressing the barriers presented
requires reflection and collaboration within each group.
Involving practitioners and those facing the challenge in
question in the research design stage can ensure that
research is relevant, contextualized, and addresses real-
world challenges.
There is potential for establishing and maintaining
innovative approaches for ensuring active and passive
networks between researchers, practitioners, and
funders.
Researchers further need to simplify and translate their
findings into actionable and accessible formats for
practitioners, while utilizing communities of practice
platforms both online and offline to facilitate knowledge
sharing and collaboration. It is crucial to prioritize the
implementation of research outputs.
Building local capacity and fostering collaboration
between implementing organizations and research
institutions are essential to bridge the gap between
research and practice. Examples of organizations
attempting to bridge this divide in the water, sanitation,
and solid waste sector include WSUP, KFPE, AfWaSa,
RWSN, and Sandec-Eawag.
In this multidisciplinary world, it is important to promote
interdisciplinary teams that can bring together diverse
perspectives and expertise. Understanding the
relationship between research and practice in the
operational context is crucial for effective decision-
making and impact.
There is opportunity for targeted dissemination of
research findings to stakeholders. Professionals working
at the interface of research and practice play a vital role
in bridging the gap, facilitating knowledge exchange, and
ensuring that evidence-based solutions are implemented
on the ground.
Overall, addressing the challenges between funders,
researchers, and practitioners in the water, sanitation,
and solid waste sector requires collaborative efforts,
context-specific approaches, and sustained commitment
to building partnerships that foster innovation,
knowledge exchange, and impactful implementation.
This workshop was not exhaustive, however, it provided
the basis for a way forward in promoting discussions that
foster productive partnerships and impactful programs
between the three parties.
Recommendations for breaking the barriers for
each actor group
iii. Researchers:
1. Contextual Alignment: ensure that research questions
align with the practical challenges and needs of
practitioners and communities in the water,
sanitation, and solid waste sectors.
Summary of opportunities:
1.Involving practitioners and research subjects in
early designs stages of research
2.Reinforcing active and passive relationships with
all three parties
3.Translating research to actionable and accessible
formats for practice
4.Building local capacity for collaboration between
research and implementing organizations
5.Promoting interdisciplinary teams for diverse
solutions
6.Targeting research findings to relevant
stakeholders
3. Page 3 of 4
2. Dissemination Beyond Journals: actively seek avenues
beyond traditional academic journals to disseminate
research findings. These includes engaging with
practitioners and the public through various channels
such as conferences, workshops, community events,
and collaboration with journalists.
3. Collaborative Partnerships: actively engage
practitioners and other stakeholders in the research
process from the design stage. Collaborative
partnerships can enhance the relevance and
applicability of research and facilitate its translation
into actionable solutions.
4. Capacity Development and or Alignment: prioritize
foster local research capacity, particularly in low and
middle-income countries. This can be achieved
through training programs, mentorship, and
knowledge sharing to empower local researchers and
practitioners to address water, sanitation, and solid
waste challenges effectively.
5. Interdisciplinary Approaches: embrace
interdisciplinary collaborations, bringing together
experts from different disciplines to address complex
challenges in water, sanitation, and solid waste. This
can foster innovative thinking, promote holistic
solutions, and provide a comprehensive
understanding of the issues at hand.
iv. Practitioners:
1. Engaging in Research: actively engage in research
activities, collaborating with researchers to
contribute their practical knowledge and experience.
Involvement in the research process from the design
stage can ensure that research aligns with the on-
ground challenges and facilitates the adoption of
evidence-based solutions.
2. Knowledge Translation: advocate for the translation
of research findings into accessible and actionable
formats. They should work closely with researchers to
develop practical tools, guidelines, and
recommendations that can be readily implemented in
their work and shared with relevant stakeholders.
3. Networking and Collaboration: actively participate in
networks and communities of practice, both online
and offline, to foster collaboration, share
experiences, and learn from peers. Collaborative
partnerships with researchers and other practitioners
can enhance knowledge exchange and promote
innovative solutions.
4. Awareness of Existing Knowledge: stay updated on
existing knowledge and research in the field of water,
sanitation, and solid waste. This can be achieved by
actively engaging with academic literature, attending
conferences, workshops, and learning events, and
leveraging platforms that facilitate knowledge
sharing. Some go-to platforms include SuSaNa,
RWSN, Sanihub among others.
5. Advocacy for Funding: advocate for increased funding
opportunities for research and post-project activities.
They can collaborate with researchers and other
stakeholders to highlight the importance of investing
in research and evidence-based practices for
sustainable water, sanitation, and waste
management.
v. Funders:
1. Contextual Understanding: understand the
geographical and cultural context of the projects,
ensuring that stakeholders who possess a deep
understanding of the context-specific challenges and
needs lead the project or research implementation.
2. Balanced Funding Approach: aim for a balanced
approach between funding implementation activities
and research. Allocating resources for research and
innovation can drive evidence-based solutions while
supporting implementation ensuring the scaling up of
proven approaches and the adoption of existing
knowledge.
3. Funding Opportunities for Youth: avail funding
opportunities specifically targeted toward youth-
oriented initiatives in the water, sanitation, and solid
waste sectors. Supporting young innovators and
practitioners can bring fresh perspectives, drive
innovation, and empower the next generation to
address the pressing challenges in these areas.
4. Support for Research Translation: allocate resources
for research translation and the dissemination of
findings into practical and accessible formats. This
includes supporting researchers and practitioners in