PRIMUS/Informed Cities: Making research work for local sustainability

The final report of a three year European Commission FP7 project

Transformative spaces in the making: key lessons from nine cases in the Global South

Creating a just and sustainable planet will require not only small changes, but also systemic transformations in how humans relate to the planet and to each other, i.e., social–ecological transformations. We suggest there is a need for collaborative environments where experimentation with new configurations of social–ecological systems can occur, and we refer to these as transformative spaces. In this paper, we seek a better understanding of how to design and enable the creation of transformative spaces in a development context. We analyse nine case studies from a previous special issue on Designing Transformative Spaces that aimed to collect examples of cutting-edge action-oriented research on transformations from the Global South. The analysis showed five design phases as being essential: Problem Definition Phase; Operationalisation Phase; Tactical Phase; Outcome Phase; and Reflection Phase. From this synthesis, we distilled five key messages that should be considered when designing research, including: (a) there are ethical dilemmas associated with creating a transformative space in a system; (b) it is important to assess the readiness of the system for change before engaging in it; (c) there is a need to balance between ‘safe’ and ‘safe-enough’ spaces for transformation; (d) convening a transformative space requires an assemblage of diverse methodological frameworks and tools; and (e) transformative spaces can act as a starting point for institutionalising transformative change. Many researchers are now engaging in transdisciplinary transformations research, and are finding themselves at the knowledge–action interface contributing to transformative space-making. We hope that by analysing experiences from across different geographies we can contribute towards better understanding of how to navigate the processes needed for the urgent global transformations that are being called for to create a more equitable and sustainable planet Earth

A review of UK research and development for organic food and farming

The objective of the project is to draw together information on current levels of funding for organic research throughout all UK public sector, private and charitable sources. A list of 268 potential organic food and farming research funders and contractors throughout the UK was drawn together and questionnaires were mailed to them in the week of 24th February 2003. With regular follow up of all recipients to achieve the best return rate possible a response rate of 41% was achieved. We asked for details on all projects that were ongoing in the period between Jan 2000 and March 2003. The survey identified 168 individual projects. The total cost of this research was £23,578,902 of which nearly £20M was solely from the public purse with 72 per cent of this funding provided by DEFRA. However, nearly £3M was funded by sources other than the public purse including a range of charities and companies. There was also £0.75M of joint funding by public and non-public sources. Of the 168 projects 151 were purely organic with a further 17 of relevance to organic systems. The majority of the research undertaken was field or bench research followed by desk studies. The overwhelming majority of the research undertaken had been covering aspects of production. Whole farm systems, soils & nutrient cycling, cropping and livestock systems accounted for nearly 70 per cent of the total funding. There were also a surprisingly small number of projects investigating the environment (8 projects) and funding only accounted for about 8 per cent of the total spend, although environmental considerations would be investigated in other topic areas such as soils & nutrient cycling. The amount of research undertaken on off-farm activities in the organic food production chain was limited. Only a small amount of research had been directed at processing, marketing or food quality. These three areas accounted for only 12 projects and 7 per cent of the total funding. Understanding the other (non-environmental) benefits or disbenefits of organic farming have also been studied to a lesser extent. Only six Economics and rural development projects have been undertaken and account for only 4 per cent of the total funding. It is recommended that DEFRA and the Organic Action Plan Group: • Establish an Organic Research Priorities Board (ORPD) to work with all stakeholders including funders to ensure identification and a co-ordinated implementation of the research and technology transfer necessary to help achieve the objectives of the Action Plan. It would then be appropriate for DEFRA , the Organic Action Plan Group and/or the ORPD to intiate; • A consultation on organic R&D priorities, particularly focussing on the needs of the businesses that may be willing to participate in LINK or other joint funded projects. • Further assessment of the benefit arising from the projects identified. • Analysis of the intensity of research and the value to the end user (government, farmers, processors etc.) from the point of view of the priority research areas (crops, livestock etc) and the different types of research and development (desk, field, extension etc.). This should aim to define the most beneficial approach to organic research and development. • Analysis of the quality and extent of the dissemination of the research results from the projects. • An investigation into the possible conflict between organic research funding and the objectives and approaches of LINK programmes need to be addressed and if a real barrier is identified a solution must be found. However, it is believed that it is important that research continues directed towards improving production methods and efficiency (financially, socially and environmentally) in those enterprises where the technical challenges are greatest or where the proportion of UK sourced farm products is relatively low

Gap Analysis of Environmental Health Research in Malawi : Report to the National Commission of Science and Technology

The aim of this consultancy was to assess the current gaps in research for the environmental health sector in Malawi, and to recommend research priorities and an effective action plan to address these gap

Two Commas and a Full Stop. a Preliminary Report on the Civicus Index on Civil Society Project in South Africa.

This paper provides the results of our efforts to implement in South Africa the proposed CIVICUS methodology for the development of a Civil Society

Researcher self-care in organizational ethnography: lessons from overcoming compassion fatigue

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to offer practical researcher self-care strategies to prepare for and manage the emotions involved in doing organizational ethnographic research. Institutional ethics policies or research training programmes may not provide guidance, yet emotions are an integral part of research, particularly for ethnographers immersed in the field or those working with sensitive topics or vulnerable or marginalised people.Design/methodology/approach – The paper draws on ethnographic fieldwork over nine months with a voluntary organization in the UK, Yarl’s Wood Befrienders, to explore the experiences and activities of volunteer visitors who offer emotional support to women detained indefinitely in an immigration removal centre. The author is a “complete member researcher”, or “at-home ethnographer”, a volunteer visitor and a former detainee.Findings – The author describes the emotional impact the research personally had on her and shares learning from overcoming “compassion fatigue”. Self-care strategies based on the literature are recommended, such as a researcher self-assessment, identification of the emotional risks of the research, and self-care plan formulated during project planning. Suggested resources and activities to support the well-being of researchers are explored.Practical implications – This paper provides practical resources for researchers to prepare for and cope with emotional and mental health risks throughout the research process. It builds awareness of safeguarding researchers and supporting them with handling emotional disruptions. Without adequate support, they may be psychologically harmed and lose the potential to critically engage with emotions as data.Originality/value – The literature on emotions in doing research rarely discusses self-care strategies. This paper offers an actionable plan for researchers to instil emotional and mental well-being into the research design to navigate emotional challenges in the field and build resilience

Politikrelevante Nachhaltigkeitsforschung : Anforderungsprofil für Forschungsförderer, Forschende und Praxispartner aus der Politik zur Verbesserung und Sicherung von Forschungsqualität - ein Wegweiser

Research aimed at helping to solve pressing societal problems must meet specific quality requirements: The knowledge it produces must not only be sound but also useable. This is particularly true of research that aims at bringing specific knowledge to bear on policy issues relating to sustainable development. This guide provides detailed actor-specific requirements profiles for this type of “policy relevant sustainability research.” This guide is aimed at research funding agencies and contracting entities, researchers themselves and policymakers1 who participate directly in the research process. It can be used both for cases where the research funding agency/contracting entity and the policymaker are different institutions or where they are identical. However, policy consulting by specialized agencies that do not perform original research is not addressed. The requirements profiles serve two functions. First of all, they should function as a guide for the three stakeholder groups, aiding them in their efforts to increase and ensure the quality of research processes and research outcomes. And, secondly, they should improve the reflexive communication among stakeholders regarding the means and the goals of research... The results presented here are part of a research and development project (Research Code Number: 3711 11 701) funded by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) and the German Federal Environment Agency (UBA). The project was carried out by the Institute for Social-Ecological Research (ISOE, project management), the Institute for Ecological Economy Research and the Environmental Policy Research Center for of the Freie Universität Berlin (FFU) (project duration: 09/2011-01/2013). The aim of the project was to develop concepts that can be used to increase the relevance of sustainability research for the design of environmental policy in Germany. In addition to the requirements profiles for a policy relevant sustainability research presented in this guide, recommendations, based on empirical studies, have been developed regarding how the coordination between different government departments with respect to funding such research can be optimized. The project's final report will be available starting March 2013 from the UBA.orschung, die einen unmittelbaren Beitrag zur Lösung drängender gesellschaft-licher Probleme leisten will, muss sich besonderen Qualitätsanforderungen stellen: Sie soll nicht nur gesichertes, sondern auch anwendbares Wissen bereithalten. Dies gilt besonders für Forschung, die darauf zielt, Politik in Fragen nachhaltiger Ent-wicklung mit spezifischem Wissen zu unterstützen. Für diesen Typ einer „politik-relevanten Nachhaltigkeitsforschung“ präsentiert der vorliegende Wegweiser ein detailliertes Anforderungsprofil. Der Wegweiser richtet sich an Förderer oder Auftraggeber einer solchen Forschung, an die Forschenden selbst und an Akteure aus der Politik1, die sich direkt an For-schungsprozessen beteiligen. Er kann dabei sowohl für den Fall genutzt werden, dass Forschungsförderer oder Auftraggeber und politische Praxispartner verschie-dene Institutionen sind, als auch für den Fall, dass sie identisch sind. Politische Beratung durch spezialisierte Agenturen, die keine eigene Forschung leisten, wird dagegen nicht adressiert. Die im Detail ausgearbeiteten Anforderungen haben zwei Funktionen. Sie sollen zum einen den drei genannten Akteursgruppen als Orientierung dienen, wie sie dazu beitragen können, die Qualität von Forschungsprozessen und Forschungs-ergebnissen zu erhöhen und zu sichern. Zum anderen sollen sie die reflexive Kommunikation zwischen den Akteuren über Mittel und Zwecke der Forschung verbessern.... Die hier vorgestellten Ergebnisse wurden im Rahmen eines vom Bundesministe-rium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit (BMU) und dem Umwelt-bundesamt (UBA) finanzierten Forschungs- und Entwicklungsvorhabens erarbeitet (Forschungskennzahl 3711 11 701). Das Vorhaben wurde vom Institut für sozial-ökologische Forschung (ISOE, Vorhabenleitung), dem Institut für ökologische Wirt-schaftsforschung (IÖW) und dem Forschungszentrum für Umweltpolitik der Freien Universität Berlin (FFU) durchgeführt (Laufzeit: 09/2011–01/2013). Ziel des Vorhabens war es, Konzepte zu entwickeln, mit deren Hilfe die Relevanz der Nachhaltigkeitsforschung für die Gestaltung von Umweltpolitik in Deutschland erhöht werden kann. Neben dem hier vorgestellten Anforderungsprofil für eine politikrelevante Nachhaltigkeitsforschung wurden auf Basis empirischer Erhebun-gen auch Empfehlungen erarbeitet, wie die Abstimmung zwischen verschiedenen Bundesressorts bei der Förderung von Nachhaltigkeitsforschung optimiert werden kann. Der Abschlussbericht des Vorhabens kann ab März 2013 über das UBA bezo-gen werden

Children and Families With Incarcerated Parents: Exploring Development in the Field and Opportunities for Growth

Summarizes discussions with experts, practitioners, advocates, policy makers, and funders about meeting the needs of prisoners' children, including through public policy and system reform. Offers principles to guide efforts to support family connections

Equal Dignity and Unequal Protection: A Framework for Analyzing Disparate Impact Claims

The Supreme Court has long endorsed the theory of the “colorblind” Equal Protection Clause, viewing it as a mandate of only facial equality. Due to rigid doctrine that limits true protection to only a short, stagnant list of fundamental rights and suspect classifications and that requires proof of discriminatory intent, only the most blatant, purposeful inequality is within constitutional reach. Festering outside of this doctrinal sphere are powerful examples of state actions that impose disparate impacts on marginalized communities, such as the nationwide system of laws that disqualify individuals—disproportionately black men—with felony convictions from the jury pool. However, the door to a new approach for combatting such issues may have recently opened. In Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court embraced the interconnection between the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses to move beyond the restrictions of current equal protection doctrine and strike down same-sex marriage bans. This “equal dignity” approach embraces a different view of equality protection: antisubordination theory, which focuses on ensuring substantive equality. This Note proposes a framework for applying equal dignity, utilizing the example of felon-juror exclusion to argue that it can serve as a principled approach for addressing disparate impact claims

Community Partnerships for Cultural Participation: Concepts, Prospects, and Challenges

Evaluates the first year of the Wallace Foundation's Community Partnerships for Cultural Participation Initiative, which funded nine community foundations working to increase participation in the arts and culture in their communities