| Title |
Do we need “more research” or better implementation through knowledge brokering?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Sustainability Science, June 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11625-015-0314-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Janet G. Hering |
| Abstract |
"More research is needed" is an iconic catchphrase used by scientists worldwide. Yet policy and management decisions are continually being made with variable levels of reliance on scientific knowledge. Funding agencies have provided incentives for knowledge exchange at the interfaces between science and policy or practice, yet it remains the exception rather than the rule within academic institutions. An important step forward would be the establishment and professionalization of knowledge brokering (i.e., as a complement to existing technology transfer and communications departments). This would require an explicit commitment of resources by both funding agencies and institutions. Many academic scientists are genuinely interested in the applications of their research. This interest could be stimulated by providing support for the process of knowledge brokering and by integrating the natural, social, and engineering sciences to address broad policy- and practice-relevant questions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 25% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| France | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 171 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 166 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 34 | 20% |
| Researcher | 34 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 23 | 13% |
| Professor | 11 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 27 | 16% |
| Unknown | 33 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 41 | 24% |
| Environmental Science | 37 | 22% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 4% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 33 | 19% |
| Unknown | 40 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 163. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 December 2022.
All research outputs
#216,396
of 23,351,247 outputs
Outputs from Sustainability Science
#6
of 813 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,393
of 267,820 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sustainability Science
#1
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,351,247 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 813 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,820 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.