| Title |
How researchers frame scientific contributions to sustainable development: a typology based on grounded theory
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Sustainability Science, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11625-016-0363-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gabriela Wuelser, Christian Pohl |
| Abstract |
Given that research on sustainable development usually relates to real-world challenges, it requires researchers to align scientific knowledge production with concrete societal problem situations. To empirically explore how researchers frame scientific contributions when designing and planning projects, we conducted a qualitative study on land use-related projects based on the methodology of grounded theory. We identified major influence factors and various types of research design. Among the factors that influence project framing, scientific considerations were found to be more important than expected. Core characteristics of project framings concerned (a) type of scientific contributions envisaged; (b) real-world sustainability challenges addressed, and (c) researchers' conceptions of how knowledge would reach its addressees. Three different types of project framing were found, suggesting that framing strongly depends on (the researchers' perception of) how well a real-world problem situation is understood scientifically and how strongly are societal actors aware of the problem and act upon it. The spectrum of how researchers planned that knowledge would reach its addressees comprised communicating results to interactive conceptions allowing for mutual learning throughout the research process. The typology reveals a variety of useful and promising project framings for sustainable development research. The typology may serve to reconcile conceptual ideals and expectations with researchers' realities. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Finland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 146 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 142 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 31 | 21% |
| Researcher | 26 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 10 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 24 | 16% |
| Unknown | 27 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 29 | 20% |
| Social Sciences | 27 | 18% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 10 | 7% |
| Engineering | 7 | 5% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 27 | 18% |
| Unknown | 40 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 20 June 2018.
All research outputs
#20,295,184
of 25,806,763 outputs
Outputs from Sustainability Science
#873
of 942 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,036
of 314,494 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sustainability Science
#11
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,763 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 942 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 314,494 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.