Improving collaborative knowledge production for climate change mitigation: lessons from EU Horizon 2020 experiences
Abstract Scientific knowledge is key to climate mitigation governance. However, effective exchange between science and policy is challenging. Science-policy theory suggests collaboration, stakeholder participation and iterative communication as key principles for improving the science-policy interfa...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2018-12-01
|
| Series: | Sustainable Earth Reviews |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s42055-018-0007-0 |
| _version_ | 1797708283167899648 |
|---|---|
| author | Daan Boezeman Heleen de Coninck |
| author_facet | Daan Boezeman Heleen de Coninck |
| author_sort | Daan Boezeman |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Scientific knowledge is key to climate mitigation governance. However, effective exchange between science and policy is challenging. Science-policy theory suggests collaboration, stakeholder participation and iterative communication as key principles for improving the science-policy interface. The Horizon 2020 project “Coordination and Assessment of Research and Innovation in Support of climate Mitigation Actions” (CARISMA) attempted to implement these principles. To help other projects learn from CARISMA’s experiences, this Guideline article critically discusses how the CARISMA project fared. CARISMA’s activities included stakeholder engagement through feedback loops, interviews with Advisory Board members, and an information platform. Experiences were discussed in a workshop with science-policy practitioners. Theory and workshop participants’ insights led to the identification of seven practical directions towards a more effective exchange between science and policy, aimed at policymakers, funding agencies and researchers: 1) Know the researcher’s role; 2) Work with policy dynamics; 3) Use alternative communication means; 4) Allow for flexibility in projects’ deliverables and milestones; 5) Be realistic about the possibility of stakeholder engagement; 6) Adjust funding criteria; 7) Invest in stable knowledge infrastructures. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-12T06:20:10Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-b47b7b0c2c154356abf1329a05ba1d09 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2520-8748 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-12T06:20:10Z |
| publishDate | 2018-12-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Sustainable Earth Reviews |
| spelling | doaj.art-b47b7b0c2c154356abf1329a05ba1d092023-09-03T02:18:54ZengBMCSustainable Earth Reviews2520-87482018-12-01111810.1186/s42055-018-0007-0Improving collaborative knowledge production for climate change mitigation: lessons from EU Horizon 2020 experiencesDaan Boezeman0Heleen de Coninck1Institute for Management Research, Radboud University and PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment AgencyDepartment of Environmental Science, Radboud UniversityAbstract Scientific knowledge is key to climate mitigation governance. However, effective exchange between science and policy is challenging. Science-policy theory suggests collaboration, stakeholder participation and iterative communication as key principles for improving the science-policy interface. The Horizon 2020 project “Coordination and Assessment of Research and Innovation in Support of climate Mitigation Actions” (CARISMA) attempted to implement these principles. To help other projects learn from CARISMA’s experiences, this Guideline article critically discusses how the CARISMA project fared. CARISMA’s activities included stakeholder engagement through feedback loops, interviews with Advisory Board members, and an information platform. Experiences were discussed in a workshop with science-policy practitioners. Theory and workshop participants’ insights led to the identification of seven practical directions towards a more effective exchange between science and policy, aimed at policymakers, funding agencies and researchers: 1) Know the researcher’s role; 2) Work with policy dynamics; 3) Use alternative communication means; 4) Allow for flexibility in projects’ deliverables and milestones; 5) Be realistic about the possibility of stakeholder engagement; 6) Adjust funding criteria; 7) Invest in stable knowledge infrastructures.http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s42055-018-0007-0Science-policy interfaceKnowledge useBoundary organisationsClimate changeMitigationCo-production |
| spellingShingle | Daan Boezeman Heleen de Coninck Improving collaborative knowledge production for climate change mitigation: lessons from EU Horizon 2020 experiences Sustainable Earth Reviews Science-policy interface Knowledge use Boundary organisations Climate change Mitigation Co-production |
| title | Improving collaborative knowledge production for climate change mitigation: lessons from EU Horizon 2020 experiences |
| title_full | Improving collaborative knowledge production for climate change mitigation: lessons from EU Horizon 2020 experiences |
| title_fullStr | Improving collaborative knowledge production for climate change mitigation: lessons from EU Horizon 2020 experiences |
| title_full_unstemmed | Improving collaborative knowledge production for climate change mitigation: lessons from EU Horizon 2020 experiences |
| title_short | Improving collaborative knowledge production for climate change mitigation: lessons from EU Horizon 2020 experiences |
| title_sort | improving collaborative knowledge production for climate change mitigation lessons from eu horizon 2020 experiences |
| topic | Science-policy interface Knowledge use Boundary organisations Climate change Mitigation Co-production |
| url | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s42055-018-0007-0 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT daanboezeman improvingcollaborativeknowledgeproductionforclimatechangemitigationlessonsfromeuhorizon2020experiences AT heleendeconinck improvingcollaborativeknowledgeproductionforclimatechangemitigationlessonsfromeuhorizon2020experiences |