Improving the public value of science: A typology to inform discussion, design and implementation of research. McNie, E., C., Parris, A., & Sarewitz, D. Research Policy, 45:884-895, Elsevier B.V, 2016.
Improving the public value of science: A typology to inform discussion, design and implementation of research [link]Website  abstract   bibtex   
•‘Basic’ and ‘applied’ research do not consider the context of use.•A more complete view of research activities and expectations is described.•A multi-dimensional typology of research activities is introduced.•Attributes are idealized on a spectrum, from science-centric to user-oriented.•Using the typology can inform science-policy planning and decisions.; Decision makers call upon and fund science to solve urgent problems, catalyze innovation, and inform policy decisions. But the standard categories for describing, planning and assessing research, especially the persistence of “basic” and “applied,” conceal much of the complexity and diversity of the contexts for conducting and using research, especially the role of knowledge users in the research process. Here we provide an entirely new typology aimed at allowing a more complete view of research activities and expectations, in order to improve deliberation and decision-making about research and its desired contribution to public values. Our multi-dimensional research typology divides research into three general activities: knowledge production, learning and engagement, and organizational and institutional processes, all of which are further subdivided into fifteen attributes. These idealized attributes are expressed in terms of a spectrum of value criteria ranging from strongly science-centric to strongly user-oriented. This enables consideration of the isolated knowledge value of science, the consideration and context of use, and the engagement of intended users. Used as a heuristic device, the typology can help inform and improve science-policy planning and decisions, aid in assessing the potential of existing projects, programs and institutions to achieve particular goals, and yield insights about the strengths and weaknesses of completed projects.
@article{
 title = {Improving the public value of science: A typology to inform discussion, design and implementation of research},
 type = {article},
 year = {2016},
 identifiers = {[object Object]},
 pages = {884-895},
 volume = {45},
 websites = {http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edselp&AN=S0048733316000056&site=eds-live&scope=site},
 publisher = {Elsevier B.V},
 id = {09e9d0a9-b15d-3d47-bf60-68d766fd2bea},
 created = {2016-08-20T17:03:58.000Z},
 file_attached = {false},
 profile_id = {217ced55-4c79-38dc-838b-4b5ea8df5597},
 group_id = {408d37d9-5f1b-3398-a9f5-5c1a487116d4},
 last_modified = {2017-03-14T09:54:45.334Z},
 read = {false},
 starred = {false},
 authored = {false},
 confirmed = {true},
 hidden = {false},
 source_type = {JOUR},
 notes = {ID: S0048733316000056; Accession Number: S0048733316000056; Author: McNie, Elizabeth C. (a, b, ⁎); Author: Parris, Adam (c); Author: Sarewitz, Daniel (d, e); Affiliation: Western Water Assessment, University of Colorado, Boulder, 1333 Grandview Ave., Boulder, CO 80309, United States; Affiliation: Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, 1333 Grandview Ave., Boulder, CO 80309, United States; Affiliation: Jamaica Bay Science and Resilience Institute, 2900 Bedford Ave., Rm. 1439, Ingersoll Hall, Brooklyn, NY 11210, United States; Affiliation: Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes, Arizona State University, 1834 Connecticut Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20009, United States; Affiliation: Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States; Number of Pages: 12; Language: English;},
 folder_uuids = {5385547b-ad5c-4873-9201-c82b9274e76b,cf78c658-6722-4a88-93c6-6a86fb55df05},
 private_publication = {false},
 abstract = {•‘Basic’ and ‘applied’ research do not consider the context of use.•A more complete view of research activities and expectations is described.•A multi-dimensional typology of research activities is introduced.•Attributes are idealized on a spectrum, from science-centric to user-oriented.•Using the typology can inform science-policy planning and decisions.; Decision makers call upon and fund science to solve urgent problems, catalyze innovation, and inform policy decisions. But the standard categories for describing, planning and assessing research, especially the persistence of “basic” and “applied,” conceal much of the complexity and diversity of the contexts for conducting and using research, especially the role of knowledge users in the research process. Here we provide an entirely new typology aimed at allowing a more complete view of research activities and expectations, in order to improve deliberation and decision-making about research and its desired contribution to public values. Our multi-dimensional research typology divides research into three general activities: knowledge production, learning and engagement, and organizational and institutional processes, all of which are further subdivided into fifteen attributes. These idealized attributes are expressed in terms of a spectrum of value criteria ranging from strongly science-centric to strongly user-oriented. This enables consideration of the isolated knowledge value of science, the consideration and context of use, and the engagement of intended users. Used as a heuristic device, the typology can help inform and improve science-policy planning and decisions, aid in assessing the potential of existing projects, programs and institutions to achieve particular goals, and yield insights about the strengths and weaknesses of completed projects.},
 bibtype = {article},
 author = {McNie, Elizabeth C and Parris, Adam and Sarewitz, Daniel},
 journal = {Research Policy}
}
Downloads: 0