Abstract Non-technical summaryTo address increasingly pressing social–environmental challenges, the transformative strand of sustainability science seeks to move beyond a descriptive-analytical stance in order to explore and contribute to the implementation of radical alternatives to dominant and unsustainable paradigms, norms, and values. However, in many cases, academia is not currently structured to support and reward inter-/trans-disciplinary and transformative endeavors. This paper introduces a theory of change for the Future Earth Pathways Initiative, and similar initiatives, to help leverage the capacity of sustainability scientists to engage in transformative research. Technical summaryThe increasing body of descriptive-analytical knowledge produced by sustainability science over the last two decades has largely failed to trigger the transformation of policies, norms, and behaviors it was aiming to inform. The emergent transformative strand of sustainability science is a proactive alternative approach seeking to play an active role in processes of societal change by developing knowledge about options, solutions, and pathways, and by participating in their implementation. In principle, scientists can enhance their contribution to more sustainable futures by engaging in transformative research. However, a lack of skills and competencies, relatively unmatured transformative methods and concepts, and an institutional landscape still geared toward disciplinary and descriptive-analytical research, still hinders the sustainability science community from engaging more widely in transformative research. In this paper, the Future Earth Pathways Initiative introduces a theory of change (ToC) for increasing the capacity of sustainability scientists to engage in this type of research. This ToC ultimately aims to build a growing community of practitioners engaged in transformative research, to advance concepts, methods, and paradigms to foster ‘fit-for-purpose transformative research’, and to shape institutions to nurture transformative research-friendly contexts. Social media summaryWhat would a theory of change for leveraging the transformative capacity of sustainability science look like?
more »
« less
Seam Work and Simulacra of Societal Impact in Networking Research: A Critical Technical Practice Approach
This paper explores how conceptions of societal impact are produced and performed during academic computer science research, by leveraging critical technical practice while building a digital agriculture networking platform. Our findings reveal how everyday practices of envisioning and building infrastructure require working across disciplinary and institutional seams, leading us as computer scientists to continuously reconceptualize the intended societal impact. By self-reflectively analyzing how we accrue resources for projects, produce research systems, write about them, and maintain alignments with stakeholders, we demonstrate that this seam work produces shifting simulacra of societal impact around which the system’s success is narrated. HCI researchers frequently suggest that technical systems’ impact could be improved by motivating computer scientists to consider impact in system-building. Our findings show that institutional and disciplinary structures significantly shape how computer scientists can enact societal impact in their work. This work suggests opportunities for structural interventions to shape the impact of computing systems.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1955125
- PAR ID:
- 10510022
- Publisher / Repository:
- ACM
- Date Published:
- ISBN:
- 9798400703300
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 1 to 19
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Honolulu HI USA
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
This paper focuses on enhancing researchers’ ability to articulate and achieve societal impacts in their work using the ARIS Broad Impact (BI) Toolkit as a jumping off point. The authors conducted a survey of UNM researchers to understand their approach to societal impact and relationship-building in research projects. The key findings suggest that 1) researchers across disciplines and funding sources value societal impacts in their work; 2) most UNM researchers engage in collaborative relationships as part of their efforts to achieve broader societal impacts; and 3) while researchers feel confident in conceptualizing and carrying out activities related to broader societal impacts, they are less confident in writing BI statements for NSF proposals. Based on these findings, the authors recommend that research development professionals 1) emphasize the importance of finding meaning in research through its broader social impacts; 2) develop tools to support more intentional relationship-building in research projects; and 3) provide resources to help researchers translate their ideas into effective BI statements for proposals. The paper concludes by highlighting areas for further research, including student engagement, mentorship, and institutional questions about BI project development and evaluation. The authors argue that addressing these areas is crucial for enhancing the societal value and effectiveness of scholarly work, ultimately driving significant positive change through research.more » « less
-
Technological innovations have become a key driver of societal advancements. Nowhere is this more evident than in the field of machine learning (ML), which has developed algorithmic models that shape our decisions, behaviors, and outcomes. These tools have widespread use, in part, because they can synthesize massive amounts of data to make seemingly objective recommendations. Yet, in the past few years, the ML community has been drawing attention to the need for caution when interpreting and using these models. This is because these models are created by humans, from data generated by humans, whose psychology allows for various biases that impact how the models are developed, trained, tested, and interpreted. As psychologists, we thus face a fork in the road: Down the first path, we can continue to use these models without examining and addressing these critical flaws and rely on computer scientists to try to mitigate them. Down the second path, we can turn our expertise in bias toward this growing field, collaborating with computer scientists to reduce the models’ deleterious outcomes. This article serves to light the way down the second path by identifying how extant psychological research can help examine and curtail bias in ML models.more » « less
-
Abstract Biological and biomedical research is increasingly conducted in large, interdisciplinary collaborations to address problems with significant societal impact, such as reducing antibiotic resistance, identifying disease sub-types, and identifying genes that control for drought tolerance in plants. Many of these projects are data driven and involve the collection and analysis of biological data at a large-scale. As a result, life-science projects, which are frequently diverse, large and geographically dispersed, have created unique challenges for collaboration and training. We examine the communication and collaboration challenges in multidisciplinary research through an interview study with 20 life-science researchers. Our results show that both the inclusion of multiple disciplines and differences in work culture influence collaboration in life science. Using these results, we discuss opportunities and implications for designing solutions to better support collaborative tasks and workflows of life scientists. In particular, we show that life science research is increasingly conducted in large, multi-institutional collaborations, and these large groups rely on “mutual respect” and collaboration. However, we found that the interdisciplinary nature of these projects cause technical language barriers and differences in methodology affect trust. We use these findings to guide our recommendations for technology to support life science. We also present recommendations for life science research training programs and note the necessity for incorporating training in project management, multiple language, and discipline culture.more » « less
-
Research at the intersection of human-computer interaction (HCI) and health is increasingly done by collaborative cross-disciplinary teams. The need for cross-disciplinary teams arises from the interdisciplinary nature of the work itself—with the need for expertise in a health discipline, experimental design, statistics, and computer science, in addition to HCI. This work can also increase innovation, transfer of knowledge across fields, and have a higher impact on communities. To succeed at a collaborative project, researchers must effectively form and maintain a team that has the right expertise, integrate research perspectives and work practices, align individual and team goals, and secure funding to support the research. However, successfully operating as a team has been challenging for HCI researchers, and can be limited due to a lack of training, shared vocabularies, lack of institutional incentives, support from funding agencies, and more; which significantly inhibits their impact. This workshop aims to draw on the wealth of individual experiences in health project team collaboration across the CHI community and beyond. By bringing together different stakeholders involved in HCI health research, together, we will identify needs experienced during interdisciplinary HCI and health collaborations. We will identify existing practices and success stories for supporting team collaboration and increasing HCI capacity in health research. We aim for participants to leave our workshop with a toolbox of methods to tackle future team challenges, a community of peers who can strive for more effective teamwork, and feeling positioned to make the health impact they wish to see through their work.more » « less
An official website of the United States government
