Impact is a Two-Way Conversation

Sammanfattning: Sustainability researchers are facing increasing pressure to improve their scientific communication and to achieve impacts in wider society with their research. Knowledge mobilisation (KMB) is a key component of both challenges, as it relates to efforts undertaken by researchers to achieve impacts with their research. This study seeks to identify some of the KMB practices being undertaken by experienced researchers, the types of support that they are receiving from their organisations and what matters they think need to be included in debates going forward about KMB and research impact. For this study, experienced sustainability researchers, KMB experts and funding assessors based in the United Kingdom and Canada were interviewed. These two countries were chosen as the UK was the first to include research impact within its national assessment of research funding, whilst the KMB sector has witnessed rapid growth in Canada. Interviewee transcripts were subject to a content analysis, the results of which were then compared against survey data provided by Springer Nature, who circulated a survey in June 2019 to researchers who had published at least 3 papers in the last 5 years, asking them for their views on research impact. Across the interviews with sustainability researchers, 65 different KMB practices, grouped into 10 categories, and 26 different types of potential support grouped into 11 categories were identified. With respect to KMB practices reported, the study provides a detailed qualitative synthesis of all interviewees’ experiences and views on a range of KMB practices, including research design, stakeholder engagement, networks, open access issues, researcher attributes and tailored communications. In addition, a detailed synthesis of support for KMB is provided, covering organisational culture, reflective spaces and fora, incentives, training, external communications, dedicated KMB personnel, time and interdisciplinary teams. Interviewees views on other matters to consider, such as the advocacy dilemma, competing interests, resistance to sustainability, possible implications for certain types of sustainability research and possible changes needed at research organisations and funding agencies are also provided. The study concludes by contending that KMB is far more complex and diverse that has traditionally been conceived, requiring key parties to investigate what is working and what is not (with respect to KMB) and that KMB is the responsibility of everyone, not just researchers and their organisations. Finally, the study offers nine recommendations for those interested in improving the KMB of sustainability research.