Revealing the Relational Mechanisms of Research for Development Through Social Network Analysis.

Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1057/s41287-023-00576-y
Marina Apgar, Guillaume Fournie, Barbara Haesler, Grace Lyn Higdon, Leah Kenny, Annalena Oppel, Evelyn Pauls, Matthew Smith, Mieke Snijder, Daan Vink, Mazeda Hossain
{"title":"Revealing the Relational Mechanisms of Research for Development Through Social Network Analysis.","authors":"Marina Apgar,&nbsp;Guillaume Fournie,&nbsp;Barbara Haesler,&nbsp;Grace Lyn Higdon,&nbsp;Leah Kenny,&nbsp;Annalena Oppel,&nbsp;Evelyn Pauls,&nbsp;Matthew Smith,&nbsp;Mieke Snijder,&nbsp;Daan Vink,&nbsp;Mazeda Hossain","doi":"10.1057/s41287-023-00576-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Achieving impact through research for development programmes (R4D) requires engagement with diverse stakeholders across the research, development and policy divides. Understanding how such programmes support the emergence of outcomes, therefore, requires a focus on the relational aspects of engagement and collaboration. Increasingly, evaluation of large research collaborations is employing social network analysis (SNA), making use of its relational view of causation. In this paper, we use three applications of SNA within similar large R4D programmes, through our work within evaluation of three Interidsiplinary Hubs of the Global Challenges Research Fund, to explore its potential as an evaluation method. Our comparative analysis shows that SNA can uncover the structural dimensions of interactions within R4D programmes and enable learning about how networks evolve through time. We reflect on common challenges across the cases including navigating different forms of bias that result from incomplete network data, multiple interpretations across scales, and the challenges of making causal inference and related ethical dilemmas. We conclude with lessons on the methodological and operational dimensions of using SNA within monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL) systems that aim to support both learning and accountability.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1057/s41287-023-00576-y.</p>","PeriodicalId":75001,"journal":{"name":"","volume":"35 2","pages":"323-350"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9875764/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-023-00576-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Achieving impact through research for development programmes (R4D) requires engagement with diverse stakeholders across the research, development and policy divides. Understanding how such programmes support the emergence of outcomes, therefore, requires a focus on the relational aspects of engagement and collaboration. Increasingly, evaluation of large research collaborations is employing social network analysis (SNA), making use of its relational view of causation. In this paper, we use three applications of SNA within similar large R4D programmes, through our work within evaluation of three Interidsiplinary Hubs of the Global Challenges Research Fund, to explore its potential as an evaluation method. Our comparative analysis shows that SNA can uncover the structural dimensions of interactions within R4D programmes and enable learning about how networks evolve through time. We reflect on common challenges across the cases including navigating different forms of bias that result from incomplete network data, multiple interpretations across scales, and the challenges of making causal inference and related ethical dilemmas. We conclude with lessons on the methodological and operational dimensions of using SNA within monitoring, evaluation and learning (MEL) systems that aim to support both learning and accountability.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1057/s41287-023-00576-y.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从社会网络分析揭示发展研究的关系机制。
通过研究促进发展项目(R4D)实现影响需要与研究、发展和政策领域的不同利益相关者进行接触。因此,理解这些规划如何支持成果的出现,需要关注参与和合作的关系方面。越来越多的大型科研合作评估采用社会网络分析(SNA),利用其因果关系观。在本文中,我们通过对全球挑战研究基金的三个跨学科中心的评估工作,在类似的大型R4D项目中使用了SNA的三个应用,以探索其作为评估方法的潜力。我们的比较分析表明,SNA可以揭示R4D程序中相互作用的结构维度,并使我们能够了解网络如何随时间演变。我们反思了案例中的共同挑战,包括导航由不完整的网络数据导致的不同形式的偏见,跨尺度的多重解释,以及进行因果推理和相关伦理困境的挑战。最后,我们总结了在旨在支持学习和问责制的监测、评价和学习(MEL)系统中使用SNA的方法和操作方面的经验教训。补充信息:在线版本包含补充资料,提供地址为10.1057/s41287-023-00576-y。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1