研究人员的反思性在共同制定公共政策中的价值:实践视角。

IF 1.2 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Journal of Medical Humanities Pub Date : 2024-06-24 DOI:10.1007/s10912-024-09853-1
Yamini Cinamon Nair, Mark Fabian
{"title":"研究人员的反思性在共同制定公共政策中的价值:实践视角。","authors":"Yamini Cinamon Nair, Mark Fabian","doi":"10.1007/s10912-024-09853-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Coproduction of public policy involves bringing together technical experts, practitioners, and people with lived experience of that policy to collaboratively and deliberatively codesign it. Coproduction can leverage different ways of knowing and evaluative perspectives on a policy area to enhance the legitimacy and efficaciousness of policymaking. This article argues that researcher reflexivity is crucial for getting the most out of coproduction ethically and epistemically. By reflecting on our positionality, habitus, and biases, we can gain new insights into how we affect the research design, production and analysis of data, and communication of findings. This reflexivity helps to disrupt power dynamics that underly research and policymaking, helping to realise the radical potential of coproduction to democratise practice, empower citizens, and make research more relational. We demonstrate the value of reflexivity through an analysis of our work coproducing a theory of thriving in financial hardship in partnership with the UK national anti-poverty charity Turn2us. We contextualise our advocacy for reflexivity within the practical realities of advancing coproduction in the UK today.</p>","PeriodicalId":45518,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Humanities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Value of Researcher Reflexivity in the Coproduction of Public Policy: A Practical Perspective.\",\"authors\":\"Yamini Cinamon Nair, Mark Fabian\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10912-024-09853-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Coproduction of public policy involves bringing together technical experts, practitioners, and people with lived experience of that policy to collaboratively and deliberatively codesign it. Coproduction can leverage different ways of knowing and evaluative perspectives on a policy area to enhance the legitimacy and efficaciousness of policymaking. This article argues that researcher reflexivity is crucial for getting the most out of coproduction ethically and epistemically. By reflecting on our positionality, habitus, and biases, we can gain new insights into how we affect the research design, production and analysis of data, and communication of findings. This reflexivity helps to disrupt power dynamics that underly research and policymaking, helping to realise the radical potential of coproduction to democratise practice, empower citizens, and make research more relational. We demonstrate the value of reflexivity through an analysis of our work coproducing a theory of thriving in financial hardship in partnership with the UK national anti-poverty charity Turn2us. We contextualise our advocacy for reflexivity within the practical realities of advancing coproduction in the UK today.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45518,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Humanities\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Humanities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10912-024-09853-1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10912-024-09853-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

公共政策的共同制定涉及将技术专家、从业人员和对政策有切身体会的人聚集在一起,以合作和协商的方式共同制定政策。共同制定可以利用对某一政策领域的不同认识方式和评价视角,提高政策制定的合法性和效率。本文认为,研究人员的反思性对于从伦理和认识论角度最大限度地利用合作生产至关重要。通过反思自己的立场、习惯和偏见,我们可以对自己如何影响研究设计、数据生产和分析以及研究结果的交流有新的认识。这种反思性有助于打破支撑研究和决策的权力动态,帮助实现共同生产的激进潜力,使实践民主化,赋予公民权力,并使研究更具关联性。我们通过分析我们与英国全国性反贫困慈善机构 Turn2us 合作提出的在经济困难中茁壮成长的理论,证明了反身性的价值。我们将在当今英国推进合作生产的现实背景下倡导反身性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
The Value of Researcher Reflexivity in the Coproduction of Public Policy: A Practical Perspective.

Coproduction of public policy involves bringing together technical experts, practitioners, and people with lived experience of that policy to collaboratively and deliberatively codesign it. Coproduction can leverage different ways of knowing and evaluative perspectives on a policy area to enhance the legitimacy and efficaciousness of policymaking. This article argues that researcher reflexivity is crucial for getting the most out of coproduction ethically and epistemically. By reflecting on our positionality, habitus, and biases, we can gain new insights into how we affect the research design, production and analysis of data, and communication of findings. This reflexivity helps to disrupt power dynamics that underly research and policymaking, helping to realise the radical potential of coproduction to democratise practice, empower citizens, and make research more relational. We demonstrate the value of reflexivity through an analysis of our work coproducing a theory of thriving in financial hardship in partnership with the UK national anti-poverty charity Turn2us. We contextualise our advocacy for reflexivity within the practical realities of advancing coproduction in the UK today.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Medical Humanities
Journal of Medical Humanities HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
33
期刊介绍: Journal of Medical Humanities publishes original papers that reflect its enlarged focus on interdisciplinary inquiry in medicine and medical education. Such inquiry can emerge in the following ways: (1) from the medical humanities, which includes literature, history, philosophy, and bioethics as well as those areas of the social and behavioral sciences that have strong humanistic traditions; (2) from cultural studies, a multidisciplinary activity involving the humanities; women''s, African-American, and other critical studies; media studies and popular culture; and sociology and anthropology, which can be used to examine medical institutions, practice and education with a special focus on relations of power; and (3) from pedagogical perspectives that elucidate what and how knowledge is made and valued in medicine, how that knowledge is expressed and transmitted, and the ideological basis of medical education.
期刊最新文献
The Rarest and Purest Form of Generosity: Simone Weil's Attention and Medical Practice. Following the Science in the Age of COVID-19 The Telegraphic Body: Dyspepsia, Modern Life, and ‘Gastric Time’ in Nineteenth-Century Medicine and Culture someOne. Breaking Taboos: Arab Breast Cancer Activism in Art and Popular Culture
×
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:481959085
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