Search

In this paper, we present a digital tool named Diversity Perspectives in Social Media (DivPSM) which conducts automated content analysis of strategic diversity communication in organizational social media posts, using supervised machine-learning. DivPSM is trained to identify whether a post makes mention of diversity or a diversity-related issue, and to subsequently code for the presence of three diversity dimensions (cultural/ethnic/racial, gender, and LHGBTQ+ diversity) and three diversity perspectives (the moral, market, and innovation perspectives). In Study 1, we describe the training and validation of the instrument, and examine how it performs compared to human coders. Our findings confirm that DivPSM is sufficiently reliable for use in future research. In study 2, we illustrate the type of data that DivPSM generates, by analyzing the prevalence of strategic diversity communication in social media posts (n = 84,561) of large organizations in the Netherlands. Our results show that in this context gender diversity is most prevalent, followed by LHGBTQ+ and cultural/ethnic/racial diversity. Furthermore, gender diversity is often associated with the innovation perspective, whereas LHGBTQ+ diversity is more often associated with the moral perspective. Cultural/ethnic/racial diversity does not show strong associations with any of the perspectives. Theoretical implications and directions for future research are discussed at the end of the paper. • DivPSM can analyze how organizations communicate about diversity on social media • DivPSM codes whether a post includes cultural/ethnic/racial, gender, or LHGBTQ+ diversity • DivPSM identifies the underlying rationale for diversity management that the organization uses • In social media posts by large Dutch organizations, gender diversity is mentioned most often • Gender diversity is often communicated as a way to increase creativity and innovation [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lacking knowledge concerning the North-Sea's socio-ecological system causes the rapid increase of Offshore Wind Farm (OWF) development to occur under serious uncertainty. Optimising OWF development while minimizing negative effects on the socio-ecological system of the North-Sea thus requires holistic knowledge and its appropriate use in policy. Together with the pressure for OWF development, the subsequently rapid development of an array of scientific knowledge results in a dynamic and multidisciplinary knowledge situation, challenging the integration of knowledge, particularly between research and policy. To ensure policy is based on the latest holistic understanding, knowledge requires integration in strategic Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) policy. While the need for better knowledge processes is widely mentioned as a challenge for MSP, knowledge-integration in MSP remains understudied. This paper responds by studying the role of OWF-related knowledge in MSP while formulating a framework of conditions for knowledge-integration between research and policy in MSP policy and OWF development. These conditions are formulated based on knowledge management and MSP literature and subsequently applied in semi-structured interviews, document research, consortium observations, and focus groups. The case study used for acquiring data is knowledge-integration in Dutch MSP and OWF development. The Dutch maritime area is intensively used and faces important tensions over space due to conflicting stakeholder interests. In addition, while being an early adopter of MSP, the Netherlands also faces serious challenges due to high political pressure promoting Offshore Wind Farm development and a related need for maritime knowledge production. Together with the array of knowledge programs aiming to inform Dutch MSP, this provides a useful case to analyse knowledge-integration in MSP. The framework developed in this paper includes conditions for knowledge-integration ranging from the acceptance of differences between researchers and policymakers, to the need to employ interface managers who can develop a structural and effective knowledge-integration process. Fundamental differences between researchers and policymakers, such as differing timeframes, and differing views on uncertainty were found to form significant risks for knowledge-integration, as such influencing conditions. Additionally, the dynamic, long-term, area specific, and multidisciplinary context of MSP and OWF development was found to significantly influence the knowledge-integration process, underlining the importance of context for knowledge processes. • Science-policy gaps challenge knowledge-integration. • Contexts of knowledge influence conditions for integration. • Uncertainty and interface, require management to improve knowledge-integration. • Interdisciplinarity necessary for holistic knowledge integration in MSP. • Strategic, adaptive, multidisciplinary, and interface as main conditions for integration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]