Search

Publicly funded national science agencies create value as innovation catalysts and through their scientific and research missions, they tackle wicked problems. Understanding how dynamic capabilities and business model innovation enable research‐intensive organisations to seize the market in the mission is key to translating bold new science that has impact. We qualitatively explore how Australia's national science agency—the Commonwealth Scientific Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO)—has pursued open innovation to support business model–dynamic capabilities in an evolving publicly funded landscape. We reflect on the value of open innovation initiatives that have allowed the CSIRO to ambidextrously pursue world‐class science while achieving impact. Points for practitioners: Dynamic capabilities and business model innovation are strategic tools for publicly funded national science agencies seeking to seize the market in the mission.We examine a case of business model–dynamic capabilities in CSIRO.Open innovation has been important for CSIRO as part of an ambidextrous approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There has been a growing recognition regarding the use of social networks to engage communities in government actions. However, despite increasing awareness of social networks, there is very limited evidence for their application in relation to climate policy. This study fills this gap by assessing the potential of social networks for engaging local communities in climate adaptation policy, drawing on a case study of the Shoalhaven region in Australia. Participants from key representative groups were recruited using a purposive snowball sampling technique (N = 24). By mapping knowledge acquisition and diffusion networks in relation to climate adaption at the local scale, this study identified key nodes within the networks. Findings demonstrate that although climate adaptation information was acquired from a diverse range of sources, the sharing knowledge networks were far more dispersed. Furthermore, although 165 knowledge sources were identified, three nodes had coverage cross the entire network, and as such acted as boundary spanners within the sharing network. This research demonstrates the utility of social network analysis to reveal the underlying knowledge networks and structures that influence community engagement pathways and in doing so outlines key implications in relation to engaging local communities in climate policy and action. Policy relevance The rapid development of adaptation as a mainstream strategy for managing the risks of climate change has resulted in the emergence of a broad range of adaptation policies and management strategies globally. However, the success of these initiatives is largely dependent on their acceptance and uptake by local communities, which to date remains a significant challenge. Accordingly, policy makers require novel approaches to overcome barriers to community engagement so as to enhance the likely success of community engagement pathways. This article demonstrates the value of using social network analysis to reveal the underlying knowledge network structures. This approach makes it possible to identify key individuals within a community who can disseminate adaptation information quickly across broad geographic ranges. By utilizing this approach, policy makers globally will be able to increase the extent to which adaption initiatives are accepted and adhered to by local communities, thus increasing their success. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Setting universal goals for sustainability is problematic and may hinder the adoption of sustainable pathways as different sectors of society often have differing opinions on not just what sustainability means for them, but also what is of priority to them. This paper tests a set of psychographic, behavioural, lifestyle and social identities to segment the public on sustainability. We evaluate general knowledge, apply social-choice tools to identify public priorities, and then apply segmentation to reveal broad strata of community profiles around these choices. We discuss our findings in the context of moving beyond knowledge on sustainability and general public choices, to more nuanced messaging and engagement that respects differences in sustainability orientations. We suggest that by focusing on what matters most for different segments of society, there is potential to design effective processes to engage with people and acquire better ownership of sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Discussions, opinions and decisions regarding options for mitigating greenhouse gas emissions are often underpinned by an assumption that people know what carbon dioxide (CO2) is and how it behaves. Nevertheless, there has been little empirical evidence to suggest this is actually the case. Renewable energy technologies as well as technologies such as CO2 capture and storage (CCS) present potential solutions for mitigating the anthropogenic emissions of CO2. In discussions and information provided on climate change and mitigation technologies, CO2 is referred to regularly, particularly in regards to CCS, as CO2 is the fundamental underpinnings of the technology. Yet surprisingly little research has investigated levels of knowledge and understanding of CO2 and how this affects perceptions and understanding of energy technologies, especially CCS. With a sample of 2470 participants from three countries (Australia, the Netherlands and Japan), our research found respondents had a general understanding of CO2 but poor knowledge of its scientific dimensions. These misperceptions were directly related to misperceptions of CCS, yet indirectly related to their opinion on the implementation of the technology. It was found that providing information on the scientific characteristics of CO2 reduced misunderstanding of CCS and mitigated some change in opinion formation on CCS implementation. Overall, our research demonstrated that assumed knowledge of CO2 in the general public is partially flawed and has the potential to impact future dialogue and uptake of mitigation options. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As governments, funding agencies and research organisations worldwide seek to maximise both the financial and non-financial returns on investment in research, the way the research process is organised and funded is becoming increasingly under scrutiny. There are growing demands and aspirations to measure research impact (beyond academic publications), to understand how science works, and to optimise its societal and economic impact. In response, a multidisciplinary practice called research impact assessment is rapidly developing. Given that the practice is still in its formative stage, systematised recommendations or accepted standards for practitioners (such as funders and those responsible for managing research projects) across countries or disciplines to guide research impact assessment are not yet available.In this statement, we propose initial guidelines for a rigorous and effective process of research impact assessment applicable to all research disciplines and oriented towards practice. This statement systematises expert knowledge and practitioner experience from designing and delivering the International School on Research Impact Assessment (ISRIA). It brings together insights from over 450 experts and practitioners from 34 countries, who participated in the school during its 5-year run (from 2013 to 2017) and shares a set of core values from the school's learning programme. These insights are distilled into ten-point guidelines, which relate to (1) context, (2) purpose, (3) stakeholders' needs, (4) stakeholder engagement, (5) conceptual frameworks, (6) methods and data sources, (7) indicators and metrics, (8) ethics and conflicts of interest, (9) communication, and (10) community of practice.The guidelines can help practitioners improve and standardise the process of research impact assessment, but they are by no means exhaustive and require evaluation and continuous improvement. The prima facie effectiveness of the guidelines is based on the systematised expert and practitioner knowledge of the school's faculty and participants derived from their practical experience and research evidence. The current knowledge base has gaps in terms of the geographical and scientific discipline as well as stakeholder coverage and representation. The guidelines can be further strengthened through evaluation and continuous improvement by the global research impact assessment community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]