Creating Boundary Objects Supports Knowledge Co-development Processes: A Case Study Evaluation from the Colorado Front Range

IF 1.8 3区 农林科学 Q2 FORESTRY
Hannah L C Brown, Antony S Cheng, Nehalem C Clark, Andrew W Slack, Brett H Wolk
{"title":"Creating Boundary Objects Supports Knowledge Co-development Processes: A Case Study Evaluation from the Colorado Front Range","authors":"Hannah L C Brown, Antony S Cheng, Nehalem C Clark, Andrew W Slack, Brett H Wolk","doi":"10.1093/jofore/fvae010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This qualitative case study evaluates manager and researcher perceptions of the impact of a place-based, collaborative knowledge co-development process and examines the outcomes of that co-development for changes to management approaches. The USDA Forest Service (Forest Service) Rocky Mountain Research Station General Technical Report 373 (GTR-373) is a codeveloped science synthesis that functions as a boundary object providing a framework for planning, designing, and implementing management action for restoration of ponderosa and dry mixed-conifer forests. The process of creating and socializing the GTR-373 framework fostered continual knowledge exchange and engagement between researchers and managers across different organizations and levels of decision-making. This built trust in the information, improved justification for management action, developed a common foundation for cross-boundary implementation, and increased communication. The framework has been applied across jurisdictions and has been used as a foundational tool for training staff and designing projects. However, adapting the GTR-373 framework across scales remains challenging. Study Implications: This qualitative case study evaluates a co-development process in which researchers and managers from multiple organizations and agencies collaborated to produce a science-informed restoration framework to support forest management on the Colorado Front Range (GTR-373). The process built trust, improved justification for management action, developed a common foundation for implementation, and increased communication. However, cross-boundary management across spatial scales remains challenging, and managers interpret information through organizational mandates and site-specific context. Sustained collaboration between researchers and land managers can help make science actionable and relevant at the appropriate scale for planning and management across expertise and jurisdictional boundaries.","PeriodicalId":15821,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forestry","volume":"40 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Forestry","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jofore/fvae010","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FORESTRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This qualitative case study evaluates manager and researcher perceptions of the impact of a place-based, collaborative knowledge co-development process and examines the outcomes of that co-development for changes to management approaches. The USDA Forest Service (Forest Service) Rocky Mountain Research Station General Technical Report 373 (GTR-373) is a codeveloped science synthesis that functions as a boundary object providing a framework for planning, designing, and implementing management action for restoration of ponderosa and dry mixed-conifer forests. The process of creating and socializing the GTR-373 framework fostered continual knowledge exchange and engagement between researchers and managers across different organizations and levels of decision-making. This built trust in the information, improved justification for management action, developed a common foundation for cross-boundary implementation, and increased communication. The framework has been applied across jurisdictions and has been used as a foundational tool for training staff and designing projects. However, adapting the GTR-373 framework across scales remains challenging. Study Implications: This qualitative case study evaluates a co-development process in which researchers and managers from multiple organizations and agencies collaborated to produce a science-informed restoration framework to support forest management on the Colorado Front Range (GTR-373). The process built trust, improved justification for management action, developed a common foundation for implementation, and increased communication. However, cross-boundary management across spatial scales remains challenging, and managers interpret information through organizational mandates and site-specific context. Sustained collaboration between researchers and land managers can help make science actionable and relevant at the appropriate scale for planning and management across expertise and jurisdictional boundaries.
创建边界对象支持知识共同开发过程:科罗拉多前沿地区的案例研究评估
这项定性案例研究评估了管理者和研究人员对基于地方的合作知识共同开发过程的影响的看法,并研究了共同开发对管理方法的改变所产生的结果。美国农业部林务局(林务局)落基山研究站通用技术报告 373(GTR-373)是一份经过编码的科学综合报告,它作为一个边界对象,为规划、设计和实施恢复松柏和干性针阔混交林的管理行动提供了一个框架。GTR-373 框架的创建和社会化过程促进了不同组织和决策层的研究人员和管理人员之间的持续知识交流和参与。这建立了对信息的信任,提高了管理行动的合理性,为跨境实施奠定了共同基础,并加强了沟通。该框架已在各辖区得到应用,并被用作培训员工和设计项目的基础工具。然而,对 GTR-373 框架进行跨尺度调整仍具有挑战性。研究意义:本定性案例研究对共同开发过程进行了评估,在这一过程中,来自多个组织和机构的研究人员和管理人员通力合作,共同制定了一个以科学为依据的恢复框架(GTR-373),以支持科罗拉多前沿地带的森林管理。这一过程建立了信任,改善了管理行动的合理性,为实施工作奠定了共同基础,并加强了沟通。然而,跨空间尺度的跨境管理仍然具有挑战性,管理人员需要根据组织任务和具体地点的情况来解释信息。研究人员与土地管理者之间的持续合作有助于使科学在适当的尺度上具有可操作性和相关性,从而实现跨专业和跨管辖范围的规划和管理。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Forestry
Journal of Forestry 农林科学-林学
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
8.70%
发文量
45
审稿时长
>24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Forestry is the most widely circulated scholarly forestry journal in the world. In print since 1902, the mission of the Journal of Forestry is to advance the profession of forestry by keeping forest management professionals informed about significant developments and ideas in the many facets of forestry. The Journal is published bimonthly: January, March, May, July, September, and November.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信