13 Transcending the Loading Dock Paradigm—Rethinking …
263
13.6 Conclusion
In this chapter, I have argued that the conventional “loading dock approach” of science
transfer is not applicable for research projects that proactively seek to drive societal
change towards sustainability. Conventional transfer channels of scientific results
are still viable, but are inappropriate in SLM settings if they are the only strategic
approach to transfer. Bi-directional communication channels that involve science
and societal actors are needed to enhance the societal relevance and applicability of
outputs. Moreover, innovative ideas in SLM require an interpersonal level in which
key actors of land use (KALU) can share, interpret and contextualise information.
In a mental model, three strategic impact pathways for T&I activities in SLM
have been presented. Each represents an ideal, heuristic approach towards KALUs
that had been identified as the main addressees of T&I activities. These actors differ
widely depending on the research context, and can impersonalise individuals and
institutions alike. Notable resources in project planning should be tied to activities
that analyse the environment of stakeholders and the system under investigation (and
its inherent ties and interrelations), in order to identify crucial actors that should be
approached.
T&I are activities that should be considered continuously during a research
process, and be an element of strategic project management from the very beginning of the project cycle. Undoubtedly, T&I activities tie up additional management
resources and cause trade-offs with other activities in the research project, which must
be considered. T&I activities need professional experts who are paid and recognised
for their work. Conceptualising and conducting T&I activities as described in the
previous section requires professional expertise that is rarely taught in academic
curricula as yet. If taken seriously, T&I should not be done part-time and in addition
to a “real” function within a research project.
Moreover, there is no guarantee that T&I activities (even if conducted to perfection) will lead to a desired impact in society because external factors that cannot be
influenced make transdisciplinary research projects vulnerable. Thus, T&I should be
seen as activities that increase the potential for research impact only. After all, it is not
the product, the process or the model of a prototype that stands for successful transfer
alone; it is the knowledge of an innovation and its functioning, and its strengths,
weaknesses, risks and opportunities that influence or slow down the dissemination
of innovations.
Acknowledgements I thank Thomas Weith, Thomas Aenis, Jana Zscheischler and Andrea Rau
for their scientific advice and support. I also thank numerous (not further mentioned) colleagues
for noteworthy inputs and fruitful discussions.
263
13.6 Conclusion
In this chapter, I have argued that the conventional “loading dock approach” of science
transfer is not applicable for research projects that proactively seek to drive societal
change towards sustainability. Conventional transfer channels of scientific results
are still viable, but are inappropriate in SLM settings if they are the only strategic
approach to transfer. Bi-directional communication channels that involve science
and societal actors are needed to enhance the societal relevance and applicability of
outputs. Moreover, innovative ideas in SLM require an interpersonal level in which
key actors of land use (KALU) can share, interpret and contextualise information.
In a mental model, three strategic impact pathways for T&I activities in SLM
have been presented. Each represents an ideal, heuristic approach towards KALUs
that had been identified as the main addressees of T&I activities. These actors differ
widely depending on the research context, and can impersonalise individuals and
institutions alike. Notable resources in project planning should be tied to activities
that analyse the environment of stakeholders and the system under investigation (and
its inherent ties and interrelations), in order to identify crucial actors that should be
approached.
T&I are activities that should be considered continuously during a research
process, and be an element of strategic project management from the very beginning of the project cycle. Undoubtedly, T&I activities tie up additional management
resources and cause trade-offs with other activities in the research project, which must
be considered. T&I activities need professional experts who are paid and recognised
for their work. Conceptualising and conducting T&I activities as described in the
previous section requires professional expertise that is rarely taught in academic
curricula as yet. If taken seriously, T&I should not be done part-time and in addition
to a “real” function within a research project.
Moreover, there is no guarantee that T&I activities (even if conducted to perfection) will lead to a desired impact in society because external factors that cannot be
influenced make transdisciplinary research projects vulnerable. Thus, T&I should be
seen as activities that increase the potential for research impact only. After all, it is not
the product, the process or the model of a prototype that stands for successful transfer
alone; it is the knowledge of an innovation and its functioning, and its strengths,
weaknesses, risks and opportunities that influence or slow down the dissemination
of innovations.
Acknowledgements I thank Thomas Weith, Thomas Aenis, Jana Zscheischler and Andrea Rau
for their scientific advice and support. I also thank numerous (not further mentioned) colleagues
for noteworthy inputs and fruitful discussions.