328
C. Fürst
2018). A remaining challenge will however consist in the enrolment of actors from
practice to bridge or potentially close the gap between land use science and land use
practice (e.g. Partelow et al. 2019).
17.5 Outlook
Transdisciplinary methods alone will not solve the problem how to realize a permanent engagement of actors from practice. There is a need for a new understanding and
conception in how land use systems research should be conceived for delivering relevant practical recommendations without losing its scientific character. If co-design
of research and co-development of knowledge are taken serious, traditional “projectoriented” research might not be appropriate since the period between the start, where
research questions and hypotheses are (co-) formulated and the end, where outputs are
presented remains often non-transparent and inaccessible for actors from practice due
to time, economic or methodological constraints (e.g. Hansson and Polk 2018). Also,
their priorities and questions might undergo changes during the research project. An
opportunity to overcome these discrepancies between science and practice would be
to agree not on singular questions or projects, but on agenda-based approaches referring to the impact pathway strategy. This would include coming to a joint agreement
on final impacts expected by policy, planning and practice (e.g. achievement of the
UN SDGs) in a medium to long-term perspective and on outcomes that are perceived
to be relevant to accomplish them (e.g. through societal transformations and the way
how these can be initiated, supported and put into action). The agreed research agenda
could then start with an initial set of outputs (i.e. singular projects) that are serving to
succeed in the outcomes (e.g. scenario model-based recommendations that inform on
optimal intervention scales and decision levels in land use systems regarding the UN
SDGs). New relevant outputs could be added and existing ones should be subject to a
critical review in reasonable time spans, so that a co-learning approach can be established. This could help to overcome the difficulties between day-to-day management
in practice and the time lapse in conducting research. Certainly, the coordination of
such an agenda-based approach will require a higher and very holistic coordination
effort, which leaves enough decision and financial space for adjustment over the
agenda process and that will require conducting some pre-assessments of financial
ranges including uncertainties in which final budgets will range. On the other hand,
it would be much more dynamic and adaptive, would offer much larger participation
opportunities from practice, but also from scientific actors and would finally benefit
both sides through more synergetic results instead of segregated results in a multitude
of smaller (even joint research) projects. Such agenda-based processes could also be
implemented on an international scale, calling for applications that deliver expected
outputs from regions where these are perceived to be requested to fulfil the agenda,
so that a synthesis across continents could be supported.
C. Fürst
2018). A remaining challenge will however consist in the enrolment of actors from
practice to bridge or potentially close the gap between land use science and land use
practice (e.g. Partelow et al. 2019).
17.5 Outlook
Transdisciplinary methods alone will not solve the problem how to realize a permanent engagement of actors from practice. There is a need for a new understanding and
conception in how land use systems research should be conceived for delivering relevant practical recommendations without losing its scientific character. If co-design
of research and co-development of knowledge are taken serious, traditional “projectoriented” research might not be appropriate since the period between the start, where
research questions and hypotheses are (co-) formulated and the end, where outputs are
presented remains often non-transparent and inaccessible for actors from practice due
to time, economic or methodological constraints (e.g. Hansson and Polk 2018). Also,
their priorities and questions might undergo changes during the research project. An
opportunity to overcome these discrepancies between science and practice would be
to agree not on singular questions or projects, but on agenda-based approaches referring to the impact pathway strategy. This would include coming to a joint agreement
on final impacts expected by policy, planning and practice (e.g. achievement of the
UN SDGs) in a medium to long-term perspective and on outcomes that are perceived
to be relevant to accomplish them (e.g. through societal transformations and the way
how these can be initiated, supported and put into action). The agreed research agenda
could then start with an initial set of outputs (i.e. singular projects) that are serving to
succeed in the outcomes (e.g. scenario model-based recommendations that inform on
optimal intervention scales and decision levels in land use systems regarding the UN
SDGs). New relevant outputs could be added and existing ones should be subject to a
critical review in reasonable time spans, so that a co-learning approach can be established. This could help to overcome the difficulties between day-to-day management
in practice and the time lapse in conducting research. Certainly, the coordination of
such an agenda-based approach will require a higher and very holistic coordination
effort, which leaves enough decision and financial space for adjustment over the
agenda process and that will require conducting some pre-assessments of financial
ranges including uncertainties in which final budgets will range. On the other hand,
it would be much more dynamic and adaptive, would offer much larger participation
opportunities from practice, but also from scientific actors and would finally benefit
both sides through more synergetic results instead of segregated results in a multitude
of smaller (even joint research) projects. Such agenda-based processes could also be
implemented on an international scale, calling for applications that deliver expected
outputs from regions where these are perceived to be requested to fulfil the agenda,
so that a synthesis across continents could be supported.