Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T11:15:25.282Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How can research partnerships better support local development? Stakeholder perceptions on an approach to understanding research partnership outcomes in the Canadian Arctic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 September 2017

Nicolas D. Brunet ,
Gordon M. Hickey  and
Murray M. Humphries
Nicolas D. Brunet
Affiliation:
School of Environmental Design and Rural Development, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Rd East, Guelph, Ontario, Canada, N1G 2W1 (nicolas.brunet@uoguelph.ca)
Gordon M. Hickey
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Resource Sciences, McGill University, 21111 Lakeshore Road, Ste. Anne de Bellevue, QC, Canada, H9X 3V9
Murray M. Humphries
Affiliation:
Centre for Indigenous Peoples’ Nutrition and Environment, McGill University, 21111 Lakeshore Road, Ste. Anne de Bellevue, QC, Canada, H9X 3V9
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Understanding the benefits and outcomes of Canada's public investment in Arctic science and associated community–researcher partnerships represents a significant challenge for government. This paper presents a capital assets-based approach to conceptualising northern research partnership development processes and assessing the potential outcomes. By more explicitly considering the pre- and post-partnership asset levels (that is, social, human, physical, financial and natural assets) for different collaborators, the potential benefits and challenges associated with community–researcher partnerships can be collaboratively assessed. In order to help refine this approach, we conducted a survey of those involved in developing and maintaining community–researcher partnerships across Arctic Canada. Results indicate that the proposed approach could be useful for research funding agencies seeking to better understand partnership outcomes and promote more effective community–researcher interactions. Challenges include adequately capturing the qualitative nature of different capital assets, pointing to future research and policy needs. Better understanding the role of research in northern development has the potential to improve northern research, policy and practice.

Type
Research Article
Information
Polar Record , Volume 53 , Issue 5 , September 2017 , pp. 479 - 488
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abele, F. (2009). Northern development: past, present and future. In: Abele, F., Courchene, T., Seidle, L. and St.-Hilaire, F. Northern exposure: people, powers and prospects in Canada's North. Montreal: The Institute on Public Policy Research.Google Scholar
Abelson, J., Forest, P. G., Eyles, J., Smith, P., Martin, E. and Gauvin, F. P. (2003). Deliberations about deliberative methods: issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes. Social Science and Medicine, 57, 239–251.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andersen, T. and Poppel, B. (2002). Living conditions in the Arctic. Social Indicators Research, 58, 191–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnstein, S.R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Association of Planners, 35, 216–224.Google Scholar
Bebbington, A. (1999). Capitals and capabilities: a framework for analysing peasant viability, rural livelihoods and poverty. World development, 27, 2021–2044.Google Scholar
Bennett, N., Lemelin, R. H., Koster, R. and Budke, I. (2012). A capital assets framework for appraising and building capacity for tourism development in aboriginal protected area gateway communities. Tourism Management, 33, 752–766.Google Scholar
Bielawski, E. (1984). Anthropological observations on Science in the North – the role of the scientist in human development in the Northwest Territories. Arctic, 37, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bocking, S. (2007). Science and spaces in the Northern environment. Environmental History, 12, 867–894.Google Scholar
Brunet, N. D., Hickey, G. M. and Humphries, M. M. (2014a). Understanding community-researcher partnerships in the natural sciences: a case study from the Arctic. Journal of Rural Studies, 36, 247–261.Google Scholar
Brunet, N. D., Hickey, G. M. and Humphries, M. M. (2014b). The evolution of local participation and the mode of knowledge production in Arctic research. Ecology and Society, 19, 69–84.Google Scholar
Brunet, N. D., Hickey, G. M. and Humphries, M. M. (2016). Local participation and partnership development in Canada's Arctic research: challenges and opportunities in an age of empowerment and self-determination. Polar Record, 52, 345–359.Google Scholar
Carney, D. (1998). Sustainable rural livelihoods: what contribution can we make? London: DFID.Google Scholar
Chambers, R. (1997). Whose reality counts? Putting the first last. Rugby: Intermediate Technology Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chitty, D. and Elton, C. (1937). Canadian Arctic wildlife enquiry, 1935–36. Journal of Animal Ecology, 6, 368–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, J. (2011). Homeless in a homeland: housing (in)security and homelessness in Inuvik and Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, Canada. Montreal: Department of Geography, McGill University.Google Scholar
Christopher, S., Watts, V., McCormick, A. K. H. G. and Young, S. (2008). Building and maintaining trust in a community-based participatory research partnership. American Journal of Public Health, 98, 1398–1406.Google Scholar
Dyer, J., Stringer, L. C., Dougill, A. J., Leventon, J., Nshimbi, M., Chama, F., . . . Muhorro, S. (2014). Assessing participatory practices in community-based natural resource management: Experiences in community engagement from southern Africa. Journal of environmental management, 137, 137–145.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Engel, P., Keijzer, N. and Land, T. (2007). A balanced approach to monitoring and evaluating capacity and performance: a proposal for a framework. Discussion paper no. 58E. Maastricht: European Centre for Development Policy Management.Google Scholar
Eriksson, C., Fredriksson, I., Fröding, K., Geidne, S. and Pettersson, C. (2014). Academic-practice-policy partnerships for health promotion research -experiences from three research programs. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 42 (Suppl 15), 88–95.Google Scholar
Fiorino, D. J. (1990). Citizen participation and environmental risk: a survey of institutional mechanisms. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 15, 226–243.Google Scholar
Folz, D. H. (1996). Survey research for public administration. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furgal, C. and Seguin, J. (2006). Climate change, health, and vulnerability in Canadian Northern aboriginal communities. Environment Health Perspectives, 114, 1964– 1970.Google Scholar
Garnett, S. T., Crowley, G. M., Hunter-Xenie, H., Kozanayi, W., Sithole, B., Palmer, C., Southgate, R. and Zander, K. K. (2009). Transformative knowledge transfer through empowering and paying community researchers. Biotropica, 41, 571–577.Google Scholar
Gearheard, S. and Shirley, J. (2007). Challenges in community-research relationships: learning from natural science in Nunavut. Arctic, 60, 62–74.Google Scholar
Gerring, J. (2004). What is a case study and what is it good for? American political science review, 98, 341–354.Google Scholar
Googins, B. K. and Rochlin, S. A. (2000). Creating the partnership society: understanding the rhetoric and reality of cross-sectoral partnerships. Business and Society Review, 105, 127–144.Google Scholar
Graham, J. and Fortier, E. (2005). From opportunity to action: a progress report on Canada's renewal of Northern research. Ottawa: Institute on Governance.Google Scholar
Green, G. P. and Haines, A. (2002). Asset building and community development. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Greenfields, M. and Home, R. (2006). Assessing gypsies and traveller needs: partnership working and “The Cambridge Project”. Romani Studies, 16, 105–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada. (n.d.). Canadian High Arctic Research Station (CHARS). Retrieved from https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1314731268547/1314731373200 (accessed 6 June 2017).Google Scholar
ITK. (2002). Negotiating research relationships: a guide for communities. Ottawa: Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami.Google Scholar
ITK & NRI. (2007). Negotiating research relationships with Inuit communities: a guide for researchers. Ottawa and Iqaluit: Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami and Nunavut Research Institute.Google Scholar
Jagosh, J., Macaulay, A. C., Pluye, P., Salsberg, J., Bush, P. L., Henderson, J., . . . Seifer, S. D. (2012). Uncovering the benefits of participatory research: implications of a realist review for health research and practice. Milbank Quarterly, 90, 311–346.Google Scholar
Jones, K., Glenna, L. L. and Weltzien, E. (2014). Assessing participatory processes and outcomes in agricultural research for development from participants' perspectives. Journal of Rural Studies, 35, 91–100.Google Scholar
Klenk, N. L. and Hickey, G. M. (2013). How can formal research networks produce more socially robust forest science? Forest Policy and Economics, 37, 44–56.Google Scholar
Korsmo, F. L. and Graham, A. (2002). Research in the North American north: action and reaction. Arctic, 55, 319–328.Google Scholar
Krishna, A. and Shrader, E. (1999). Social capital assessment tool. In conference on social capital and poverty reduction (Vol. 22, p. 24). Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
Lasker, R. D., Weiss, E. S. and Miller, R. (2001). Partnership synergy: a practical framework for studying and strengthening the collaborative advantage. The Milbank Quarterly, 79, 179–205.Google Scholar
Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of psychology, 22, 140.Google Scholar
Lyons, N. (2010). The wisdom of elders: Inuvialuit social memories of continuity and change in the twentieth century. Arctic Anthropology, 47, 22–38.Google Scholar
Lynn, F. M. and Busenberg, G. J. (1995). Citizen advisory committees and environmental-policy: what we know, what's left to discover. Risk Analysis, 15, 147–162.Google Scholar
Mercer, S. L., Green, L. W., Cargo, M., Potter, M., Daniel, M., Olds, S. and Reed-Gross, E. (2008). Appendix C: reliability-tested guidelines for assessing participatory research projects. In: Minkler, M. and Wallerstein, N. Community-based participatory research for health: from process to outcomes. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Minkler, M. and Wallerstein, N. (2008). Introduction to CBPR: new issues and emphases. In: Minkler, M. and Wallerstein, N. Community-based participatory research for health: from process to outcomes. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Molas-Gallart, J., Tang, P. and Morrow, S. (2000). Assessing the non-academic impact of grant-funded socio-economic research: results from a pilot study. Research Evaluation, 9, 171–182.Google Scholar
Moser, C. (1998). The asset vulnerability framework: Reassessing urban poverty reduction. World Development, 26, 1–19.Google Scholar
Nelkin, D. and Pollak, M. (1979). Public participation in technological decisions: reality or grand illusion? Technology Review, 9, 55–64.Google Scholar
Oosten, J. and Laugrand, F. (2002). Qaujimajatuqangit and social problems in modern Inuit society: an elders workshop on Angakkuuniq. Inuit Studies, 26, 17–44.Google Scholar
Parlee, B. and Furgal, C. (2012). Well-being and environmental change in the Arctic: a synthesis of selected research from Canada's International Polar Year program. Climate Change, 115, 13–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pearce, T. D., Ford, J. D., Laidler, G. J., Smit, B., Duerden, F., Allarut, M., . . . Wandel, J. (2009). Community collaboration and climate change research in the Canadian Arctic. Polar Research, 28, 10–27.Google Scholar
Phillipson, J., Lowe, P., Proctor, A. and Ruto, E. (2012). Stakeholder engagement and knowledge exchange in environmental research. Journal of Environmental Management, 95, 56–65.Google Scholar
Research Council of Canada. (2007). A review of Canadian publications and impact in the natural sciences and engineering, 1996 to 2005. Ottawa, Ontario: NSERC. Retrieved from http://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/NSERC-CRSNG/Policies-Politiques/assesscontrib-evalcontrib_eng.asp (accessed 6 June 2017).Google Scholar
Raymond, C. M., Fazey, I., Reed, M. S., Stringer, L. C., Robinson, G. M. and Evely, A. C. (2010). Integrating local and scientific knowledge for environmental management. Journal of Environmental Management, 91, 1766– 1777.Google Scholar
Rooney, P., Steinberg, K. and Schervish, P. G. (2004). Methodology is destiny: the effect of survey prompts on reported levels of giving and volunteering. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33, 628–654.Google Scholar
Rowe, G. and Frewer, L. J. (2000). Public participation methods: a framework for evaluation. Science, Technology and Human Values, 25, 3–29.Google Scholar
Sandler, T. H. and Lowny, K. (2006). Social capital building toolkit (version 1.2). Saguaro Seminar: Civic Engagement in America, John F. Kennedy School of Government. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.Google Scholar
Schwarz, N, Knauper, B., Hipler, H. J., Noelle-Neumann, E. and Clark, L. (1991). Numeric values may change the meaning of scale labels. Public Opinion Quarterly, 55, 570– 582.Google Scholar
Scoones, I. (1998). Sustainable rural livelihoods: a framework for analysis (I.w.p. 72, ed). Sussex: University of Sussex.Google Scholar
SSHRC. n.d. Future challenge areas. Retrieved from http://www.sshrc-crsh.gc.ca/funding-financement/programs-programmes/challenge_areas-domaines_des_defis/index-eng.aspx (accessed 6 June 2016).Google Scholar
Stern, M. J. and Coleman, K. J. (2015). The multidimensionality of trust: applications in collaborative natural resource management. Society & Natural Resources, 28, 117– 132.Google Scholar
Sue, V. M. and Ritter, L. A. (2012). Conducting online surveys. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Suluk, T. K. and Blakney, S. L. (2009). Land claims and resistance to the management of harvester activities in Nunavut. Arctic, 61 (Suppl 1), 62–70.Google Scholar
Taylor, M. (2000). Communities in the lead: power, organizational capacity and social capital. Urban Studies, 37, 1019–1035.Google Scholar
Temby, O., Rastogi, A., Sandall, J., Cooksey, R. and Hickey, G. M. (2015). Interagency trust and communication in the transboundary governance of Pacific salmon fisheries. Review of Policy Research, 32, 79–99.Google Scholar
Turpin, T. and Garrett-Jones, S. (2009). Reward, risk and response in Australian cooperative research centres. Retrieved from http://ro.uow.edu.au/commpapers/473 (accessed 6 June 2016).Google Scholar
Webler, T. (1995). “Right” discourse in citizen participation: an evaluative yardstick. In: Renn, O., Webler, T. and Wiedemann, P. Fairness and competence in citizen participation: Evaluating models for environmental discourse. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
Wootton, B. C. and Metcalfe, C. (2010). A nice cold drink: keeping water potable in Canada's North. Water Canada, 2019, 22–24.Google Scholar
Wulfhorst, J. D., Eisenhauer, B. W., Gripne, S. L. and Ward, J. M. (2008). Participatory research for community-based natural resource management. Criteria and assessment of participation research. In: Wilmsen, C., Elmendorf, W., Fisher, L., Ross, J., Sarathy, B. and Wells, G. Partnerships for empowerment. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
Young, T. K. and Mollins, C. J. (1996). The impact of housing on health: an ecologic study from the Canadian Arctic. Arctic Medical Research, 55, 52–61.Google Scholar