Abstract
The chapter explores the ‘engaged excellence’ approach developed by the Institute of Development Studies. It combines high-quality, conceptually and empirically innovative research, with deep extensive engagement with local and global actors through our practices, partners and students. Four pillars contributing to engaged excellence high-quality research are identified: co-constructing knowledge; mobilising impact-orientated evidence, and building enduring partnerships, emphasising their mutual interdependence. The arguments supporting the concept of engaged excellence are epistemological, pragmatic, and normative. In each section, these arguments are outlined, acknowledging that an approach to research that embraces excellence and engagement means that trade-offs need to be made, and ethical and practical challenges navigated. It is shown that the approach has the potential to create more robust and influential research across Development Studies, and helps ensure its dual commitments to scholarly excellence and societal relevance.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Apgar, M., Mustonen, T., Lovera, S., & Lovera, M. (2016). Moving Beyond Co-construction of Knowledge to Enable Self-Determination. IDS Bulletin,47(6), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.19088/1968-2016.199.
Bardsley, C., (2017). The Pursuit of Impact Through Evidence: The Value of Social Science for Development, a Funder’s Perspective. In J. Georgolakis, M. Jessani, R. Oronje, B. Ramalingam (Eds.), The Social Realities of Knowledge for Development. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies. https://opendocs.ids.ac.uk/opendocs/bitstream/handle/123456789/12852/Social_Realities_of_Knowledge_for_Development_FullIssue.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y#page=186. Accessed 8 August 2017.
Benequista, N. (2011). Blurring the Boundaries: Citizen Action Across States and Societies. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies.
Cash, D. W., et al. (2003). Knowledge Systems for Sustainable Development. PNAS,100(14), 8086–8091.
Caxaj, C. S. (2015). Indigenous Storytelling and Participatory Action Research. Global Qualitative Nursing Research,2, 1–12.
Corbridge, S. (2007). The (Im)Possibility of Development Studies. Economy and Society, 36(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085140701264869.
Cornell, S., et al. (2013). Opening Up Knowledge Systems for Better Responses to Global Environmental Change. Environmental Science and Policy, 28, 60–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2012.11.008.
Dilling, L., & Lemos, M. C. (2011). Creating Usable Science: Opportunities and Constrainsts for Climate Knowledge Use and Their Implications for Science Policy. Global Environmental Change,21, 680–689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha2010.11.006.
Dolan, et al. (2016). Engaged Excellence or Excellent Engagement? Collaborating Critically to Amplify the Voices of Male Survivors of Conflict-Related Sexual Violence. IDS Bulletin,47(6), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.19088/1968-2016.198.
Ely, A., & Marin, A. (2017). Learning About ‘Engaged Excellence’ Across a Transformative Knowledge Network. IDS Bulletin, 47(6), 73–86. https://doi.org/10.19088/1968-2016.200.
Fazey, I., et al. (2014). Evaluating Knowledge Exchange in Interdisciplinary and Multi-Stakeholder Research. Global Environmental Change,25, 204–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.12.012.
Gaventa, J., & Bivens, F. (2014). Co-constructing Democratic Knowledge for Social Justice: Lessons from an International Research Collaboration. In J. Shefner, H. F. Dahms, R. E. Jones, & A. Jalata (Eds.), Social Justice and the University: Globalisation, Human Rights and the Future of Democracy (pp. 149–174). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Glover, R., & Silka, L. (2013). Choice, Power and Perspective the Neglected Question of Who Initiates Engaged Campus-Community Partnerships. Gateways: International Journal of Community Research and Engagement,6, 38–56.
Haraway, D. (1988). Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective. Feminist Studies,14(3), 575–559.
Harding, S. (1995). Strong Objectivity: A Response to the New Objectivity Question. Synthese,104(3), 331–349.
Harding, S. G. (1986). The Science Question in Feminism. Cornell: Cornell University Press.
Hoffman, A. J. (2016). Reflections: Academia’s Emerging Crisis of Relevance and Consequent Role of the Engaged Scholar. Journal of Change Management,16(2), 77–96.
Howes, M., & Chambers, R. (2016). Originally (1979) IDS Bulletin 10(2). IDS Bulletin 47(6), 119–130. https://doi.org/10.19088/1968-2016.203.
Hutchins, K., et al. (2013). Strengthening Knowledge Co-production Capacity: Examining Interest in Community-University Partnerships. Sustainability, 5(9), 3744–3770. https://doi.org/10.3390/su5093744.
Jasanoff, S. (2004a). The Idiom of Co-production. In S. Jasanoff (Ed.), States of Knowledge: The Co-production of Science and Social Order (pp. 1–12). New York: Routledge.
Jasanoff, S. (2004b). Ordering Knowledge, Ordering Society. In S. Jasanoff (Ed.), States of Knowledge: The Coproduction of Science and Social Order (pp. 13–45). London: Routledge.
Kajner, T., et al. (2011). Balancing Head and Heart: The Importance of Relational Accountability in Community-University Partnerships. Innovative Higher Education,37(4), 257–270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-011-9206-8.
Keeley, J., & Scoones, I. (2003). Understanding Environmental Policy Processes: Cases from Africa. London: Routledge.
Lincoln, Y., Lynham, S., Susan, A., & Guba, E. G. (2011). Paradigmatic Controversies, Contradictions, and Emerging Confluences, Revisited. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 97–128). London: Sage.
Mason, K. (2015). Participatory Action Research: Coproduction, Governance and Care. Geography Compass,9(9), 497–507.
Mauser, W., et al. (2013). Transdisciplinary Global Change Research: The Co-creation of Knowledge for Sustainability. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 5(3–4), 420–431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2013.07.001.
Molas-Gallart, J., & Tang, P. (2011). Tracing ‘Productive Interactions’ to Identify Social Impacts: An Example from the Social Sciences. Research Evaluation, 20(3), 219–226. https://doi.org/10.3152/095820211X12941371876706.
Nielson, R. (2016). Action Research as an Ethics Praxis Method. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(3), 419–428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2482-3.
Oosterhoff, P., & Shepherd, K. (2016). Affective Engagement: Teaching Young Kenyans About Safe and Healthy Sex. IDS Bulletin, 47(6), 87–100. https://doi.org/10.19088/1968-2016.201.
Oswald, K., Gaventa, J., & Leach, M. (2016). Introduction: Interrogating Engaged Excellence in Research. IDS Bulletin,47(6), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.19088/11968-2016.196.
Pietrykowski, B. (2015). Participatory Economic Research: Benefits and Challenges of Incorporating Participatory Research into Social Economics. Review of Social Economy, 73(3), 242–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/00346764.2015.1044841.
Pittore, K., teLintelo, P. J. H., Georgalakis, J., & Mikindo, T. (2016). Choosing Between Research Rigour or Support for Advocacy Movements, a False Dichotomy? IDS Bulletin,47(6), 101–118. https://doi.org/10.19088/1968-2016.202.
Rice, J. L., et al. (2015). Knowing Climate Change, Embodying Climate Praxis: Experiential Knowledge in Southern Appalachia. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 15(2), 253–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2014.985628.
Rosendahl, J., et al. (2015). Scientists’ Situated Knowledge: Strong Objectivity in Transdisciplinarity. Futures, 65, 17–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2014.10.011.
Santos, B. S., et al. (2008). Introduction: Opening Up the Canon of Knowledge and Recognition of Difference. In B. S. Santos (Ed.), Another Knowledge Is Possible Beyond Northern Epistemologies. London: Verso.
Strier, R. (2011). The Construction of Community University Partnerships: Entangled Perspectives. Higher Education, 62(1), 81–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-010-9367-x.
Tandon, R., Singh, W., Clover, D., & Hall, B. (2016). Knowledge Democracy and Excellence in Engagement. IDS Bulletin, 47(6), 19–36. https://doi.org/10.19088/1968-2016.197.
Turnhout, E., et al. (2013). New Roles of Science in Society: Different Repertoires of Knowledge Brokering. Science and Public Policy, 40(3), 354–365. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs114.
Visvanathan, S. (2005). Knowledge, Justice and Democracy. In M. Leach, I. Scoones, & B. Wynne (Eds.), Science and Citizens: Globalization and the Challenge of Engagement (pp. 83–95). London: Zed Books.
Wagaman, M. A., & Sanchez, I. (2015). Looking Through the Magnifying Glass: A Duoethnographic Approach to Understanding the Value and Process of Participatory Action Research with LGBYQ Youth. Qualitative Social Work, 22, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325015595855.
Wehrens, R. (2014). Beyond Two Communities from Research Utilization and Knowledge Translation to Coproduction? Public Health, 128(6), 545–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2014.02.004.
Williams, G. (2013). Researching with Impact in the Global South? Impact-Evaluation Practices and Reproduction of ‘Development Knowledge’. Contemporary Social Science,8(3), 223–236.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Oswald, K., Leach, M., Gaventa, J. (2019). Engaged Excellence in Development Studies. In: Baud, I., Basile, E., Kontinen, T., von Itter, S. (eds) Building Development Studies for the New Millennium. EADI Global Development Series. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04052-9_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04052-9_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-04051-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-04052-9
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)