IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v11y2024i1d10.1057_s41599-024-02893-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do universities support solutions-oriented collaborative research? Constraints to wicked problems scholarship in higher education

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Carolan

    (Colorado State University)

Abstract

Questions abound over how universities should teach and prepare the next generation of researchers to confront current and future wicked problems. With so much focus on curriculum and training, it is crucial that we step back and reflect on higher education’s capabilities to foster solution-oriented, collaborative research. What do the institutional incentive structures in higher education support, in terms of practices and outputs related to scholarship? And are those structures felt evenly across the academy? Those doing research in these spaces—in terms of title, autonomy, power, privilege, and status—vary widely by their institutional locations as well as in terms of their ties to broader disciplinary norms. To assess whether these dynamic, contested institutional landscapes afford so-called wicked problem scholarship, this paper draws from survey and interview data collected from 44 researchers working at the nexus of food, energy, and water systems at Carnegie Research 1 universities in the United States. Findings point to an uneven institutional landscape, which is shown to shape in different ways the type of solutions-oriented, collaborative scholarship fostered across the five positions examined. The paper concludes by reflecting on the paper’s findings, particularly in terms of what the data tell us about higher education as a place that fosters wicked problems scholarship, while also highlighting the study’s limitations.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Carolan, 2024. "Do universities support solutions-oriented collaborative research? Constraints to wicked problems scholarship in higher education," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-02893-x
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-024-02893-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-024-02893-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-024-02893-x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Koch, Susanne & Tetley, Camilla, 2023. "What ‘counts’ in international forest policy research? A conference ethnography of valuation practice and habitus in an interdisciplinary social science field," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    2. Hendrik P. van Dalen & Kène Henkens, 2012. "Intended and unintended consequences of a publish‐or‐perish culture: A worldwide survey," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(7), pages 1282-1293, July.
    3. Steven R. McGreevy & Christoph D. D. Rupprecht & Daniel Niles & Arnim Wiek & Michael Carolan & Giorgos Kallis & Kanang Kantamaturapoj & Astrid Mangnus & Petr Jehlička & Oliver Taherzadeh & Marlyne Sah, 2022. "Sustainable agrifood systems for a post-growth world," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 5(12), pages 1011-1017, December.
    4. Nicholas C. Kawa & Mark Anthony Arceño & Ryan Goeckner & Chelsea E. Hunter & Steven J. Rhue & Shane A. Scaggs & Matthew E. Biwer & Sean S. Downey & Julie S. Field & Kristen Gremillion & Joy McCorristo, 2021. "Training wicked scientists for a world of wicked problems," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-4, December.
    5. Greg Guest & Emily Namey & Mario Chen, 2020. "A simple method to assess and report thematic saturation in qualitative research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-17, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dell'Anno, Roberto & Caferra, Rocco & Morone, Andrea, 2020. "A “Trojan Horse” in the peer-review process of fee-charging economic journals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3).
    2. Shibayama, Sotaro, 2019. "Sustainable development of science and scientists: Academic training in life science labs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 676-692.
    3. Hendrik P. van Dalen, 2019. "Values of Economists Matter in the Art and Science of Economics," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 72(3), pages 472-499, August.
    4. Abramo, Giovanni & D'Angelo, Ciriaco Andrea & Grilli, Leonardo, 2021. "The effects of citation-based research evaluation schemes on self-citation behavior," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(4).
    5. Horbach, S.P.J.M.(Serge) & Halffman, W.(Willem), 2019. "The extent and causes of academic text recycling or ‘self-plagiarism’," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 492-502.
    6. Dario Krpan & Jonathan E. Booth & Andreea Damien, 2023. "The positive–negative–competence (PNC) model of psychological responses to representations of robots," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(11), pages 1933-1954, November.
    7. Stephan Puehringer & Georg Wolfmayr, 2023. "Competitive Performativity of (Academic) Social Networks. The subjectivation of Competition on ResearchGate, Google Scholar and Twitter," ICAE Working Papers 150, Johannes Kepler University, Institute for Comprehensive Analysis of the Economy.
    8. Bruno S. Frey, 2021. "Backward‐oriented economics," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(2), pages 187-195, May.
    9. Ben Purvis & Hannah Keding & Ashley Lewis & Phil Northall, 2023. "Critical reflections of postgraduate researchers on a collaborative interdisciplinary research project," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    10. Edler, Jakob, 2023. "Demand, public procurement and transformation," Discussion Papers "Innovation Systems and Policy Analysis" 79, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    11. Antonio Fernandez-Cano, 2021. "Letter to the Editor: publish, publish … cursed!," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(4), pages 3673-3682, April.
    12. Fujian Song & Yoon Loke & Lee Hooper, 2014. "Why Are Medical and Health-Related Studies Not Being Published? A Systematic Review of Reasons Given by Investigators," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(10), pages 1-8, October.
    13. Erin C McKiernan, 2017. "Imagining the “open” university: Sharing scholarship to improve research and education," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-25, October.
    14. Joeri K Tijdink & Anton C M Vergouwen & Yvo M Smulders, 2013. "Publication Pressure and Burn Out among Dutch Medical Professors: A Nationwide Survey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(9), pages 1-6, September.
    15. Daniele Fanelli & Vincent Larivière, 2016. "Researchers’ Individual Publication Rate Has Not Increased in a Century," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(3), pages 1-12, March.
    16. Meredith T Niles & Lesley A Schimanski & Erin C McKiernan & Juan Pablo Alperin, 2020. "Why we publish where we do: Faculty publishing values and their relationship to review, promotion and tenure expectations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-15, March.
    17. M. K. Yanti Idaya Aspura & A. Noorhidawati & A. Abrizah, 2018. "An analysis of Malaysian retracted papers: Misconduct or mistakes?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(3), pages 1315-1328, June.
    18. Sandra Rousseau & Ronald Rousseau, 2015. "Metric-wiseness," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(11), pages 2389-2389, November.
    19. Alberto Baccini & Giuseppe De Nicolao & Eugenio Petrovich, 2019. "Citation gaming induced by bibliometric evaluation: A country-level comparative analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-16, September.
    20. van Dalen, Hendrik Peter, 2020. "How the Publish-or-Perish Principle Divides a Science : The Case of Academic Economists," Discussion Paper 2020-020, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-02893-x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.