Toward a General Theory of Boundary Work: Insights from the CGIARâ€™s Natural Resource Management Programs
Previous research on the determinants of effectiveness in knowledge systems seeking to support sustainable development has highlighted the importance of â€œboundary workâ€ through which research communities organize their relations with other fields of science, other sources of knowledge, and the worlds of action and policymaking. A growing body of scholarship postulates specific attributes of boundary work that promote used and useful research. These propositions, however, are largely based on the experience of a few industrialized countries. We report here on an effort to evaluate their relevance for efforts to harness science in support of sustainability in the developing world. We carried out a multi-country comparative analysis of natural resource management programs conducted under the auspices of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). We discovered 6 distinctive kinds of boundary work contributing to successes of the CGIAR programsâ€”a greater variety than has been documented in previous studies. We propose that these different kinds of boundary work can be understood as a dual response to the different uses for which the results of specific research programs are intended, and the different sources of knowledge drawn on by those programs. We show that these distinctive kinds of boundary work require distinctive strategies to organize them effectively. Especially important are arrangements regarding participation of stakeholders, governance, and the use of boundary objects. We conclude that improving the ability of research programs to produce useful knowledge for sustainable development will require both greater and differentiated support for multiple forms of boundary work.
|Date of creation:||2010|
|Date of revision:|
|Publication status:||Published in HKS Faculty Research Working Paper Series|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Web page: http://www.hks.harvard.edu/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Stephen Zehr, 2005. "Comparative boundary work: US acid rain and global climate change policy deliberations," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(6), pages 445-456, December.
- Pender, John & Suyanto & Kerr, John & Kato, Edward, 2008. "Impacts of the Hutan Kamasyarakatan Social Forestry Program in the Sumberjaya watershed, West Lampung District of Sumatra, Indonesia:," IFPRI discussion papers 769, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
- Tomas Hellstr�m & Merle Jacob, 2003. "Boundary organisations in science: From discourse to construction," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 235-238, August.
- Sujatha Raman, 2005. "Institutional perspectives on science-policy boundaries," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(6), pages 418-422, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hrv:hksfac:4450046. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ben Steinberg)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.