1. Social research: Innovation and linkages across boundaries Perspective from within a Crown Research Institute Margaret Kilvington, Will Allen, Chrys Horn Collaborative Learning for Environmental Management Group Landcare Research

2. “It’s tough out there in the border country”

3. Outline Working as a social researcher within a CRI Upsides, downsides and choices Challenges Future directions

4. Speaking from own experience May have something in common with other social researchers in CRIs, and elsewhere Situation analogous to anyone trying to work across fields

5. Collaborative Learning for Environmental Management CLEM

6. Collaborative learning for Environmental Management Undertake research on “human dimensions of environmental problems” Range of methodologies: ethnographic – action research 5 Staff CLEM

7. Landcare Research CLEM 5 staff

8. Landcare Research Research on biophysical aspects of environmental problems Around 500 staff CLEM 5 staff

9. Environmental Research, Funding and Management agencies National agencies e.g., MFE, MAF, MoRST, CCO Regional Councils District Councils University, ‘Environmental’ departments/centres Other CRI social research groups, e.g., ESR, AgResearch Landcare Research Around 500 staff CLEM 5 staff FRST Ecosystem portfolio

10. Why are we there? Landcare Research identified the need to improve engagement with environmental problem solving – ‘human dimensions’ Wider recognition of the challenge in undertaking ‘engaged science’ – ‘Science and society’ issue Improve funding competitiveness

11. Implications of this position

12. Downsides: Marginal to mainstream ambitions within the organisation ( objective 5 in a 5 objective programme) Serious language differences between us and our ‘home community’ Our peers and influencers are not social researchers Isolated from wider social research community

13. Implications of this position Contentions ‘Them’‘Us’ Places to workCentresBoundaries What to focus onProductsprocesses Theoretical underpinning PositivismConstructivism

14. Choices Consolidate traditional social research approaches Bridge disciplines Social Research Develop independent research Develop an integrated social research approach CLEM

15. Choices Develop independent research Develop an integrated social research approach CLEM Consolidate traditional social research approaches Bridge disciplines Social Research

16. Environmental Research and Management agencies National agencies e.g., MFE, MAF, MoRST, CCO Regional Councils District Councils University, ‘Environmental’ departments/centres Other CRI social research groups, e.g., ESR, AgResearch Landcare Research Around 500 staff CLEM 5 staff

17. Cross programme social research Biodiversity Biosecurity Catchment Improved biodiversity understanding Improved biosecurity understanding Improved catchment understanding Improved collaborative learning understanding Collaborative learning objective X-case lessons

18. Downsides to Upsides MarginalUnique high demand within organisation. Don’t have to cross institutional barriers to interact with different disciplines

19. Downsides to Upsides Language difference Multi-lingual All current CLEM staff have backgrounds in biophysical science as well as social research Developing greater expertise in interdisciplinary vs. transdisciplinary research

20. Downsides to Upsides Non-social research influencers and peers Wider networks Get better at developing contextually relevant research approaches Better chances of influencing and working with policy makers within the environmental policy area

21. Downsides to Upsides Isolated‘Snow Shoe effect’ Working within new developing fields of social research (e.g., action research) Flexibility outside traditional social research

22. Challenges Maintaining our grounding in rigorous social research Publishing in interdisciplinary social research not traditional ‘social research’ journals People on the boundaries don’t ‘look good’ to anyone Stigma of ‘applied research’ The consequences of being invisible Co-opting language Tokenism Service oriented “handmaiden to the biophysical science community”

23. Future directions for CLEM Turning more to strengthening own research Building networks with our own peers

24. Cross programme social research Biodiversity Biosecurity Catchment Improved biodiversity understanding Improved biosecurity understanding Improved catchment understanding Improved collaborative learning understanding Collaborative learning objective X-case lessons

25. Future directions for Social Science Does it want to focus centrally on traditional research methodologies or on the boundaries? How does it support the increasing numbers of us who are ‘boundary’ workers?