Aim

1. Case study: Centre for Low Carbon Futures The Sustainability Research Institute at the University of Leeds is a partner in regional and local collaborative networks, such as the Centre for Low Carbon Futures (CLCF). This project will develop a transition plan to help the Yorkshire and Humber region develop a low carbon, climate resilient economy. The main funder is Yorkshire Forward and involves 3 main project partners from the Universities of Leeds, Sheffield and York. At Leeds, researchers undertake processes of ‘downscaling’ large scale economic assessments so that they are more relevant to the needs of different stakeholders in diverse contexts. This process of ‘ground truthing’ provides a critically important feedback loop with potential to shape future policies. Through focus groups the project is developing scenarios or pathways towards a low carbon economy together with business and stakeholder groups such as Business In The Community (BITC). It resulted in on-line `low carbon pathway planner’, which presents a range of scenarios to which businesses record their response in consideration of key factors such as carbon emissions, policy environments and cost impacts. Businesses can then alter their response to explore different pathways towards a low carbon economy. It also enables them to compare their performance to other companies and work out what they should do to climb the corporate carbon reduction leader board. It will enable businesses to make better informed decisions and to prioritise their investments, thus protecting or enhancing competitiveness in the region. It will also inform the provision of evidence-based policy support to aid and accelerate transitions towards a low carbon economy. References Colebatch H, Hoppe R and Noordegraaf M (2010) Working for Policy Amsterdam University Press Collins H M and Evans R (2002) The Third Wave of Science Studies: Studies of Expertise and Experience Social Studies of Science 32 (2) 235-296 Hoppe R (2005) Rethinking the science-policy nexus: from knowledge utilization and science technology studies to types of boundary arrangements Poiesis and Praxis 3(3) 199-215 Klein J T, Grossenbacher-Mansuy W, Häberli R, Bill A, Scholz R W and Welti M (eds.) (2001) Transdisciplinarity: Joint problem solving among science, technology, and society. An effective way for managing complexity Birkhäuser, Basel Landry R, Amara N, and Lamari M (2003) The Extent and Determinants of the Utilization of University Research in Government Agencies Public Administration Review 63(2)192-205 Nutley S M, Walter I and Davies H T O (2007) Using evidence: How research can inform public services Bristol: The Policy Press Sabatier P A (1988) An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein Policy Sciences 21(2-3) 129-168 Thorpe R, Holt R, Macpherson A and Pittaway L (2005) Using knowledge within small and medium-sized firms: A systematic review of the evidence International Journal of Management Reviews 7(4) 257–281 Enhancing the impacts of research on policy at the regional and local levels - climate change research in Yorkshire & HumbersideDr Anna WesselinkSustainability Research Institute, University of Leeds Aim The aim of this research is to assess and improve research impact on policy and practice of climate change governance at the regional and local level. The research will develop a programme of case study research exploring how to set up effective science-society interactions. Through participatory action research new knowledge on expertise for research impact is co-produced together with researchers and other actors through reflection in and on action. This approach generates new professional insights and practices relevant to the situation, as well as improved theoretical understanding of research impact processes. The research started in June 2010 and is part of a larger HEFCE funded project based at LSE which seeks improvement in knowledge of the impact of social science research. Theoretical framing To enhance the impact of research we need to understand the processes through which research impacts on policy and practice. A conceptual framework will be designed that encompasses the insights presented in the relevant bodies of literature: policy science & political science on policy making, science-policy interfaces, boundary organisations, e.g. Hoppe (2005), Colebatch et al (2010) environmental governance on public participation and transdisciplinarity, e.g. Klein et al. (2001) public administration on knowledge use in social policy domains (health, justice, education), e.g. Landry et al. (2003), Nutley et al. (2007) business management on knowledge management and innovation, e.g. Thorpe et al. (2007) STS on knowledge and expertise, e.g. Collins & Evans (2002). The cross-cutting issue that links these different literatures is their (implicit or explicit) understanding of ‘knowledge’: what is valid knowledge, who produces it, what is the relationship between knowledge and action. The answers to these questions determine how ‘knowledge use’ is conceived and therefore how knowledge use can be influenced and assessed. The dichotomy between positivist and constructivist approaches is evident in this literature. The available evidence on effective knowledge use points clearly towards constructivist explanations: a process of knowledge co-production is the best guarantee for ensuring knowledge is used. However, this excludes more explicitly political tactical and strategic use of knowledge which are part of the political reality of decision making as described e.g. by Sabatier’s advocacy coalition work.