MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404961464 · doi:10.5751/es-15563-290429

Reflecting on arts-based participatory research: considerations for more equitable transdisciplinary collaborations

2024· article· en· W4404961464 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilNational Research FoundationSight Research UKAmerican College of Emergency Physicians
KeywordsTransdisciplinarityCitizen journalismThe artsEnvironmental planningEnvironmental resource managementParticipatory action researchSociologyPolitical scienceEngineering ethicsGeographyComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceEngineeringSocial scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the importance of pursuing meaningful and equitable transdisciplinary research collaborations with Indigenous and local community members has been established in the literature, challenges remain as to how to best do this in practice. Pursuing arts-based participatory research methods in two different ocean governance contexts in South Africa, this paper provides reflections by social and marine scientists, Indigenous and local community members, and artists taking part in transdisciplinary collaborations as co-researchers and co-facilitators. Centralizing the use of arts-based methods in the form of storytelling and photography, we consider some key lessons emerging from this transdisciplinary research for transformative ocean governance. This includes the need to actively critique and disrupt the invented roles of “researchers” and “research participants” and to build strong relationships and trust prior to the envisioned research process. We argue that the use of arts-based participatory methods has supported meaningful learning across multiple ways of relating to and connecting with the ocean and highlight inherent barriers to truly collaborative transdisciplinary research that are relevant for projects in different contexts and at various scales, such as the inequity of academic publishing processes and ownership of knowledge outputs. Despite continuous difficulties in ensuring equitable valuation of various knowledge systems, we find that arts-based participatory processes are valuable in advancing what we refer to as “comprehensive transdisciplinarity,” where non-academic co-researchers take part in conceptualization, methods formation, and dissemination of the research. We propose some critical questions that can assist teams considering transdisciplinary collaborations and conclude with some lessons and recommendations for academic institutions to better support equitable transdisciplinary collaborations that are needed to advance deep transformations toward sustainability.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.895
GPT teacher head0.725
Teacher spread0.171 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it