Docstoc

Fish and Fire in the Pacific Northwest NatureServe Network

Document Sample
Fish and Fire in the Pacific Northwest NatureServe Network Powered By Docstoc
					         Scientist and Practitioner Collaboration and
                 Communication Networks :
            Fish and Fire in the Pacific Northwest




 Ken Vance-Borland, Paige Fischer, Kelly Burnett, Janean Creighton, Susan Hummel,
                               and Sherri Johnson
Biodiversity Without Borders meeting, Portland, Or.
April 23-26, 2012
      Why this Fish & Fire Study?
• Understand patterns of communication among Fish &
  Fire scientists and managers

• Identify communication gaps that may be obstacles to
  knowledge diffusion and adoption

• Suggest opportunities to enhance the network,
  increasing effectiveness and innovation
Theories of science communication

Traditional model               Social learning model
• Scientists produce            • Scientists and managers
   information managers need,     exchange information and
   managers apply information     generate new knowledge
   when making decisions
                                • Bringing to bear diverse
• Pushing scientific              knowledge on a problem
  information to managers         fosters innovation in
  ineffective for addressing      problem solving
  complex problems?
       What are social networks?
Individuals and the
relationships between
them                            Basic model of social interaction

                                                            Seek out others
                        Seek out similar others             with greater
                                                            expertise or
                                                            resources




                                   Interact with others who
                                   are available and accessible
      The Social Network Perspective
• Relationships are important
• Actors are interdependent rather than
  independent, autonomous units
• Relational ties among actors are channels for
  transfer of resources (either material or
  nonmaterial)
• Network structures provide opportunities for
  or impose constraints on individual action


Wasserman and Faust, 1994
Social network structure and
          learning
  Dense ties (bonding capital)
   • Trust
   • Communication of information
   • Communication of complex
     knowledge
   • Efficient decision-making,
     mobilization of resources
   • Collective action

  Loose ties (bridging capital)
   • Access to novel and rare information
      and resources
   • Innovation
   • Complex problem solving
      Social Network Data Collection
1.   With whom have you worked (planned, consulted,
     implemented, or monitored) on fish and fire research and/or
     management?
2.   From whom have you sought the information you needed to
     address commonplace tasks, chores, or duties?
3.   From whom have you sought the information you needed to
     address uncommon, unexpected or novel problems?
4.   With whom have you had informal interactions, experiences and
     discussions (e.g., at the water cooler, in the hall, on field trips)
     that led to the generation of new ideas, understanding or
     knowledge?
Summary of Web Survey Respondents
                                                200


                                                150
Survey Respondents


                        Number of Respondents
 552 invited                                    100
 388 responded (70%!)
 • 49 Researchers                               50
 • 339 Practitioners
                                                 0
                                                      Researcher   Practitioner   Practitioner
                                                                    Manager        Technical
                                                                    (GS >=12)      (GS<=11)
 Scientist and Manager Network
Scientist (n=49)
Manager (n=116)




                            Scientists only




                   All      Manager only
Results: Communication frequencies

  Frequency of outgoing ties (ratio observed to expected)


                               Scientist       Manager

  Scientist (n = 49)          207 (4.78)        30 (.28)

  Manager (n = 116)             82 (.77)       188 (.75)


  Observed chi square value = 678.351
  Significance = 0.000100
  Number of iterations = 10,000
       Some Social Network Measures
   Dense ties (bonding capital)              Loose ties (bridging capital)
   Density: Proportion of all                Cross-boundary
   possible ties that exist                  exchange: Proportion
                                             of ties that connect
                                             scientists and
                                             managers
         50%                  100%
                                             Brokerage: Role of 3rd
   Centralization: How centralized           party in connecting
   the network is                            people                   Coordinator



                                                      Consultant
                                                                      Gatekeeper
Centralization = 0   Centralization = 100%
Preliminary results: Bonding Capital
                           All      Scientists   Managers
                         (n=165)     (n=49)       (n=116)

Density                     1.9%      8.8%         1.4%


Degree
                           14.8%     29.5%         6.4%
Centralization
                 All   Scientists                    Managers
Preliminary Results: Bridging Capital
                     All         Scientists      Managers
                   (n=165)        (n=49)          (n=116)

Cross-boundary
                    22.1%          12.7%           30.4%
exchange

Total brokerage   1928(+)**       1365(+)*           563

   Coordinator    1056(+)***     796(+)***           260

   Consultant      90(-)***          50              40

   Gatekeeper      412(+)**        345(+).           67

                     *** p<0.0001; ** p<0.001; * p<0.01; . p<0.1
      Discussion: Bonding Capital
• Bonding capital in the F&F network is low

• Managers especially lack bonding capital

• Scientists have higher levels of bonding capital than
  managers but are vulnerable to being
  overshadowed by a few individuals
    Discussion: Bridging Capital
• Bridging capital low between scientists and
  managers: limited exposure to new ideas

• Scientists not mediating discussions among
  managers; managers not mediating discussions
  among scientists

• A few scientists are mediating access of managers to
  other scientists
 Preliminary Potential Implications
• Scientists are invested in themselves and may
  lack social energy to invest in managers,
  limiting the communication of fish and fire
  science findings
• Managers may not have the bonding capital to
  diffuse the limited information they get from
  scientists out into the manager network,
  limiting the success of fish and fire
  management
        Fish & Fire Collaboration and Communication Network




Discipline
  Fire and fuels
  Fisheries and aquatic ecosystems
                                    Enhancing Researcher and Practitioner Connectivity

                               80

                               70
Number of Survey Respondents




                               60

                               50

                               40

                               30

                               20

                               10

                               0
                                     Journals   Trainings   Consult    Define     Joint   Joint Project Partnership
                                                                                Program
                                                               Preferred Strategies
 Networks of Scientists and Managers Who
       Prefer Collaborative Science
        Communication Strategies



Jointly define      Jointly develop and   Jointly develop and   Strategic partnership
                    implement program     implement project




       Researcher
       Manager
         Network Initiatives That Have Been
             Recommended or Applied
    Type                   Interventions                         References
Social      Discuss network maps with network              Cross & Parker 2004;
            participants                                   Friedman et al. 2007
            Introduce people who have common goals or      Krebs & Holley 2004
            complementary skills; train network
            participants in network building skills
            Engage peripheral actors who can bring new     Krebs & Holley 2004;
            resources into the network                     Prell et al. 2009
            Engage well-connected actors who can diffuse   Valente & Fosados
            new ideas out into the network                 2006; Prell et al. 2009
            Encourage self-organized collaboration         Sandow & Allen 2005
            networks among employees
            Conduct cross-group meetings, trainings, and   Reagans & McEvily
            projects for mutual benefit                    2003; Krebs & Holley
                                                           2004; Chen 2007;
                                                           Friedman et al. 2007
        Network Initiatives That Have Been
            Recommended or Applied
    Type                    Interventions                      References
Technical   Searchable knowledge and skills database;    Borgatti & Cross 2003
            instant messaging and video conferencing
            Data sharing between groups                  Mandarano 2009
Financial   Hiring and performance evaluation criteria   Borgatti & Cross 2003
            that demonstrate collaboration
            Share project staff funding between groups   Friedman et al. 2007;
                                                         Mandarano 2009
            Pool resources to hire a paid network        McAllister et al. 2008
            facilitator
            Create a fund to provide small grants for    Krebs & Holley 2004
            network participants to try new actions
http://www.networkweaver.com/
        Fish & Fire Network Weaving
• Conference calls

• Webinars

• Face-to-face meetings and site visits

• Re-survey

• Full-network workshop

• Recommend institutional interventions
              Research Team
      Kelly Burnett, Research Fish Biologist, PNW
 Janean Creighton, OSU and PNW Partnership
      Paige Fischer, Research Social Scientist, WWETAC, PNW
   Susan Hummel, Research Forester, PNW
    Sherri Johnson, Research Ecologist, PNW
Ken Vance-Borland, OSU and PNW

             Federal Advisors
          Ray Abriel, USFS State and Private Forestry
      Rowan Baker, USFWS Science Advisor
       Jim Capurso, USFS R-6 Fish Biologist
         John Cissel, Director Joint Fire Sciences Program
    Janine Clayton, USFS Supervisor Gifford Pinchot National Forest
          Al Doelker, BLM State Fish Biologist
      Louisa Evers, BLM State/Regional Fire Ecologist
   Michael Furniss, PNW Communications and Applications Program
    Bob Gresswell, USGS Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center
      Gregg Riegel, USFS Zone Ecologist
           Phil Roni, NMFS Northwest Fisheries Science Center
      Questions or comments?
Ken.vance-borland@oregonstate.edu
           541-758-8772

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:0
posted:5/30/2012
language:
pages:26