International research networks are nowadays common thing, many of our institutions have some kind of exchange relations with peers in other countries. However, more often than not, these networks are merely a matter of protocole or PR, and not many of them bear real, tangible results. How can we make them work better? What could be our contribution as researchers to them? Any positive experiences or good practices?
Article Knowledge Sharing for Development: Dead Slow Ahead?
may be of interest: the article concentrates on how knowledge sharing across and within international organizations, government agencies, the private sector, civil society organizations, and other development practitioners might be advanced to create synergies toward the Sustainable Development Goals; specifically, the article flags the poor state of the art, notes the need to progress from knowledge products to knowledge processes, and points to guidelines for designing knowledge partnerships better.
@Diary R. Sulayman thanks for your opinion, however I think that what you say there works irrespectively of being part of a formal network... one thing is networking (which you describe very adequately) and the other the "official" research networks. Putting more life into the latter seems quite a challenge...
Olivier Serrat Thanks for your reading recommendation.... but what priorities should we set among all these proposals? There are ideas and initiatives to boost IRN's however the question is what are the best things to do here....
Article Knowledge Sharing for Development: Dead Slow Ahead?
makes specific recommendations for enhancing knowledge partnerships. (And so, the matter of how one might prioritize among proposals is a secondary concern that does not stem from the original query, which invited suggestions to make international research networks more effective.) The Guidelines for Knowledge Partnerships to which the article refers are at https://www.adb.org/publications/guidelines-knowledge-partnerships.
I agree with you Ben. If there are no (extra) incentives to scientists they won't want to be part of a network as sometimes this is a cumbersome business (dealing with people far away, different mentalities, etc.) So scientists participating in networks should be more incentivated than their Faculty colleagues who don't.
ilike your title Olivier... although it points to a scary end... I don't think anyone wished knowledge exchange to disappear altogether....
What I would like to know is experiences of good functioning networks, so if you have the impression that your network is working well just share this and try to explain why is it so in your opinion...
Recently read that research networks fuction best when they organise (and fund!) International congresses and meetings and when they own high-ranked journals, on whih they eventually publish the proceedings or the results or the presentations turned into articles of these conferences.
Do we all like this prepackaged procedure?
Ok coleagues, some months have passed.... any updates or new findings about this question? Anyone wanting to add their own (recent) experience?
HI,
It is always advisable to have an international connection with regard to our research work. I have always found it beneficial. Similarly, it also offers me an insight pertaining to where we stand in comparison to the others in a particular area of research. RG is one such example. However, threats related to data security, plagiarism of ideas, etc., limit many researchers from actively involving themselves in such networks.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Political Science