Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T12:33:02.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stakeholder engagement and the perceptions of researchers: how agricultural modellers view challenges to communication

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 October 2016

R. P. Kipling  and
Ş. Özkan Gülzari
R. P. Kipling*
Affiliation:
Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, 1st Floor, Stapledon Building, Plas Gogerddan, Aberystwyth, Ceredigion SY23 3EE, UK
Ş. Özkan Gülzari
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Aquacultural Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Biosciences, Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU), Post Box 5003, Ås 1430, Norway
*
†E-mail: rpk@aber.ac.uk
Get access

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Keywords

applied scienceframework analysisknowledge exchangeSocial Worlds theory
Type
Full Paper
Information
Advances in Animal Biosciences , Volume 7 , Special Issue 3: Proceedings of LiveM 2016: Modelling Grassland-Livestock Systems Under Climate Change , November 2016 , pp. 240 - 241
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Clarke, AE 1991. Social worlds/arenas theory as organisational theory. In Social organisation and social process: essays in honor of Anselm Strauss (ed. D Maines), pp. 119–158. Aldine de Gruyter, New York.Google Scholar
Colvin, J, Blackmore, C, Chimbuya, S, Collins, K, Dent, M, Goss, J, Ison, R, Roggero, PP and Seddaiu, G 2014. In search of systemic innovation for sustainable development: a design praxis emerging from a decade of social learning inquiry. Research Policy 43, 760–771.Google Scholar
Kipling, RP, Bannink, A, Bellocchi, G, Dalgaard, T, Fox, NJ, Hutchings, NJ, Kjeldsen, C, Lacetera, N, Sinabell, F, Topp, CFE, van Oijen, M, Virkajärvi, P and Scollan, ND 2016. Modeling European ruminant production systems: facing the challenges of climate change. Agricultural Systems 147, 24–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritchie, J, Lewis, J, McNaughton Nicholls, C and Ormston, R 2014. Qualitative research practice: a guide for social science students and researchers, 2nd edition. SAGE Publications Ltd, London.Google Scholar
Rodela, R, Cundill, G and Wals, AEJ 2012. An analysis of the methodological underpinnings of social learning research in natural resource management. Ecological Economics 77, 16–26.Google Scholar
van Paassen, A, Roetter, RP, Van Keulen, H and Hoanh, CT 2007. Can computer models stimulate learning about sustainable land use? Experience with LUPAS in the humid (sub-)tropics of Asia. Agricultural Systems 94, 874–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vasconcelos, A, Sen, B, Rosa, A and Ellis, D 2012. Elaborations of grounded theory in information research: arenas/social worlds theory, discourse and situational analysis. Library and Information Research 36, 120–146.Google Scholar
Voinov, A and Bousquet, F 2010. Modelling with stakeholders. Environmental Modelling & Software 25, 1268–1281.Google Scholar