Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
in Chapter 3) is shown by feedback loops where learning contributes to
defining the problem and what innovations are likely to help solve it.
“Engagement,” “influence on decision-maker KAS” and “changes in practice
(outcomes)” are uses for research outputs.
Changes in practice and policies, which are outcomes, occur when decision-
makers alter their knowledge, attitudes or skills (KAS). The question is how to
use outputs to influence people's KAS and in doing so contribute to outcomes
favorable to development. Production of research outputs (shown in dark gray
in Figure 5.1) is under the control of a project. The process of translating
outputs to outcomes (shown in light gray) is not. Decision-makers confront
many influences other than being informed of research results, which makes
the process harder.
Figure 5.1 is similar to the boundary framework of Chapter 6, where
research outputs are used to create better understanding, and for decision
support and negotiation support. Within its ToC, CPWF justifies technical
research because:
• research to define problems [development challenges] without trying to
solve them is incomplete;
• it is not prudent to try to solve problems that are not understood;
• it is fruitless to do research whose outputs will not be used in engagement
[the social process of informing people]; and
• engagement not guided by evidence can be ineffective and inefficient.
Technical innovation and problem definition
The purpose of research on technical innovation is to provide knowledge,
including knowledge about new technologies and their performance. In R4D,
knowledge is intended to help inform engagement, dialogue and negotiation.
It should be credible and relevant.
There are three categories of knowledge from technical research:
1
Knowledge on the nature of the problem or challenge being addressed;
2
Knowledge on the design and performance of technical options (often
integrated with institutional options); and
3
Knowledge (ex ante and ex post) on the broader consequences of inno-
vation.
Many CPWF projects invested a lot in defining problems. This involved
defining the issues or challenges in question and tracing chains of cause and
effect, sometimes giving problem trees. We have known for a long time that
understanding the causes of a problem often suggests ways to solve it (Tripp
and Woolley, 1989). We give some examples.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search