Collaboration with Caveats: Research–Practice Exchange in Planning

Joe Hurley, Elizabeth Jean Taylor, Kath Phelan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Researcher and practitioner collaboration in urban planning is both
critical to good outcomes and problematic to achieve in reality.
Collaboration has the potential for new partnerships, better research
problem definition, improved research design and greater impact
on practice and policy. However, politics, stakeholder agendas and
funding bodies bring pressures and constraints, for which research
professionals require a broader set of skills to manage. We examine researcher–practitioner collaboration as part of an action research project on urban greening in Australia. Focusing on a stakeholder engagement workshop, we examine the mechanisms used to overcome barriers to research-practice exchange. We find overt consideration of common barriers to access and use of research when planning collaboration exercises can help facilitate more
productive engagement, creating spaces for mutual understanding and generating shared objectives. However, we also find that efforts at collaboration challenge traditional research practices, involve tensions and caveats, and require a different mode of researcher engagement.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)508-523
Number of pages16
JournalPlanning, Practice & Research
Volume32
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • action research
  • practice
  • urban planning
  • collaboration
  • workshop
  • policy
  • urban greening

Cite this

@article{0c3dbadd2f944583aaa5ef6bfbe054eb,
title = "Collaboration with Caveats: Research–Practice Exchange in Planning",
abstract = "Researcher and practitioner collaboration in urban planning is bothcritical to good outcomes and problematic to achieve in reality.Collaboration has the potential for new partnerships, better researchproblem definition, improved research design and greater impacton practice and policy. However, politics, stakeholder agendas andfunding bodies bring pressures and constraints, for which researchprofessionals require a broader set of skills to manage. We examine researcher–practitioner collaboration as part of an action research project on urban greening in Australia. Focusing on a stakeholder engagement workshop, we examine the mechanisms used to overcome barriers to research-practice exchange. We find overt consideration of common barriers to access and use of research when planning collaboration exercises can help facilitate moreproductive engagement, creating spaces for mutual understanding and generating shared objectives. However, we also find that efforts at collaboration challenge traditional research practices, involve tensions and caveats, and require a different mode of researcher engagement.",
keywords = "action research, practice, urban planning, collaboration, workshop, policy, urban greening",
author = "Joe Hurley and Taylor, {Elizabeth Jean} and Kath Phelan",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.1080/02697459.2017.1378971",
language = "English",
volume = "32",
pages = "508--523",
journal = "Planning, Practice & Research",
issn = "0269-7459",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "5",

}

Collaboration with Caveats: Research–Practice Exchange in Planning. / Hurley, Joe; Taylor, Elizabeth Jean; Phelan, Kath.

In: Planning, Practice & Research , Vol. 32, No. 5, 2017, p. 508-523.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Collaboration with Caveats: Research–Practice Exchange in Planning

AU - Hurley, Joe

AU - Taylor, Elizabeth Jean

AU - Phelan, Kath

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Researcher and practitioner collaboration in urban planning is bothcritical to good outcomes and problematic to achieve in reality.Collaboration has the potential for new partnerships, better researchproblem definition, improved research design and greater impacton practice and policy. However, politics, stakeholder agendas andfunding bodies bring pressures and constraints, for which researchprofessionals require a broader set of skills to manage. We examine researcher–practitioner collaboration as part of an action research project on urban greening in Australia. Focusing on a stakeholder engagement workshop, we examine the mechanisms used to overcome barriers to research-practice exchange. We find overt consideration of common barriers to access and use of research when planning collaboration exercises can help facilitate moreproductive engagement, creating spaces for mutual understanding and generating shared objectives. However, we also find that efforts at collaboration challenge traditional research practices, involve tensions and caveats, and require a different mode of researcher engagement.

AB - Researcher and practitioner collaboration in urban planning is bothcritical to good outcomes and problematic to achieve in reality.Collaboration has the potential for new partnerships, better researchproblem definition, improved research design and greater impacton practice and policy. However, politics, stakeholder agendas andfunding bodies bring pressures and constraints, for which researchprofessionals require a broader set of skills to manage. We examine researcher–practitioner collaboration as part of an action research project on urban greening in Australia. Focusing on a stakeholder engagement workshop, we examine the mechanisms used to overcome barriers to research-practice exchange. We find overt consideration of common barriers to access and use of research when planning collaboration exercises can help facilitate moreproductive engagement, creating spaces for mutual understanding and generating shared objectives. However, we also find that efforts at collaboration challenge traditional research practices, involve tensions and caveats, and require a different mode of researcher engagement.

KW - action research

KW - practice

KW - urban planning

KW - collaboration

KW - workshop

KW - policy

KW - urban greening

U2 - 10.1080/02697459.2017.1378971

DO - 10.1080/02697459.2017.1378971

M3 - Article

VL - 32

SP - 508

EP - 523

JO - Planning, Practice & Research

JF - Planning, Practice & Research

SN - 0269-7459

IS - 5

ER -