square pegs for round hole? researchers, consultants and staff practitioners as adaptation knowledge...

Square pegs for round holes? Researchers, consultants

and staff practitioners as adaptation knowledge brokers

Scott Losee Dr Tony MatthewsScott Losee Consulting QUT

30/9/2014, NCCARF Conference, Gold Coast, Queensland

Scott LoseeConsultingQuote from last year

‘A lot of consultants have made a lot of money out of the Pacific Islands.’

This comment prompted thinking about the relative contribution of different knowledge broker groups in advising on climate change adaptation

Losee & Matthews, NCCARF Gold Coast, 2014 / loseeconsulting.com.au 2

Scott LoseeConsultingAims

Share proposed research approach and some pilot outcomes

Seed some fruitful discussion about the roles of professional advisor groups

Yeronga, Qld, 1974, BCC archives


Scott LoseeConsultingLiterature touchpoints

Gibbs, M.T. (unpub.)

Application of risk management; knowledge and treatment of climate change science by practitioners; service level of assets

Hegger et al., 2012

Joint knowledge production between science and policy. Incidental mention of consultants

McAllister et al., 2014

Network analysis of roles played by stakeholder groups. Consultants and local government engagement characterised as ‘advocacy’. ‘Biased learning associated with advocacy does not yield efficient use of science for contested problems with uncertain outcomes.’

Knaggård, Å, 2014

‘Scientific knowledge was not framed in a politically accessible way, and thereby became unhelpful as policy advice... When policymakers were unable to find or use scientific knowledge for their decisions, they tended to rely more on political knowledge of what works and what can be politically agreed upon...’ Knowledge brokers wield considerable power over how issues are understood as political problems.

Litfin, 1994 Knowledge brokers: ‘...intermediaries between the original researchers, or the producers of knowledge, and the policymakers who consume that knowledge.’


Scott LoseeConsulting

Decision makersand decisions

We argue that CC adaptation research tends to: Pay too much attention to community awareness and

education

Pay too little attention to communication with influential decision makers

Overwhelmingly focus on policy outcomes by governments

Give less attention to decision making in the corporate and government/utility sectors on

Operations and asset management

Investment

Strategic planning



NCCARF presenters as an indication of professional advisor groups

146, 51%42, 15%

18, 6%

Academic researcherApplied scientistGovernment/corporateStakeholder groupConsultantOther

The extensive list of presenters at the 2014 NCCARF Conference provides one (imperfect) indication of professional advisor groups involved in climate change adaptation


Scott LoseeConsultingProfessional advisor groups

Academicresearchers

Consultants In-house practitioners

Decision makers

3 groups selected for investigation, but decisions makers are influenced by many people, some professional CC adaptation advisors, many not...


Scott LoseeConsultingProfessional advisor groups

Academicresearchers


Government or corporate employees with expertise in climate change adaptation

Professionals hired on a project or fee basis to provide expert advice

Undertake research related to adaptation in the university sector(i.e. not CSIRO or BOM, etc.)


‘Scientists, public policymakers, businesses, and NGO officers have differing, often implicit, perspectives on the world around them and one could even say that these actors belong to communities with different epistemologies.’

— Hegger et al., 2012, after Hoppe, 2009


Scott LoseeConsultingApproach

What is the best way for these 3 groups of professionals to contribute to advising decision makers on climate change adaptation?

Investigate accessible information regarding the circumstances of the 3 groups

Conduct telephone survey Speaking with equal number of representatives of

each group

24 questions

Pilot interviews only so far


Is distinct consideration needed for climate change adaptation?

Not entirely, but sufficiently distinct to warrant attention Possible parallel domains?

Healthcare, education, security, marketing?

Strong attributes of CC adaptation:1. Polarised politics

2. New and expanding discipline

3. Centrality of physical sciences

4. Multi-discipline scientific complexity, sophisticated modelling

5. Degree of uncertainty

6. Long-term implications



Possible influencing factors

Time

Cost Quality

Che

ap

GoodFast

Possible framework for influences on professional advisor groups found in the ubiquitous concept for understanding trade-offs in consulting projects and determining the key variables in the ‘scope’ of a project


Scott LoseeConsultingIndicative division of time

Academic researchers 40% Teaching

40% Research

20% ‘Service’

Consultants 80% billable

Project work

Project management

20% indirect costs

Bid writing

Administration

Management

Marketing

In-house practitioners 30% Research

25% People Management

20% Program and Project Management

15% Communication and marketing

10% Administration




40% Research

20% ‘Service’


Project work

Project management

20% indirect costs

Bid writing

Administration

Management

Marketing





10% Administration

Delivery, but the focus of output is

publication in scholarly journals, not

deliverables to decision makers




40% Research

20% ‘Service’


Project work

Project management

20% indirect costs

Bid writing

Administration

Management

Marketing





10% AdministrationHeavy emphasis on delivering outputs to

satisfy client requirements




40% Research

20% ‘Service’


Project work

Project management

20% indirect costs

Bid writing

Administration

Management

Marketing





10% Administration

Deliverables tailored to needs, but

potentially fluid priorities depending

on needs of ‘the hierarchy’


Scott LoseeConsultingCost of advice

Group

Median gross salary

(15y exp.)

Basis of calculation(1725 h/y)

Hourly cost of advice

Academic researcher(Senior Lecturer grade C.01)

$120,85660% overhead

added on salary $111

Consultant(Senior Consultant) $136,325

2.5 multiplier on direct salary $142

In-house practitioner(Senior Advisor)

$112,026Total cost of

employment ÷ work hours

$65Sources: PayScale, Inc.

‘If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur.’

—Attributed to Red Adair, brainyquote.com


Scott LoseeConsultingQuality

Differing interpretations of quality emerging Reflecting deep knowledge vs. error-free and reliable outputs

Academic researchers Peer review, ethical guidelines and research data management

But do these apply in ‘consulting mode’ advice to decision makers?

Consultants ISO 9001 quality management systems applied to processes and deliverables

In-house practitioners Often quality systems are in place; application may depend on organisational

culture

Hierarchical checks on written adviceLosee & Matthews, NCCARF Gold Coast, 2014 / loseeconsulting.com.au 18

Scott LoseeConsultingWhich group provides the best...

Academicresearchers

Consultants

In-housepractitioners

Quality

Timeliness

Practicalit

y

Relevance

Value for

money

Objectivit

y

Comprehensibility

Innovativeness

Reliability

ClarityPredictio

n


Scott LoseeConsultingWhich group provides the best...

Academicresearchers

Consultants

In-housepractitioners

Quality

Timeliness

Practicalit

y

Relevance

Value for

money

Objectivit

y

Comprehensibility

Innovativeness

Reliability

Clarity

3 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0

0 2 2 1 1 1 2 0 2 2

0 1 1 2 2 0 1 1 1 1

Pilot interviews



When is advice most appropriate from these groups?

Academic researchers


Testing feasibility of something new

New topic not encountered before

Popularising research – getting commentary out to public faster than other, more constrained, groups

When balancing the needs of clients and practicalities, advantages, disadvantages, costs and benefits of different adaptation pathways

Strategic decision making that will have a long-term impact

Daily decision making directly relevant to the organisation

When understanding of organisational barriers and constraints is critical



What factors influence advice provided by these groups?



Goals of their universities If they have funding for their research Ideological drivers Personal intellectual interests

Some appreciation of organisational practicalities

Current knowledge of field

Influenced by who is paying

Generally driven by time pressures

Appreciation of how advice would impact on other areas of the organisation

Awareness of ‘cascading consequences’

Culture, politics and strategies of organisations and stakeholders



What are the best qualities of these groups regarding CC advice?



Reliable and considered advice

Attempt to be as free of bias as possible

Climate change scientists’ able to understand risk

Able to say what's worked for others Able to interpret technical info and translate it for a non-technical audience Deliver within a specific time, efficient work Pragmatic Best risk practitioners

Very holistic view Understand impact on a functional level

Understand and respond to risks

Understand implementation barriers and politics and strategies of end users

Understand what can implemented



What are your greatest reservations about these groups?Academic researchers


Perspective limited by discipline Trouble in making decisions because considering all factors Research funding drives topics Longer timelines Can be too ‘wishy-washy’ in advice Bias associated with ideology

Cost Reports ‘sit on a shelf’ phenomena Knowledge transfer not always effective Lean towards what client wants. Most pragmatic solutions but not necessarily the best Knowledge gaps with climate science

Level of knowledge and their interpretation of the subject matter Generalists, not qualified in areas they may advise on Subject to whims and strategies of their organisations Not always open to good/best risk management (due to org. culture)



Concluding points for discussion

Time, cost, quality triangle provides one framework Structural drivers part of the influences on advice from the 3 groups Greatest strengths are sometimes also greatest weaknesses

E.g. It is good that in-house practitioners have the best understanding of organisational barriers, but this may also constrain them from being open to the best adaptation responses

Discussion Is this a useful avenue of inquiry?

What should we include at this early stage to make the most of the opportunity?

Do we need to obtain the views of decision makers?


Scott LoseeConsultingReferences

Gibbs, M.T. (unpublished). Guiding principles for infrastructure climate change risk and adaptation studies.

Hegger, D. Lamers, M., Van Zeijl-Rozema, A. and Dieperink, C. (2012). Conceptualising joint knowledge production in regional climate change adaptation projects: success conditions and levers for action, Environmental Science & Policy, 18, 52-65.

Hoppe, R. (2009). Scientific advice and public policy: expert advisers’ and policymakers’ discourses on boundary work. Poiesis and Praxis 6 (3-4), 235-263.

Knaggård, Å. (2014). What do policy-makers do with scientific uncertainty? The incremenbal character of Swedish climate change policy-making, Policy Studies, 35 (1), 22-39.

Litfin, K.T. (1994). Ozone Discourses: Science and Politics in Global Environmental Cooperation, Columbia University Press, New York.

McAllister, R.J., McCrea, R., Lubell, M.N. (2014). Policy networks, stakeholder interactions and climate adaptation in the region of South East Queensland, Australia, Reg. Environ. Change, 14, 527-539.


Thank you

Scott Losee / 0404 467 228 / [email protected]

square pegs for round hole? researchers, consultants and staff practitioners as adaptation knowledge...

Environment

nccarf gold coast

nccarf conference

scientific knowledge

theproducers of knowledge

scott loseeconsultingaims

scott loseeconsultingapproach

scott loseeconsultingquote

moreon political knowledge