Abstract
new tools were completed by each ULL alongside a post hoc pathway to impact statements. Comparisons are presented and discussed, the strengths and weaknesses of this approach are considered and opportunities for improvement in societal impact planning and evaluation are provided. Our main findings include the importance of establishing clear shared definitions while accepting plural understandings, the need to acknowledge resource as a critical factor in impact delivery and the headline need for far greater focus in this area from both funders and research groups
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 5387 |
| Number of pages | 21 |
| Journal | Sustainability |
| Volume | 15 |
| Issue number | 6 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 17 Mar 2023 |
Bibliographical note
This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).Funding
This research his research received funding from the European Union\u2019s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program (Grant # 730254) within the Sustainable Urbanisation Global Initiative (SUGI) from JPI Urban Europe. The SUGI Food Water Energy (FWE) Nexus was established by the Belmont Forum and the Joint Programming Initiative (JPI) Urban Europe and included 20 funders globally. Funders who directly supported this project were: InnovateUK, Economic and Social Research Council and Arts and Humanities Research Council Award # ES/S002243/1 (UK); START International - USA (South Africa); Sao Paulo Science and Technology Funding Agency (FAPESP), Award # 2017/50421-3 (Brazil); National Science Foundation Award # 1830104 (USA); The Research Council of Norway (Norway); and Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk (NOW) Award # 438-17-405 (Netherlands). These funders had no involvement in the design, data handling, or writing of this publication. Conceptual and theoretical developments were also made possible via discussions within the UK Prevention Research Partnership\u2019s (award # MR/S037586/1) Community of Practice Impact Theme, which is funded by the British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, Economic and Social Research Council, Health and Social Care Research and Development Division (Welsh Government), Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, Natural Environment Research Council, Public Health Agency (Northern Ireland), The Health Foundation and Wellcome.
| Funders | Funder number |
|---|---|
| Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo | |
| Natural Environment Research Council | |
| Economic and Social Research Council | |
| Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office | |
| Department for Employment and Learning, Northern Ireland | |
| National Institute for Health and Care Research | |
| The Research Council of Norway | |
| Public Health Agency | |
| Wellcome Trust | |
| Cancer Research UK | |
| British Heart Foundation | |
| Health Foundation | |
| Health and Social Care Research and Development Division | |
| Arts and Humanities Research Council | |
| UK Research and Innovation | ES/S002243/1 |
| Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek | 438-17-405 |
| Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo | 2017/50421-3 |
| National Science Foundation | 1830104 |
| Horizon Europe | 730254, 1830104 |
| Medical Research Council | MR/S037586/1 |
Keywords
- societal impact
- socio-environmental impact
- academic impact
- urban living lab
- co-production
- impact planning
- impact evaluation
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Comparing Societal Impact Planning and Evaluation Approaches across Four Urban Living Labs (in Food-Energy-Water Systems)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS