Search

De webportal Kijk in de Kas is een interactief instrument om praktijk- en onderzoekskennis uit te wisselen. Teler kunnen een virtueel kijkje nemen bij vijf collega's. Klimaatmodel KASPRO rekent mee en produceert mooie plaatjes. De betrokken onderzoekers en telers geven via weblogs hun commentaar. Ze streven op deze manier naar een betere koppeling van onderzoek en praktijk op het gebied van de energiebesparing

Ten gevolge van de invloed van ICT-ontwikkelingen op onderzoek en wetenschappelijke communicatie zien we een fundamentele verandering ten opzichte van het ‘papieren tijdperk’. Toegang tot wetenschappelijke kennis, informatie en data, essentieel voor hoger onderwijs en onderzoek, kan door deze technische ontwikkeling drastisch verbeterd worden. Het is binnen de instellingen de basis voor de kennisoverdracht (onderwijs) en kennisontwikkeling (onderzoek). Maar ook in de relatie met de samenleving (kennisvalorisatie) is toegang tot kennis en informatie van groot belang. Uitgangspunt is dat resultaten van met publieke middelen gefinancierd onderzoek ook publiekelijk toegankelijk dienen te zijn. De afgelopen jaren heeft Open Access een relatief hoge vlucht genomen. Vele instellingen wereldwijd (waaronder alle Nederlandse universiteiten) hebben de zgn. Berlin Declaration ondertekend, daarmee aangevend dat men Open Access van wetenschappelijke informatie actief wil bevorderen. Er is sprake van Open Access wanneer: 1. een publicatie online wordt gepubliceerd en in minimaal een online repository (een vrij toegankelijk digitaal archief) wordt opgenomen; 2. de publicatie voor iedereen met een internetverbinding kosteloos toegankelijk is en blijft; 3. de auteur de gebruiker toestemming geeft om de content te mogen (her)gebruiken voor onderzoek en onderwijs; 4. die toestemming voor (her)gebruik twee voorwaarden heeft: een correcte bronvermelding en geen plagiaat; 5. de auteur deze toestemming vooraf geeft voor het vrije, wereldwijde en onherroepelijke gebruik. Er zijn twee scenario’s m.b.t. Open Access: 1. The Green Road / Repositories: vrijwel alle universiteiten in Europa en de VS en hebben een begin gemaakt met een “institutional repository” waarin publicaties van de instelling voor iedereen toegankelijk kunnen worden ontsloten. Via harvesting kunnen vervolgens disciplinegewijs aanvullende diensten worden geleverd met het in repositories aanwezige materiaal. De universiteit van Nottingham houdt een lijst bij van alle repositories (OpenDoar). Nederland, waar alle universiteiten, dank zij het DARE project inmiddels een redelijk gevuld repository hebben, is koploper. 2. The Golden Road / Open Access Tijdschriften: dit zijn tijdschriften waar niet de lezer betaalt (in de vorm van een abonnementsprijs) maar de kosten op een andere wijze worden gedekt. Een veel voorkomende variant is dat dit geschiedt in de vorm van article processing charges (publicatiekosten, ook wel publication fees genoemd), wat betekent dat de financier/opdrachtgever voor het onderzoek betaalt.

De informatiemaatschappij zorgt voor een nieuwe vorm van voedingswetenschap op het gebied van nutrigenomics, Nutritional Science 2.0. Voor het vermeerderen van kennis op dit terrein is een vrije mondiale uitwisseling van data nodig die nog niet goed van de grond is gekomen

WOT Natuur & Milieu heeft in samenwerking met het Milieu- en Natuurplanbureau 22 posters samengebracht. Ze staan voor 22 projecten. Samengebracht vanuit de gedachte van duurzame informatievoorziening MNP, Natuurbalans en de relatie met Wageningen UW. Onderverdeeld naar: biodiversiteit, economische context, milieu, bestuur & samenleving, landschap

Tachtig procent van het dierenwelzijnsbeleid ligt op het bordje van de gemeente, aldus VVD-wethouder Robert Blom van Alphen aan den Rijn. Terwijl tegelijkertijd bij veel gemeenten kennis hierover ontbreekt. Genoeg reden voor een miniconferentie Gemeentelijk dierenwelzijnsbeleid

This study explores possible explanations for science communication behaviour on the part of researchers. More specifically, it considers which factors impact on the active participation of researchers in science communication.For the purpose of this study, science communication behaviour is defined as communication by academics about their scientific research, in the broadest sense of the word, and to an ‘external’ audience. By this we mean persons or groups outside the confines of the research setting. The audience may be affected by the research or exert an influence on it, but it should not fulfil a necessary role in it. Hence, any interaction with outsiders within the parameters of the research process, e.g. as an integral part of a participatory research approach, shall not be regarded as science communication behaviour. Likewise, communication by academics with their peers is also beyond the scope of the present study, as this is considered to belong to the field of ‘scientific’ communication.This qualitative research project endeavours to identify the determinants of the science communication behaviour of fifteen researchers with the University of Antwerp, mostly professors from an array of academic fields. Their behaviour is characterised primarily by a traditional outlook on the communication process, i.e. in terms of a source, a recipient and a transmitter. Moreover, they usually take no initiative towards participating actively in science communication, though they will participate upon request. The diversity exhibited in their science communication behaviour manifests itself in terms of the communication frequency, target group preferences, and type of science communication activities.Explanations for the science communication behaviour of the researchers were found first and foremost in the aspects of ‘willingness’, ‘permission’ and ‘ability’. These correspond with the principal determinants in Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour, namely attitude, the subjective norm, and perceived behavioural control.With regard to the first aspect, the respondents in the study exhibit a mainly positive attitude towards science communication in general. However, that is not to say that they always communicate equally actively with external audiences, as they may also take into account a variety of critical considerations, which can be grouped into seven categories: 1) the choice of communication content: scientific facts, the scientific process or the consequences of the research, 2) the educational level, the degree of interest and the behaviour of the ‘general’ public, 3) the moment of communication: after research has been concluded or during the actual research process, 4) the manner of communication: by means of transmission or transaction, 5) the simplification of the message, 6) the use of infotainment, and 7) the individual and / or collective responsibility involved. There are also divergent opinions on the motives or reasons to engage in science communication, including the potential benefits to the researchers and their research, to the organisation and science in general, and to society as a whole. We therefore conclude that the group of academic researchers is by no means homogenous insofar as attitude towards science communication is concerned.Second, communication with an external audience requires ‘permission’. In other words, it requires a university management that gives its backing and provides a certain acknowledgment, appreciation and support, as well as a public authority that underscores the significance of science communication. If these aspects are lacking, the positive attitude of the researcher towards science communication may evaporate. Another obstacle originating in the social environment of the researcher is the lack of status of young scholars within the academic milieu, which makes them worry they might damage their career prospects by devoting time to science communication. A further element is criticism from colleagues, superiors or other members of the research team. In addition, there may be organisational factors to consider: the internal regulation of the research institution or the house rules of whoever commissioned the research may prohibit or restrict communication with an external audience. Finally, the internal scientific culture, which tends to emphasise the primacy of research and academic publications, may also undercut researchers’ intention to engage in science communication or affect their positive attitude towards it.Third, the scientist must ‘be able’, i.e. they must possess the necessary skills for science communication. This requires training as well as experience. Whereas most respondents consider themselves to possess the necessary communication skills, they also tend to feel their colleagues lack them. The most frequently cited obstacle is, however, lack of time. The respondents explain that they have many other tasks that take precedence over science communication, including research commitments, educational assignments, fundraising, administrative responsibilities and personnel management. Other bottlenecks are a lack of positive feedback and support in communication with external audiences, the often negative balance between investments in and yield from science communication, and the absence of any perceivable impact of science communication. Finally, the strained relationship with the media is cited as an obstacle or barrier. It is attributed to the different cultures of academia and the media, a primarily negative perception of the media on the part of the scientific community, and anxiety over damaging fallout.Attitude, the subjective norm and perceived behavioural control may each impact separately on the researcher’s behaviour, but they also interact. In other words, they may enhance or suppress one another. For example, the attitude of a researcher may be very positive and yet he or she may fail to exhibit active behaviour due to a lack of communication skills. Conversely, researchers who do not regard science communication as their personal duty may nevertheless choose to participate actively in it because of the appreciation shown by their social environment.In the behavioural model of Ajzen, there are also a number of individual background characteristics that play a determining role. Our research pointed to three significant factors.First and foremost, there is the knowledge paradigm within which the researcher works. The hypothesis substantiated by this study is that a researcher with a positivistic outlook will tend towards a traditional mode of communication; an approach whereby it is assumed that knowledge can be transmitted. The constructivist perspective, on the other hand, maintains that knowledge is constructed through interaction. In this approach, communication is regarded as a transaction. It speaks for itself that constructivists tend to be more at ease with interactive and participatory forms of communication than positivistic researchers are. Our research shows the respondents to have a mainly positivistic attitude and to communicate primarily in a traditional way. This suggests that the knowledge paradigm is an important determinant of how the researcher communicates with external audiences. There is a potential for conflict between the growing trend towards more interactive and participatory science communication and the preferences of researchers whose approach is based on a positivistic knowledge paradigm.A second important background factor is the professional identity of the researcher. This identity is a function of how they perceive their job assignment, their professional motivation, and aspects of their social and personal identity. Our hypothesis is that a researcher’s professional identity can help explain his or her science communication behaviour: if communication is, in one way or another, present in the researcher’s job perception and/or is part and parcel of their professional motivation, then science communication is congruent with their professional identity. An analogous reasoning applies if communicating corresponds with aspects of the researcher’s personal or social identity.The third and final background factor is interaction with society. Our study shows that the presence or absence of an external research orientation has explanatory power for the researcher’s display of active science communication behaviour. In other words, if society is in any way the focus of the researcher’s work, as might be the case in such fields as medicine, sociology or law, then communication with external audiences may be beneficial to the research. Science communication is then a tool which the researcher may apply to enhance his work.It is also noticeable that the barriers or bottlenecks that researchers experience in relation to science communication may present themselves in all of the aforementioned areas. Hence, existing recommendations for encouraging science communication by researchers are equally diverse. However, previous research into these obstacles has restricted itself too much to identifying external environmental barriers and to finding ways of eliminating them. The present doctoral research suggests that the problem is much more complex than that. It is too simple only to look for barriers that are external to the researcher and subsequently to deal with them in an instrumental way. A more comprehensive approach is called for, whereby person-related factors are also studied in order to better understand and possibly adjust the science communication behaviour of the researcher. This requires closer attention to the person of the researcher, and particularly to their perception of scientific knowledge production and attitudes towards their profession and the tasks it entails, as well as the relationship between the research activities and society.Making adjustments to researchers’ personal perceptions is however not an easy proposition and requires a different kind of approach than merely the lifting of barriers. Still, it is our expectation that communication between the researcher and society can be enhanced by combining the elimination of external bottlenecks with behavioural incentives on the one hand and, on the other, through greater emphasis in the training of researchers on diversity of knowledge paradigms, professional identity and the role of society.In sum, our study indicates that the intention and behaviour of researchers in relation to science communication depends on four major clusters of factors, namely attitude, the subjective norm, perceived behavioural control, and a number of person-related background factors. Together, these determinants constitute a complex whole in which contributing factors may enhance or suppress one another. The extent to which each of the determinants comes into play could not be ascertained in this qualitative study. A quantitative research approach might provide better insight into that aspect.

The study revealed that the dominant Agricultural extension approaches used in the rice sector in Cameroon is ToT and T&V. The methods of information circulation using these approaches are individual and group methods. The extension approaches has been criticized for its ineffectiveness especially in the circulation of information in rice production. lack of room for participation in the manner of implementing agricultural approaches (ToT and T&V), government bias policy towards the rice sector, weak linkage of farmers to research and other NGOs for assistance, no accessibility of modern technologies like the radio because its too expensive, insufficient finance, shortage of extension workers, behavioural altitude of extension workers towards the farmers, and women low access to information because they are not involved in extension activities are among the most cited problems hindering the effectiveness of extension services in the rice sector in Cameroon. Apart from these general constraints, the finding revealed that the problems extension workers specifically faces that hinders their work performance in effective information circulation in rice production includes low salary, lack of technical aids, to many farmers to attain to, too technical information to communicate to farmers and no reliable transport. In an attempt to improve the extension services in the rice sector in Cameroon, the information circulation frame work was established whereby the three main stakeholders involved in information circulation, that is research, extension and farmers organization were linked in such a way that each actor does what it can do best in enhancing dissemination and utilization of agricultural information all geared towards the rice famers. Whereas supportive government policy, creation of community radio stations, strong link between farmers and researchers and a bottom up implementation of extension approach in information dissemination in Ndop rice can be a good starting point for effective information circulation in Ndop rice production in Cameroon.

De webportal Kijk in de Kas is een interactief instrument om praktijk- en onderzoekskennis uit te wisselen. Teler kunnen een virtueel kijkje nemen bij vijf collega's. Klimaatmodel KASPRO rekent mee en produceert mooie plaatjes. De betrokken onderzoekers en telers geven via weblogs hun commentaar. Ze streven op deze manier naar een betere koppeling van onderzoek en praktijk op het gebied van de energiebesparing

A study was undertaken on the sunflower value chain in Lira district of Uganda. The objective of the study was twofold: First to catalogue innovations that have been developed or introduced in the value chain over a 10 year trajectory (1998-2007). The second objective was to map the knowledge management capabilities of the stakeholders involved in the chain. The study adopted a qualitative approach in which primary data was gathered through group discussion with the largely subsistence sunflower farmers in the district. Eight farmer groups were selected for the study. Key informant interviews were also conducted for the respondents selected from amongst the Millers, Input Stockist, NGOs, Produce Buyers as well as Private and Public Extension Workers. A preset interview /discussion check list was used to guide the data collection processes. Collected data was analyzed through discussion along major themes such source/origin of innovation, networking/linkages and flow of communication and information amongst different stakeholders. The result of the study showed a number of stakeholders involved in a complex relation in the value chain. The stakeholders were identified to include Farmers as producers, Millers as private entrepreneurs, Produce buyers, Input Stockist and Agents, Government agency, NGOs and Extension Workers. The actions of each stakeholder were found to directly affect or indirectly influence the actions of another. There was low rate and level of innovation amongst the stakeholders. Developed innovations were dotted among the stakeholders with only minimal spread to others in the chain. The innovations identified were categorised into four groups namely: Product innovations, Management/Organizational Innovations, Process innovations and Service innovation defined by the form in which such innovation were found. Local innovations generated from the national research programme was lacking as the only case was an improved seed released into the production system in 1991. Since then no other technologies or innovations was release into the value chain from the national research system. Product innovations were mainly developed by Millers and imported. The Management/organizational forms varied across all stakeholders but more strongly exhibited with farmers. Extension providers however, showed no new form of organizations /Management. Communication and knowledge sharing amongst stakeholders were found incomplete, sporadic and near absent in some cases. However, internal communication was strong and informal amongst farmers and enhanced by formation of clusters of mobilized groups. In conclusion I recommend the establishment of platform for coordination amongst extension workers, and this should be guided by management of the various providers of extension services. The noble innovations should be up scaled by extension workers and should be used as bench mark for building the social network to develop an innovation system appropriate for the oilseed subsector under a Joint coordination by the Vegetable Oil development project and the recently formed Uganda Oilseed subsector Plat form. The recently formed oilseed subsector platform to link up with VODP and Districts in consultation with Millers and other stakeholder for capacity building programmes for all stakeholders to stimulate the innovation system. There district as an authority should initiate dialogue amongst Millers to strengthen the already initiated association to be responsive to needs of all.

De brochure Onderwijsdag Ondernemerschap 2008 is een bundeling van alle posters met resultaten van onderzoek en onderwijsontwikkeling die tijdens deze door LNV gefinancierde onderwijsdag van het project Ondernemerschap van Onderzoek naar Onderwijs zijn gepresenteerd. In dat programma vindt kennisontwikkeling op het gebied van ondernemerschap plaats in nauwe samenwerking met overheid, ondernemers en het onderwijs. De afgelopen periode is er vanuit het programma juist veel aandacht geweest om de kennis beter te laten benutten Deze brochure is zelf een goed voorbeeld geworden van een nauwe samenwerking tussen onderzoek en onderwijs

Op 24 april 2008 organiseert PPO een speciale open dag die ondernemers uit de bloembollen- en vaste plantenketen een gevarieerd programma biedt met de nieuwste innovaties. 's Ochtends komen praktijkgerichte verhalen van bedrijfsleven en kennisinstellingen aan bod. De middag is een kennismarkt: bedrijven tonen hun laatste innovaties voor de sector, er zijn posters met informatie van internationale kennisinstellingen en PPO presenteert recente informatie uit het praktijkonderzoek

De brochure Onderwijsdag Ondernemerschap 2008 is een bundeling van alle posters met resultaten van onderzoek en onderwijsontwikkeling die tijdens deze door LNV gefinancierde onderwijsdag van het project Ondernemerschap van Onderzoek naar Onderwijs zijn gepresenteerd. In dat programma vindt kennisontwikkeling op het gebied van ondernemerschap plaats in nauwe samenwerking met overheid, ondernemers en het onderwijs. De afgelopen periode is er vanuit het programma juist veel aandacht geweest om de kennis beter te laten benutten Deze brochure is zelf een goed voorbeeld geworden van een nauwe samenwerking tussen onderzoek en onderwijs

This study was conducted in the eastern province of Kenya, Makueni district. The district was selected due to the large numbers of farmer who grow citrus. 20 farmers who grow citrus were selected of which 10 were farmers who grow both the grafted citrus and non grafted citrus to find their perception on knowledge circulation in the farming communities. 3 extension workers were also interviewed to find the role in knowledge circulation. The findings from this research reveal that a lot of learning takes place amongst the farmers themselves. In fact 55% of the learning occurs through farmer to farmer knowledge exchange while the 10 % learning occurs through the formal government extension services. The study also found that Knowledge circulation is also enhanced by other development partners working in the rural areas. The findings show that land size, availability of inputs and other off farm activities the farmer engage in have implication on the numbers of citrus trees planted by farmers. The findings show that the extension service is Kenya is slowly adopting new approach to enhance knowledge circulation. Extension service has adopted the group approach as opposed to the individual farm visits. This has been due to the structural adjustment program which led to under funding in the extension department. A lot of reforms are also taking place in the extension department to ensure a better flow of information and knowledge to the farming communities. Extension is acting as the coordinating unit within the district for all the other development partners working in the district. The government extension service is no longer the sole provider of information and knowledge to the farming communities in the district.

Zet provinciale ambtenaren, bestuurders en onderzoekers twee dagen lang bij elkaar in een bus, bezoek onderweg innovatieve projecten en er ontstaan allerlei nieuwe verbindingen en “energie”. De deelnemers leren van de projecten wat ze wel en juist niet moeten doen als ze in hun eigen werk innovaties willen bevorderen. En passant merken ze dat Wageningen UR veel meer doet dan ze altijd dachten. Een reportage

This study explores possible explanations for science communication behaviour on the part of researchers. More specifically, it considers which factors impact on the active participation of researchers in science communication.For the purpose of this study, science communication behaviour is defined as communication by academics about their scientific research, in the broadest sense of the word, and to an ‘external’ audience. By this we mean persons or groups outside the confines of the research setting. The audience may be affected by the research or exert an influence on it, but it should not fulfil a necessary role in it. Hence, any interaction with outsiders within the parameters of the research process, e.g. as an integral part of a participatory research approach, shall not be regarded as science communication behaviour. Likewise, communication by academics with their peers is also beyond the scope of the present study, as this is considered to belong to the field of ‘scientific’ communication.This qualitative research project endeavours to identify the determinants of the science communication behaviour of fifteen researchers with the University of Antwerp, mostly professors from an array of academic fields. Their behaviour is characterised primarily by a traditional outlook on the communication process, i.e. in terms of a source, a recipient and a transmitter. Moreover, they usually take no initiative towards participating actively in science communication, though they will participate upon request. The diversity exhibited in their science communication behaviour manifests itself in terms of the communication frequency, target group preferences, and type of science communication activities.Explanations for the science communication behaviour of the researchers were found first and foremost in the aspects of ‘willingness’, ‘permission’ and ‘ability’. These correspond with the principal determinants in Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour, namely attitude, the subjective norm, and perceived behavioural control.With regard to the first aspect, the respondents in the study exhibit a mainly positive attitude towards science communication in general. However, that is not to say that they always communicate equally actively with external audiences, as they may also take into account a variety of critical considerations, which can be grouped into seven categories: 1) the choice of communication content: scientific facts, the scientific process or the consequences of the research, 2) the educational level, the degree of interest and the behaviour of the ‘general’ public, 3) the moment of communication: after research has been concluded or during the actual research process, 4) the manner of communication: by means of transmission or transaction, 5) the simplification of the message, 6) the use of infotainment, and 7) the individual and / or collective responsibility involved. There are also divergent opinions on the motives or reasons to engage in science communication, including the potential benefits to the researchers and their research, to the organisation and science in general, and to society as a whole. We therefore conclude that the group of academic researchers is by no means homogenous insofar as attitude towards science communication is concerned.Second, communication with an external audience requires ‘permission’. In other words, it requires a university management that gives its backing and provides a certain acknowledgment, appreciation and support, as well as a public authority that underscores the significance of science communication. If these aspects are lacking, the positive attitude of the researcher towards science communication may evaporate. Another obstacle originating in the social environment of the researcher is the lack of status of young scholars within the academic milieu, which makes them worry they might damage their career prospects by devoting time to science communication. A further element is criticism from colleagues, superiors or other members of the research team. In addition, there may be organisational factors to consider: the internal regulation of the research institution or the house rules of whoever commissioned the research may prohibit or restrict communication with an external audience. Finally, the internal scientific culture, which tends to emphasise the primacy of research and academic publications, may also undercut researchers’ intention to engage in science communication or affect their positive attitude towards it.Third, the scientist must ‘be able’, i.e. they must possess the necessary skills for science communication. This requires training as well as experience. Whereas most respondents consider themselves to possess the necessary communication skills, they also tend to feel their colleagues lack them. The most frequently cited obstacle is, however, lack of time. The respondents explain that they have many other tasks that take precedence over science communication, including research commitments, educational assignments, fundraising, administrative responsibilities and personnel management. Other bottlenecks are a lack of positive feedback and support in communication with external audiences, the often negative balance between investments in and yield from science communication, and the absence of any perceivable impact of science communication. Finally, the strained relationship with the media is cited as an obstacle or barrier. It is attributed to the different cultures of academia and the media, a primarily negative perception of the media on the part of the scientific community, and anxiety over damaging fallout.Attitude, the subjective norm and perceived behavioural control may each impact separately on the researcher’s behaviour, but they also interact. In other words, they may enhance or suppress one another. For example, the attitude of a researcher may be very positive and yet he or she may fail to exhibit active behaviour due to a lack of communication skills. Conversely, researchers who do not regard science communication as their personal duty may nevertheless choose to participate actively in it because of the appreciation shown by their social environment.In the behavioural model of Ajzen, there are also a number of individual background characteristics that play a determining role. Our research pointed to three significant factors.First and foremost, there is the knowledge paradigm within which the researcher works. The hypothesis substantiated by this study is that a researcher with a positivistic outlook will tend towards a traditional mode of communication; an approach whereby it is assumed that knowledge can be transmitted. The constructivist perspective, on the other hand, maintains that knowledge is constructed through interaction. In this approach, communication is regarded as a transaction. It speaks for itself that constructivists tend to be more at ease with interactive and participatory forms of communication than positivistic researchers are. Our research shows the respondents to have a mainly positivistic attitude and to communicate primarily in a traditional way. This suggests that the knowledge paradigm is an important determinant of how the researcher communicates with external audiences. There is a potential for conflict between the growing trend towards more interactive and participatory science communication and the preferences of researchers whose approach is based on a positivistic knowledge paradigm.A second important background factor is the professional identity of the researcher. This identity is a function of how they perceive their job assignment, their professional motivation, and aspects of their social and personal identity. Our hypothesis is that a researcher’s professional identity can help explain his or her science communication behaviour: if communication is, in one way or another, present in the researcher’s job perception and/or is part and parcel of their professional motivation, then science communication is congruent with their professional identity. An analogous reasoning applies if communicating corresponds with aspects of the researcher’s personal or social identity.The third and final background factor is interaction with society. Our study shows that the presence or absence of an external research orientation has explanatory power for the researcher’s display of active science communication behaviour. In other words, if society is in any way the focus of the researcher’s work, as might be the case in such fields as medicine, sociology or law, then communication with external audiences may be beneficial to the research. Science communication is then a tool which the researcher may apply to enhance his work.It is also noticeable that the barriers or bottlenecks that researchers experience in relation to science communication may present themselves in all of the aforementioned areas. Hence, existing recommendations for encouraging science communication by researchers are equally diverse. However, previous research into these obstacles has restricted itself too much to identifying external environmental barriers and to finding ways of eliminating them. The present doctoral research suggests that the problem is much more complex than that. It is too simple only to look for barriers that are external to the researcher and subsequently to deal with them in an instrumental way. A more comprehensive approach is called for, whereby person-related factors are also studied in order to better understand and possibly adjust the science communication behaviour of the researcher. This requires closer attention to the person of the researcher, and particularly to their perception of scientific knowledge production and attitudes towards their profession and the tasks it entails, as well as the relationship between the research activities and society.Making adjustments to researchers’ personal perceptions is however not an easy proposition and requires a different kind of approach than merely the lifting of barriers. Still, it is our expectation that communication between the researcher and society can be enhanced by combining the elimination of external bottlenecks with behavioural incentives on the one hand and, on the other, through greater emphasis in the training of researchers on diversity of knowledge paradigms, professional identity and the role of society.In sum, our study indicates that the intention and behaviour of researchers in relation to science communication depends on four major clusters of factors, namely attitude, the subjective norm, perceived behavioural control, and a number of person-related background factors. Together, these determinants constitute a complex whole in which contributing factors may enhance or suppress one another. The extent to which each of the determinants comes into play could not be ascertained in this qualitative study. A quantitative research approach might provide better insight into that aspect.

De hele dag door worden we bestookt met informatie en suggesties, bedoeld om ons ergens toe aan te zetten of juist van af te brengen, in het belang van onszelf of van de wereld om ons heen. Ook bij het bedenken van oplossingen voor de meest uiteenlopende problemen roepen we al gauw om meer of betere communicatie. Kortom, strategische communicatie is aan de orde van de dag. Dit boek gaat over principes en toepassingen van strategische communicatie. Het uitgangspunt is dat een goed begrip van de wijze waarop mensen met elkaar communiceren in verschillende contexten en gedegen inzicht in de mechanismen die daarbij een rol spelen, noodzakelijk zijn voor een effectieve toepassing van communicatie. Toepassingen vinden plaats in de context van probleemoplossing en innovatie, waarbij innovatie ruim wordt opgevat. Het gaat niet alleen om technische innovaties maar ook om sociale innovaties, zoals andere manieren om met elkaar te communiceren

WOT Natuur & Milieu heeft in samenwerking met het Milieu- en Natuurplanbureau 22 posters samengebracht. Ze staan voor 22 projecten. Samengebracht vanuit de gedachte van duurzame informatievoorziening MNP, Natuurbalans en de relatie met Wageningen UW. Onderverdeeld naar: biodiversiteit, economische context, milieu, bestuur & samenleving, landschap

‘Hoort, zegt het voort…..’ is een verzameling van toppers en floppers in de communicatie bij Netwerken in de Veehouderij. Het is een publicatie van Wageningen UR en het onderzoeksprogramma Netwerken in de Veehouderij. Dit programma wordt gefi nancierd door het Ministerie van LNV en heeft tussen 2004 en 2008 ruim 120 netwerken van veehouders en anderen ondersteund om te komen tot een duurzame veehouderij

Er is een steeds grotere wetenschappelijke en politieke consensus over de mate waarin het klimaat zal veranderen en de mate waarin de mens daaraan bijdraagt. Ook is er steeds meer overeenstemming over de maatregelen die genomen moeten worden om de klimaatverandering te remmen en ons voor te bereiden op de gevolgen daarvan. Deze consensus is echter niet unaniem. Er zijn mensen die de wetenschappelijke ‘feiten’ proberen te weerleggen en/of te nuanceren. Deze mensen worden wel de klimaatsceptici genoemd. Een manier om met deze sceptici om te gaan is door ze te negeren. Een tweede manier is door in debat te gaan en hun kritieken (wetenschappelijk) te weerleggen of te nuanceren. Een derde manier wordt in dit essay uit de doeken gedaan. Ik zal beargumenteren dat het kan lonen om meer inzicht te verwerven in de wijze waarop macht de productie en reproductie van kennis beïnvloedt

PPO-fruit neemt actief deel aan het Europese Isa-project. Het project beoogt de fruitconsumptie in Europa te bevorderen door kennisontwikkeling en - verspreiding op het gebied van consumptiebeleving, gezondheid, veredeling, verwerking, duurzame teelt en naoogstbehandeling. Dit artikel beschrijft welke onderzoeken PPO-fruit uitvoert in de naoogstfase en ook coördineert in Europa

Na een kleine drie jaar ervaring met 115 netwerken van veehouders mogen we spreken van een nieuwe benadering die perspectief biedt voor het stimuleren van duurzame innovaties: de aanpak van ‘netwerken met vrije actoren’, met actoren die sturen op energie en verbinding. Spelers met ruimte om die verbindende rol te spelen zijn schaars geworden op de kennismarkt. Een vrije actor heeft de ruimte, het inzicht en de positie om te doen wat nodig is om het netwerk over de grootste obstakels heen te helpen. Het programma levert vrije actoren op tijdelijke basis in de vorm van kenniswerkers die hun weg weten te vinden in de kennisinfrastructuur, interveniëren in het proces om de interne interactie gezond te houden en assisteren bij het op gang brengen van de nodige interactie met de buitenwereld. Het programma ‘Netwerken in de Veehouderij’ (NidV) heeft deze rol op een nieuwe manier met kenniswerkers ingevuld. Het programma is niet gestart vanuit een theorie of een methode maar vanuit een zoekrichting. In deze publicatie beschrijven we de aanpak en haar wordingsgeschiedenis, de theoretische onderbouwing en de conclusies die we op grond van de ervaring tot nu toe kunnen trekken