EAGER: International Type II: Classifying the Causes, Consequences, and Lessons of Resilience Within International Scientific Collaboration

EAGER：国际类型 II：对国际科学合作中复原力的原因、后果和教训进行分类

• 批准号: 2122228
• 负责人: Holly Jarman
• 金额: $ 29.99万
• 依托单位: Regents of the University of Michigan - Ann Arbor
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2021
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2021-09-01 至 2024-08-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=2122228&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: EAGER; International; Type; II; Classifying

Part I: Nontechnical descriptionThe COVID-19 pandemic has made clear both the importance of international scientific collaboration and its fragility. Given the observed disruption to international scientific teams and collaborative efforts, as well as the risk of future potential disruptions, there is a critical need to understand how to build international scientific collaborations that are resilient and sustainable in the face of disruption. This project addresses the following questions: what are the characteristics of international teams that influence long-term collaboration? How do such characteristics allow teams engaging within international scientific exchange to recover from disruption to their collaborative efforts, while other characteristics tend to contribute to strain and even failure? To answer such questions, this project aims to create a comparative methodology that will allow us to understand, gauge, and contribute to improving future international scientific collaboration. Analyzing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on international scientific collaborations will drive our understanding of i) the potential benefits of international scientific collaboration and how they are realized, ii) the barriers to continued collaboration in the event of systemic disruption, iii) the reasons why some collaborations are more resilient than others, and iv) the ways in which risks to collaboration can be mitigated. To answer these questions, the investigators will develop and test a method that uses i) publicly available quantitative and qualitative data on international research funding, administration, and use and ii) original interviews with key informants selected for their expertise in analysis of scientific network sustainability and resiliency. Using this information, we will compare international scientific collaboration in polities chosen for their different positions in world science and different policy approaches to scientific collaboration. The findings from this method will be useful on two levels: to gain informants' understanding of scientific collaboration and resilience; and to gain an understanding of different governmental and policy approaches from comparing the frameworks, policies, and ideas that are enunciated in different systems. Results from this effort will provide international scientific engagements and teams with a critical foundation to develop and enhance their resilience against current and future disruptions – ensuring that international engagement and scientific innovation shall continue despite any aberration in how such teams and organizations interact, collaborate, and pursue cutting-edge scientific ideas in various fields.Part II: Technical descriptionThis project aims to develop a scientifically robust methodology to comparatively evaluate international scientific relationships and their resilience in the face of global crises. Anecdotally, the COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically changed the dynamics of international scientific collaboration, challenging collaboration in many ways while demonstrating its value in addressing shared problems. But the resilience of international scientific engagement is under-researched at present, and there is urgent need to develop resilience structures and practices to prevent permanent disruption. To develop a scientific and policy approach focused on the resilience of international collaborative teams, this project will generate qualitative data through semi-structured interviews with a purposeful, stratified sample of research funders, administrators and researchers in selected countries. A review of publicly available policy documentation, laws, research outputs and funding amounts will supplement the interview data. An Expert Advisory Group of senior scientists drawn from selected countries (UK, Singapore, EU) will advise the team in identifying and constructing the initial stratified sample of interviewees. The interview data, review of publicly available data, and advice from the Expert Advisory Group will be used by the investigators to identify both qualitative lessons and quantitative metrics relating to the resilience of international research collaborations.This method would develop knowledge in two ways. First, by having interviewees in science policy discuss their operative theories of resilient collaboration, the lessons they drew from the disruption of COVID-19, and how to build resilient international collaboration, we would bring the practical expertise and theories of experts into the discussion of resilience. Second, by taking an explicitly mixed methods, comparative approach to a diverse sample of science policy systems, we can develop a framework for comparing different science policy approaches to collaboration and their effects on resilience.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.

第一部分：非技术描述2019冠状病毒病大流行表明了国际科学合作的重要性及其脆弱性。鉴于观察到的对国际科学团队和合作努力的破坏，以及未来潜在破坏的风险，迫切需要了解如何建立在破坏面前具有弹性和可持续性的国际科学合作。这个项目解决了以下问题：影响长期合作的国际团队的特点是什么？这些特征如何使参与国际科学交流的团队从中断中恢复到他们的合作努力，而其他特征往往会导致紧张甚至失败？为了回答这些问题，该项目旨在创建一种比较方法，使我们能够理解、衡量并为改善未来的国际科学合作做出贡献。分析COVID-19大流行对国际科学合作的影响，将有助于我们理解：(1)国际科学合作的潜在利益及其实现方式，(2)在发生系统性破坏时继续合作的障碍，(3)一些合作比其他合作更具弹性的原因，以及(4)减轻合作风险的方式。为了回答这些问题，研究人员将开发和测试一种方法，该方法使用i)关于国际研究资金、管理和使用的公开定量和定性数据，以及ii)对在科学网络可持续性和弹性分析方面具有专业知识的关键举报人的原始访谈。利用这些信息，我们将比较国际科学合作的政策选择，因为它们在世界科学中的不同地位和不同的科学合作政策方法。该方法的发现将在两个层面上有用：获得举报人对科学合作和弹性的理解；并通过比较不同系统中阐明的框架、政策和思想，了解不同的政府和政策方法。这一努力的结果将为国际科学参与和团队提供一个关键的基础，以发展和增强他们对当前和未来中断的恢复能力——确保国际参与和科学创新将继续下去，尽管这些团队和组织在各个领域的互动、合作和追求前沿科学思想的方式存在任何偏差。第二部分：技术描述本项目旨在开发一种科学可靠的方法来比较评估国际科学关系及其在面对全球危机时的弹性。有趣的是，2019冠状病毒病大流行极大地改变了国际科学合作的动态，在许多方面挑战了合作，同时也显示了合作在解决共同问题方面的价值。但是，目前对国际科学参与的复原力的研究不足，迫切需要发展复原力结构和实践，以防止永久性的破坏。为了开发一种专注于国际合作团队弹性的科学和政策方法，该项目将通过对选定国家的研究资助者、管理人员和研究人员进行有目的的分层样本的半结构化访谈，生成定性数据。对公开的政策文件、法律、研究产出和供资数额的审查将补充面谈数据。一个由来自选定国家（英国、新加坡、欧盟）的资深科学家组成的专家咨询小组将在确定和构建受访者的初始分层样本方面向该小组提供建议。调查人员将使用访谈数据、对公开可用数据的审查以及专家咨询组的建议，以确定与国际研究合作复原力有关的定性教训和定量指标。这种方法可以从两个方面发展知识。首先，通过让科学政策领域的受访者讨论他们关于韧性合作的操作理论、他们从COVID-19的破坏中吸取的教训，以及如何建立韧性国际合作，我们将把专家的实践专业知识和理论引入到韧性的讨论中。其次，通过对不同的科学政策系统样本采取明确的混合方法和比较方法，我们可以开发一个框架，用于比较不同的科学政策合作方法及其对弹性的影响。该奖项反映了美国国家科学基金会的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的知识价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

项目成果

Role of scientific advice in covid-19 policy

科学建议在 covid-19 政策中的作用

• DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2022-070572
• 发表时间: 2022
• 期刊: BMJ
• 作者: Jarman, Holly;Rozenblum, Sarah;Falkenbach, Michelle;Rockwell, Olivia;Greer, Scott L
• 通讯作者: Greer, Scott L