Author:
Fabian Mark,Alexandrova Anna,Nair Yamini Cinamon
Abstract
AbstractWe describe a replicable process for coproducing a theory of ‘thriving’, or more broadly ‘wellbeing’, in partnership with stakeholders to inform an area of policy. Coproduction promotes effectiveness, practicality, and legitimacy of wellbeing policies by combining insights from people with lived experience of that policy, the practitioners who implement it, and technical experts with relevant area specific knowledge. We illustrate our methodology using a case study of a coproduction exercise between wellbeing researchers and practitioners and users of Turn2us, a UK-based anti-poverty charity. We report both the process developed for this collaboration and the bespoke theory and measures of thriving in financial hardship that emerged from it. We emphasise the interplay between different types of inputs: quantitative and qualitative data, academic theories of wellbeing and lived experience, and formal and informal insights. Our experience demonstrates the value of contextualising wellbeing for practical contexts, serving as an important complement to top-down approaches relying on standardised theories and metrics.
Funder
Economic and Social Research Council
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
Reference44 articles.
1. Alexandrova, A. (2017). A philosophy for the science of wellbeing. Oxford University Press.
2. Alexandrova, A., & Fabian, M. (2022). Democratising measurement: Or why thick concepts call for coproduction. European Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 12(7), 1–23.
3. Alkire, S. (2005). Why the capability approach? Journal of Human Development, 6(1), 115–135.
4. Anderson, E. (2002). Situated knowledge and the interplay of value judgments and evidence in scientific inquiry. The scope of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science (pp. 497–517). Springer.
5. Anderson, I., & Jæger, B. (1999). Scenario workshops and consensus conferences: Towards more democratic decision-making. Science and Policy, 26(5), 331–340.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献