‘Where’ is the evidence? A starting point for the development of place‐based research reviews and their implications for wellbeing‐related policymaking

Author:

Esmene Shukru1ORCID,Leyshon Michael1,de Braal Petra2,de Bruin Hans3,Leyshon Catherine1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Centre for Geography and Environmental Science University of Exeter Penryn UK

2. Solidarity University Middelburg The Netherlands

3. HZ University of Applied Sciences Vlissingen The Netherlands

Abstract

AbstractThis paper aims to stimulate debate around the development of a place‐based research review methodology. We present place‐based reviews as a potential source of support for wellbeing‐related local policymaking. Our introductory discussions highlight an ever‐growing need for insights about specific localities and a lack in resources—including time—for local policymakers to engage with research. Additionally, increasing demands for local insights have been driven by devolution shifts, which redistribute policymaking responsibilities to local authorities. Hence, we explore the challenges and opportunities that arise when places are considered in reviewing research relevant to wellbeing. We build a case study around two related places of different scale: Truro, a small cathedral city in the United Kingdom's Southwest; and Cornwall, the regional county that contains Truro. We use these places as search terms in combination with terms concerning health and social care (HSC) services. HSC services are included as a component of our case study, as the topic is a consistent concern for wellbeing‐related policies. In our findings, we report a lack of papers on our smaller scale of place (Truro). One might expect this outcome. Nonetheless, we reflect on current research practices and processes that might have further limited our ability to generate insights about Truro. Encouragingly, our findings on Cornwall demonstrate the potential of place‐based reviews in supporting local policymaking more broadly. We make initial judgements around knowledge gaps—including the exclusion of perspectives from certain groups and identities—and topological insights, that is, those that are relevant to Cornwall as a whole. Our discussions also consider how place‐based reviews can be enhanced via the retrieval and inclusion of non‐academic studies. Finally, key questions to induce debate on this subject are posed in the conclusion.

Funder

Interreg

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3