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COVID-19大流行既清楚了国际科学合作及其脆弱性的重要性。鉴于观察到的破坏国际科学团队和协作努力以及未来潜在破坏的风险，因此有迫切需要了解如何在面对破坏时建立抵抗力和可持续性的国际科学合作。该项目解决以下问题：影响长期合作的国际团队的特征是什么？这种特征如何使团队参与国际科学交流，从而从中断到他们的协作努力，而其他特征往往会导致紧张甚至失败？为了回答此类问题，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。 Analyzing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on international scientific collaborations will drive our understanding of i) the potential benefits of international scientific collaborations 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 resistant than others, and iv) the ways in which risks to collaboration can be mitigated.为了回答这些问题，调查人员将开发和测试一种使用i）关于国际研究资金，管理和使用的公开可用定量和定性数据的方法，以及ii）针对其科学网络可持续性和弹性分析专家的关键信息的原始访谈。使用这些信息，我们将比较为政治方面的国际科学合作而在世界科学领域的不同立场和科学合作的不同政策方法中进行比较。该方法的发现将在两个层面上有用：以了解线人对科学协作和韧性的理解；并从比较不同系统中阐明的框架，政策和思想的框架，政策和思想，以了解不同的政府和政策方法。这项努力的结果将为国际科学参与和团队提供关键的基础，以发展和增强对当前和未来的破坏的抵御能力，以确保国际参与和科学创新应继续使团队和组织在此类团队和组织之间进行互动，协作和合作以及在各种领域的相互作用方面的互动方式和购买方面的研究方面的互动方式，以进行科学研究的方法：技术描述：技术描述的技术学范围。全球危机。有趣的是，Covid-19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，同时证明了其在解决共同问题方面的价值。但是目前对国际科学参与的弹性进行了研究，迫切需要开发弹性结构和实践，以防止永久破坏。为了开发一种专注于国际协作团队的韧性的科学和政策方法，该项目将通过半结构化的访谈与选定国家 /地区的研究基金，管理人员和研究人员进行半结构化访谈来生成定性数据。对公开可用的政策文件，法律，研究成果和资金金额的审查将补充访谈数据。来自选定国家（英国，新加坡，欧盟）的高级科学家的专家咨询小组将建议该团队识别和构建最初分层的受访者样本。调查人员将使用访谈数据，公开数据的审查以及专家咨询小组的建议，以确定与国际研究合作的弹性有关的定性课程和定量指标。这种方法将以两种方式发展知识。首先，通过让受访者在科学政策上讨论他们的弹性理论，他们从Covid-19的中断中汲取了教训，以及如何建立弹性国际合作，我们将将专家的实际专业知识和专家理论带入弹性的讨论中。其次，通过采用明确混合的方法，对科学政策系统的多样性样本进行了比较方法，我们可以开发一个框架来比较不同的科学政策方法以进行协作及其对弹性的影响。该奖项反映了NSF的法定任务，并被认为是通过使用基金会的知识和更广泛影响的评估来审查Criteria通过评估来通过评估来获得支持的。

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