{"id":515,"date":"2019-01-16T18:13:22","date_gmt":"2019-01-16T18:13:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/research.reading.ac.uk\/openupsci\/?p=515"},"modified":"2019-01-16T18:13:22","modified_gmt":"2019-01-16T18:13:22","slug":"benefits-and-opportunities-for-a-national-community-of-practice","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/research.reading.ac.uk\/openupsci\/2019\/01\/16\/benefits-and-opportunities-for-a-national-community-of-practice\/","title":{"rendered":"Benefits and Opportunities for a National Community of Practice"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"In 2018, we conducted a short online survey to capture the thoughts and strategies of individuals and organisations involved in public engagement with research in the UK. Over 70 individuals and organisations replied, including university researchers, practitioners, NGOs, policy teams, public engagement support teams and community groups. We asked them about their future involvement in public engagement and citizen science, and what it could be. Here we present some of the key themes that emerged from their answers to two of the questions. You can find details on the barriers and challenges here<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Question 1: What are the benefits to you and\/or your organisation of belonging to (and being supported by) a national community of practice<\/a> around public engagement with environmental research?<\/h2>\n

Four key benefits could be identified<\/p>\n

1. Knowledge Sharing<\/strong><\/h4>\n

This was the most common answer among our respondents, with over half stating that knowledge sharing would be a key benefit of a community of practice. This could be in sharing experiences, case studies, data, challenges, and ideas around best practice.<\/p>\n

2. Resource Sharing<\/strong><\/h4>\n

Being able to share resources was seen as an important benefit of a national community, and would enable individuals and organisations to tackle current difficulties regarding finite resources. Though our respondents largely did not specify particular resources, this point was often linked to other benefits of knowledge sharing, saving time, and avoiding the duplication of efforts.<\/p>\n

3. Engagement<\/strong><\/h4>\n

A national community was highlighted as an important solution to reaching wider audiences and extending the geographical reach of projects and organisations. In addition, there may be opportunity for greater \u2018impact\u2019 by working with different communities or \u2018disadvantaged\u2019 groups. This wider reach could also increase volunteer numbers for citizen science projects. Yet not only would such a community have an impact on involvement, but the type of involvement, with respondents noting the potential increase in motivation, enthusiasm, and confidence.<\/p>\n

4. Funding<\/strong><\/h3>\n

In our previous blog post, we demonstrated that funding was a key concern for our respondents. A national community of practice was viewed by a number of respondents as a benefit, enabling organisations to have access to external funding, to gain further knowledge about available funding streams, and to improve bid-writing through partnerships and collectives.<\/p>\n

A community of practice was seen by the majority of respondents as an important and beneficial way of furthering public engagement and improving current approaches to citizen science in environmental research, with opportunities to share ideas, improve personal and professional development, and to ultimately better environmental outcomes.<\/em><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Question 2: In an ideal<\/em> world what could you or your organisation contribute to a national community for public engagement with environmental research?<\/h2>\n

Our respondents suggested:<\/p>\n

1. Knowledge<\/strong><\/h4>\n

Two thirds of our respondents said that they could offer some form of knowledge to a community of practice. This could be:<\/p>\n