Open Collections

Rossa-Roccor, Verena

University of British Columbia

Background: A growing number of academics advocate for political action on climate change. Very little is known about their strategic capacity or how they experience this role. There is also a paucity of training opportunities for academics who want to become more effective activists. This dissertation (i) presents a theory-substantive conceptual framework for change making strategies and tactics, (ii) fills the knowledge gap on strategies and experiences of academic advocates, and (iii) fills the training gap by providing a strategy workshop for academics. Methodology: A conceptual framework of practice-relevant insights on effective change making strategies was developed using a multidisciplinary body of literature. The experiences and skills of academic advocates were assessed in an interview-based narrative study design which included 17 academics from Canada, the US, and the UK. Data was analysed with a thematic coding approach within an interpretive description framework. The workshop focuses on power navigation strategies, integrating findings from the literature and the interviews. Results and discussion: I developed four archetypes based on participants’ knowledge mobilization (KMb) tactics: the advisor, the advocate, the activist, and the insider. These archetypes are fluid categories along two axes: (i) where participants exert their influence - inside vs. outside of the policy community - and (ii) how they approach their KMb activities from “power navigator” to “information provider”. The former engages in the realities of politics inside the policy community (e.g., civil servant, partisan activities, or lobbying) or as an outsider via tactics such as social movements or civil disobedience. The latter aims to maintain the status of an “objective” advisor via tactics such as acting as an expert witness or public intellectual. The choice of strategy for most participants is intuitive, depends largely on one’s concept of what is right or wrong (“identity”), and is based on implicit theories of change grounded in beliefs and assumptions rather than an empirical evidence base. Systemic realities such as lack of incentives or resources prohibit the academic advocate from applying literature-based strategic insights to their own work. This dissertation seeks to remedy these challenges by providing a workshop that considers these constraints.

Text

2025-05-20

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International

http://hdl.handle.net/2429/91166

Resources, Environment and Sustainability

University of British Columbia

UBCV

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/