Abstract

Community-engaged research is understood as existing on a continuum from less to more community engagement, defined by participation and decision-making authority. It has been widely assumed that more is better than less engagement. However, we argue that what makes for good community engagement is not simply the extent but the fit or alignment between the intended approach and the various contexts shaping the research projects. This article draws on case studies from three Community Engagement Cores (CECs) of NIEHS-funded Environmental Health Science Core Centers (Harvard University, UC Davis and University of Arizona,) to illustrate the ways in which community engagement approaches have been fit to different contexts and the successes and challenges experienced in each case. We analyze the processes through which the CECs work with researchers and community leaders to develop place-based community engagement approaches and find that different strategies are called for to fit distinct contexts. We find that alignment of the scale and scope of the environmental health issue and related research project, the capacities and resources of the researchers and community leaders, and the influences of the sociopolitical environment are critical for understanding and designing effective and equitable engagement approaches. These cases demonstrate that the types and degrees of alignment in community-engaged research projects are dynamic and evolve over time. Based on this analysis, we recommend that CBPR scholars and practitioners select a range of project planning and management techniques for designing and implementing their collaborative research approaches and both expect and allow for the dynamic and changing nature of alignment.

Highlights

  • Research conducted in collaboration with non-academic stakeholders has seen a substantial increase in popularity in recent decades [1,2,3]

  • This case study follows a course of action which the Community Engagement Core (CEC) of the Harvard Chan-National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) Center for Environmental Health (Harvard Chan Center) undertook to address the health concerns expressed at a Dorchester (Massachusetts) neighborhood workshop sponsored by the Boston Public Health Commission

  • The Harvard Center includes researchers who study the impact of exposures related to particulate matter (The Harvard EHSC focuses on research related to persistent organics and metals.)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Research conducted in collaboration with non-academic stakeholders has seen a substantial increase in popularity in recent decades [1,2,3]. Through these collaborations, local partners gain access to scientific resources and knowledge that can help inform community advocacy and bolster legitimacy in political and other public discourse, as well as help shape the research agenda of universities to respond to community priorities [4]. Researchers gain the firsthand knowledge and insight of local partners, develop interventions with greater relevance and feasibility, build bridges between the university and broader community, and support the self-empowerment of disadvantaged communities. Public Health 2020, 17, 1187; doi:10.3390/ijerph17041187 www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call