WHO: power in actor selection | Funding body | Researchers | Practitioners |
---|---|---|---|
Instrumental | – | Deciding whom to involve or selecting practitioners; based on their authority as project leaders | Deciding to decline an invitation toparticipate, deciding to withdraw orre-position; based on a lack ofaccountability as non-formalised partners |
Structural | Endorsing only researchers as applicants/PIs, transferring project authority to them, thus shaping the options of researchers and practitioners; based on material-structural sources | – | Shaping the structural conditions of researchers’ entering the field (behavioural and communication norms), (de-)legitimising researchers as actors in the field; based on practitioners’ legitimacy in the practice context; silent or outspoken threat of withdrawal, distant actors in the wider practice context, authorising individual actors to participate |
Discursive | Framing practitioners in terms of ‘citizens’ and ‘concerned societal groups’ as opposed to ‘experts’, ‘stakeholders’ | Ascribing roles to and positioning the practitioners, constructing them as ‘legitimate problem identifiers’, ‘implementers’ or ‘multipliers’ | Ascribing roles to and positioning the researchers, constructing researchers as ‘advisors’, ‘evaluators’ or ‘organisers’, based on ideas of how the ‘others’ are |