communication barriers and lessons learned in energy policy

Clicks: 250
ID: 172008
2018
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #297 of 935 articles by views in journal of physics: conference series

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 935 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
In the past 30 years, energy researchers have concluded their academic publication with sections that deal directly with policy implications and recommendations. Yet too often, these recommendations are written with little understanding of how policymakers balance different needs, prefer to communicate, or use scientific information. In this manuscript, we outline key variables—time, training, and interpretation—that are key to understanding how to better communicate research implications to policymakers. We recommend emphasizing the power of language and the use of boundary objects in an attempt to mitigate the issues presented between researchers and policymakers.
Reference Key
smith2018sustainabilitycommunication Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;Hollie Smith;Christine Gilbert
Journal journal of physics: conference series
Year 2018
DOI
10.3390/su10020449
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.