Difference between revisions of "Case Studies and Lessons Learned Workgroup Progress Reports"

Revision as of 03:34, 11 January 2012

Timeline

• 18th November 2011 – FORSYS participants submit STSM opportunities to wiki
• 1st February 2012 – FORSYS participants submit case study (CS) abstracts to CS technical committee (CSTC)
• 1st March – CSTC provides reporting format for CS
• 1st March - CSTC responds to abstracts
• 1st June - CSTC follow up on cases
• 1st September – FORSYS participants submit first draft of CS to CSTC
• 1st October – CSTC responds to drafts
• 1st November – FORSYS participants submit final CS
• 20th December 2012 – CSTC synthesis
• 2013 CS synthesis informs development of FORSYS guidelines
• technically have until 3 months after end of project (4/2013) to complete all project work

Develop case study guidelines

• Figure out how cases will contribute to final Forsys guidelines
• E-mail Forsys participants about important guidelines updates

Manage case study contributions

• Develop semantic form for entering case studies into the wiki
• Solicit case studies from the Forsys network
• Review and comment on case studies submitted
• Answer questions, resolve issues

What do we do with the case study ideas we receive?

• Cases with STSM opportunities should be entered on the wiki at http://fp0804.emu.ee/wiki/index.php/Category:STSM_Opportunity
• For cases generally, the idea was to create a semantic form similar to what is being developed for the DSS, but this will take some time to develop. In the meantime, maybe we can just post them directly to the standard wiki. I added a subcategory to Category:Case Studies that is Category:Forsys Case Studies (but this is just a temporary strategy). It may be important to somehow separate cases that Forsys participants plan to use to contribute towards the project guidelines from general cases in the literature, but we are not sure exactly how yet - see Forsys vs Literature question.

How to we tag/categorize the cases?

• I am not a tagging expert but it seems to me that tags need to be smaller than “Cases of participatory planning in forestry”. The point is modularity. So “case study” is enough for a case study. And “case” is enough for a case. (without describing the study –methodology, theory- behind it). Then “participation” is another tag.
• Agreed in principle, but there do seem to be some differences between wiki categories and keywords more generally (although we're all just learning). The fundamental difference seems to be that there is no way to use multiple wiki categories at once to find, for example, all “cases” with “participation”. This leads to the use of long categories involving multiple concepts. Also, wiki categories are used as the title of pages and longer ones are helpful for this. As we move to the semantic wiki, it looks like the modular approach will be possible.

Case study literature database

• Investigate possible technologies for managing/sharing case study literature
  • e.g. Mendeley or Citeulike

Do we separate cases from Forsys participants from cases from the literature?

• Assuming institutionalization of the wiki and not of the Cost Action per se, it does not matter whether a forsys member has delivered a case or a case study. Of course it does for the record of the Action, so a separate tag “Forsys member” should do.
• This is a good point. The initial thinking is that these will be stored in different data structures: the wiki for forsys cases and a literature database (maybe Mendeley.com for the literature). However, somehow we would need to link from each to the guidelines they relate to.

Publications

• Think of publication possibilities for case study work

Possibilities

• Book: similar to country reports book; would require a high level of effort and good contributions
• Journal special issue: what possible journals? Forest Systems, ???
• Individual journal articles: just encourage/help cases submit articles individually
• Wiki: as a minimum, we'll post all cases to the wiki and use the semantic forms to make connections between them
• Other???

DONE

After the Leuven 2011 meeting

• Synthesized Leuven discussion and updated Case Study Guidelines on the wiki
• Developed semantic wiki form for STSM Opportunities

At Leuven 2011 meeting

• Give case study introductory presentation
• Each STC member leads a subgroup on assigned task
• Develop & present a time line for the work on the case studies
  • incl. meeting of the STC
  • incl. clear division of responsibilities

Before the Leuven 2011 meeting

• Develop two (or more) documents:
  • Case Study Notes by Research Phase: organize information already generated about the case study guidelines
  • 2011-11_Leuven_Case_Study_Agenda
• Gather further information on case studies (STC sends request to country representatives)
  • Existing forest DSS case studies
  • Potential forest DSS case studies
  • Other relevant literature (methods, theories, etc)