Citation

Baines D. Pol. Pract. Health Saf. 2007; 5(1): 75-89.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2007, Institution of Occupational Safety and Health (Great Britain))

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Knowledge translation is a growing requirement in many types of research. Given that prevention and remedy are the explicit and desired outcomes, knowledge translation has particular salience in health and safety research. Drawing on data collected as part of a larger qualitative study of health and safety issues in the Canadian social services sector, this paper argues that knowledge translation, as it is presently understood and structured, is limited and limiting through its own discourse of scientific neutrality, as well as by the political economy of universities and research funding bodies, which tend to reward those producing peer-reviewed journal articles and penalise those who spend time making research 'accessible to the people for whom it could make a difference, or who could make a difference with it'. Using knowledge to improve health and safety policy and practice would be better served if knowledge translation was integrated into the research methodology itself, namely as a measure of validity known as 'catalytic validity'.

This paper argues that knowledge translation needs to pivot on an acceptance of the contested and politicised nature of knowledge building and transfer. This will involve new kinds of research relationships and processes, new understandings of proof, and a shift in the political economy of universities and research funding bodies.