From art for arts sake to art as means of knowing:a rationale for advancing arts-based methods in research, practice and pedagogy

This paper advances a philosophically informed rationale for the broader, reflexive and practical application of arts-based methods to benefit research, practice and pedagogy. It addresses the complexity and diversity of learning and knowing, foregrounding a cohabitative position and recognition of a plurality of research approaches, tailored and responsive to context. Appreciation of art and aesthetic experience is situated in the everyday, underpinned by multi-layered exemplars of pragmatic visual-arts narrative inquiry undertaken in the third, creative and communications sectors. Discussion considers semi-guided use of arts-based methods as a conduit for topic engagement, reflection and intersubjective agreement; alongside observation and interpretation of organically employed approaches used by participants within daily norms. Techniques span handcrafted (drawing), digital (photography), hybrid (cartooning), performance dimensions (improvised installations) and music (metaphor and structure). The process of creation, the artefact/outcome produced and experiences of consummation are all significant, with specific reflexivity impacts. Exploring methodology and epistemology, both the "doing" and its interpretation are explicated to inform method selection, replication, utility, evaluation and development of cross-media skills literacy. Approaches are found engaging, accessible and empowering, with nuanced capabilities to alter relationships with phenomena, experiences and people. By building a discursive space that reduces barriers; emancipation, interaction, polyphony, letting-go and the progressive unfolding of thoughts are supported, benefiting ways of knowing, narrative (re)construction, sensory perception and capacities to act. This can also present underexplored researcher risks in respect to emotion work, self-disclosure, identity and agenda. The paper therefore elucidates complex, intricate relationships between form and content, the represented and the representation or performance, researcher and participant, and the self and other. This benefits understanding of phenomena including personal experience, sensitive issues, empowerment, identity, transition and liminality. Observations are relevant to qualitative and mixed methods researchers and a multidisciplinary audience, with explicit identification of challenges, opportunities and implications.

The external dimension of the EU’s fight against organized crime:the search for coherence between rhetoric and practice

SSince the external dimension of the European Union’s Justice and Home Affairs (JHA) began to be considered, a substantial amount of literature has been dedicated to discussing how the EU is cooperating with non-member states in order to counter problems such as terrorism, organized crime and illegal migration. According to the EU, the degree of security interconnectedness has become so relevant that threats can only be adequately controlled if there is effective concerted regional action. This reasoning has led the EU to develop a number of instruments, which have resulted in the exporting of certain elements of its JHA policies, either through negotiation or socialization. Although the literature has explored how this transfer has been applied to the field of terrorism and immigration, very little has been written on the externalisation of knowledge, practice and norms in the area of organized crime. This article proposes to bridge this gap by looking at EU practice in the development of the external dimension of organized crime policies, through the theoretical lens of the EU governance framework.

Servitization: academic research and business practice

En los últimos años, la servitización de la manufactura ha llegado a ser un tópico de interés tanto a nivel académico como empresarial. Así, las empresas están contemplando que la servitización es una forma de mejorar su posición competitiva y estar más cerca de sus clientes. Diferentes estudios empíricos han intentado explicar por qué y cómo se servitiza. Facilitan información clave para entender mejor el proceso de servitización. La conexión entre la academia y la práctica empresarial es decisiva en los fundamentos de este tópico de investigación. La fundamentación del mismo, permitirá continuar con su desarrollo y a la puesta en práctica en las empresas. Así, este número especial pretende contribuir en el avance de la teoría y práctica de la servitización. In recent years, the servitization of manufacturing has become a topic of interest to both academics and practitioners. Indeed, companies are realising that servitization is a way to enhance their competitive advantage and get closer to their customers. Several empirical studies have attempted to explain why and how to servitize. They provide important insights to better understand the processes of servitization. The connection between academia and business practices is decisive in the foundation of this research topic. This foundation will allow continuing with its development, contributing in turn to improve the implementation in companies. Hence, this special issue aims to contribute to the theoretical and practical aspects of servitization.

Knowledge acquisition and research evidence in autism:researcher and practitioner perspectives and engagement

Background: Government policy and national practice guidelines have created an increasing need for autism services to adopt an evidence-based practice approach. However, a gap continues to exist between research evidence and its application. This study investigated the difference between autism researchers and practitioners in their methods of acquiring knowledge. Methods: In a questionnaire study, 261 practitioners and 422 researchers reported on the methods they use and perceive to be beneficial for increasing research access and knowledge. They also reported on their level of engagement with members of the other professional community. Results: Researchers and practitioners reported different methods used to access information. Each group, however, had similar overall priorities regarding access to research information. While researchers endorsed the use of academic journals significantly more often than practitioners, both groups included academic journals in their top three choices. The groups differed in the levels of engagement they reported; researchers indicated they were more engaged with practitioners than vice versa. Conclusions: Comparison of researcher and practitioner preferences led to several recommendations to improve knowledge sharing and translation, including enhancing access to original research publications, facilitating informal networking opportunities and the development of proposals for the inclusion of practitioners throughout the research process.