Anita Välikangas (@anikangas.bsky.social)

Just published a new paper - I’m happy this is now out: What do people mean when they claim that certain kind of research is or should be relevant? I show that ”relevance” is not one designated target - it has several, even conflicting, meanings. Read it here: link.springer.com/article/10.1...

loading . . .

Relevance of what, relevant to whom? Contested characterisations of relevant knowledge and its production - European Journal for Philosophy of Science Relevance has become a central concept in the discussion of academic knowledge production, used in the strategies and guidelines of various research-oriented institutions. This article analyses some of the key contemporary tenets in this area. Having conducted a systematic literature review of 113 academic articles, I distinguish eight main ways of referring to relevance in the context of knowledge production. Some accounts focus on how existing knowledge institutions do or could provide users with relevant knowledge, whereas others take a more dynamic approach reflecting on how stakeholder needs should influence knowledge production and what types of institutional structures allow them to do so. This difference corresponds with the characterisation of the science-policy interface either as a two-world (linear) relationship or as one-world intertwined. It is also worth considering how social and policy relevance, for example, stand against each other. These nuances should be recognised given that the concept of relevance is widely used in institutional design and in discussions about the future of academic knowledge production. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13194-025-00676-y