Particularly in academic contexts, Social Impact Scientists have a hard time securing funding that will match their desire to collaborate across disciplines, or for flexible innovation support, especially important if they hope to have an impact at scale.
Depending on the institution they sit within, Social Impact Scientists face different bureaucratic hurdles or position-specific requirements (e.g. peer-reviewed articles for academics). Across many experiences, however, is a frustration with structures that slow down their work, limit experimentation and, therefore, make it harder for them to respond to dynamic humanitarian needs.
The work of Social Impact Scientists is often very far removed, geographically, from humanitarian crises – making their network of relationships relatively thin. As such, they seek out touchpoints to inform their work and ensure that their EO applications respond to contextual needs. However, humanitarians themselves face competing pressures and limited funding, and they must often prioritize immediate response needs over long-term research or innovation work. This reduces the reliability of engagement between the two groups.
Due to the contexts described above, the pace of work of a Social Impact Scientists and that of a Tech Savvy Humanitarian are often at opposite ends of the spectrum. For these Scientists to have the impact they hope to have, this requires that they adjust their workflows and find creative solutions to match the rapid-changing contexts humanitarians work within. Successful collaboration will require that these Scientists identify where they can work towards interventions that are sustained.
