Allying knowledge integration and co-production for knowledge legitimacy and usability: The Amazonian SISA policy and the Kaxinawá Indigenous people case

Matuk, Fernanda Ayaviri; Turnhout, Esther; Fleskens, Luuk; Amaral, E. F. do; Haverroth, Moacir; Behagel, Jelle

doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2020.04.018

Cited by 23 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The second principle we identified was frequent, sustained, and early engagement with ILK holders (Huntington 2000; Huntington et al 2002). The literature highlights that engagement with ILK holders should begin even before the start of any knowledge co-production processes (Chapman and Schott 2020; Matuk et al 2020b). Early collaboration allows for knowledge co-production efforts to develop in ways that comply with local priorities and expectations (Falardeau et al 2019), identify culturally appropriate methods and communication channels (Huntington et al 2002;Jones et al 2008;Maclean and Cullen 2009), anticipate power sharing scenarios and conflicting worldviews (Pohl et al 2005;Zurba 2009), and foster trust, respect, and reciprocity among all project partners.…”

Section: Guiding Principles Of Knowledge Co-productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, most authors embedded their approaches in frameworks and principles that reflected the contextual diversity of their knowledge co-production initiatives. This contextual diversity parallels calls for increased methodological diversity and "methodological bricolage" in knowledge co-production to evaluate actionable knowledge in all its forms (Jagannathan et al 2020;Matuk et al 2020b). Amidst this diversity, the approaches were united by the conceptually diffuse goals of creating actionable science towards catalyzing transformative societal change (Beier et al 2017;Jagannathan et al 2020;Mach et al 2020).…”

Section: Approaches To Knowledge Co-productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Learning from knowledge co-production research and practice in the twenty-first century: global lessons and what they mean for collaborative research in Nunatsiavut

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An increasing need for novel approaches to knowledge co-production that effectively and equitably address sustainability challenges has arisen in the twenty-first century. Calls for more representative and contextual co-production strategies have come from indigenous communities, scientific research forums, and global environmental governance networks. Despite calls to action, there are no systematic reviews that derive lessons from knowledge co-production scholarship to interpret their significance through the lens of a specific sociopolitical and cultural context. We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature on knowledge co-production published from 2000 to 2020. Using a hybrid inductive and deductive thematic analysis, we identified two conceptual themes—guiding principles and approaches—to structure the synthesis and interpretation of 102 studies. We found that knowledge co-production studies often converged on four interrelated principles: recognition of contextual diversity bounding knowledge co-production, preemptive and intentional engagement with indigenous knowledge holders, formation of shared understanding of the purpose of knowledge co-production, and empowerment of knowledge holders throughout the co-production cycle. These principles manifested in multiple approaches for interpreting, bridging, applying, and distributing power amongst diverse knowledge systems rooted in different epistemologies. We filter these findings through the social–ecological context that frames an ongoing knowledge co-production project with Inuit communities in Nunatsiavut, Canada: the Sustainable Nunatsiavut Futures Project. Our review suggests that emerging forms of knowledge co-production principles and approaches yield immense potential in diverse contexts. Yet in many regions, including Nunatsiavut, principles alone may not be enough to account for systemic and contextualized issues (e.g., colonization and data sovereignty) that can present roadblocks to equitable sustainability science in the twenty-first century if left unaddressed.

show abstract

Section: Guiding Principles Of Knowledge Co-productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Approaches To Knowledge Co-productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning from knowledge co-production research and practice in the twenty-first century: global lessons and what they mean for collaborative research in Nunatsiavut

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Those applying the approach rely upon boundary organisations that have the capacity and normative desire to connect key actors across thought collectives. In some cases, knowledge co-creation processes can be compromised by power asymmetries, prompting a need for culturally sensitive dialogues (Matuk et al 2020).…”

Section: Building Contextual Convergence: Plural Inputs To Practical Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…How do we identify the meanings which are lost during the process, when inequalities become even more pronounced (e.g., Isaksson and Richardson 2009)? And what are the consequences of decisions based on this knowledge for culturally and ethically justifiable futures (Matuk et al 2020;Turnhout et al 2020)? Depoliticisation of power relations is common to knowledge co-creation in sustainability science, particularly when striving for a consensus that is considered appropriate from a given thought collective's perspective, or when failing to consider the wider political context in which sustainability solutions are embedded (Turnhout et al 2020).…”

Section: Building Contextual Convergence: Plural Inputs To Practical Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bridge over troubled water: managing compatibility and conflict among thought collectives in sustainability science

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustainability transformations call forth new forms and systems of knowledge across society. However, few tools and processes exist for promoting dialogue among different interests and normative stances in knowledge co-creation. In this article, we build on the notion of thought collectives to argue that understanding and moderating normative tensions are necessary if sustainability science is to provide successful solutions. Drawing on an analysis of the normative tensions between rival high-tech and low-tech thought collectives in the mobility and food production sectors, we discuss three strategic approaches: applying common evaluative frameworks, building contextual convergence and embracing complexity. We argue that these strategies indicate a need to distinguish different kinds of reflexivity in managing tensions among thought collectives. As a practical conclusion, we establish sets of reflexive questions to help sustainability scientists deploy the knowledge management strategies discussed.

show abstract

“…Social learning can be considered as the processes through which knowledge is co-produced [18] and new knowledge co-production is a key outcome of social learning processes [23]. The dynamics of social learning, knowledge production, and exchange between scientists and growers have been explored in great detail in cases where the educational, institutional, and communicative power of scientists greatly outweighs the power of growers [24][25][26][27][28]. This body of literature focuses on the need to hybridize local and scientific knowledge in order to avoid scientific imperialism or a one-way transfer of information, which is especially important when there is significant power asymmetry between scientists and farmers [29].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge Co-Production with Agricultural Trade Associations

Nocco

Feinstein

Stock

et al. 2020

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientists and agricultural trade associations may further conservation outcomes by engaging with one another to uncover opportunities and engage in social learning via knowledge co-production. We observed, documented, and critically reviewed knowledge exchanges among scientists and agricultural stakeholders working on a multidecadal water conflict in Wisconsin. Differences in knowledge exchange and production were related to meeting spaces, organization, time management, and formality of interactions. We found that repetitive, semiformal meetings organized and led by growers facilitated knowledge exchange, co-production, and social learning. However, scientists often appeared uncomfortable in grower-controlled spaces. We suggest that this discomfort results from the widespread adoption of the deficit model of scientific literacy and objectivity as default paradigms, despite decades of research suggesting that scientists cannot view themselves as objective disseminators of knowledge. For example, we found that both scientists and growers produced knowledge for political advocacy but observed less transparency from scientists, who often claimed objectivity in politicized settings. We offer practical methods and recommendations for designing social learning processes as well as highlight the need to better prepare environmental and extension scientists for engaging in agribusiness spaces.

show abstract

Allying knowledge integration and co-production for knowledge legitimacy and usability: The Amazonian SISA policy and the Kaxinawá Indigenous people case

Cited by 23 publications

References 19 publications

Learning from knowledge co-production research and practice in the twenty-first century: global lessons and what they mean for collaborative research in Nunatsiavut

Learning from knowledge co-production research and practice in the twenty-first century: global lessons and what they mean for collaborative research in Nunatsiavut

Bridge over troubled water: managing compatibility and conflict among thought collectives in sustainability science

Knowledge Co-Production with Agricultural Trade Associations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About