Transdisciplinary co-creation increases the utilization of knowledge from sustainable development research

Jacobi, Johanna; Llanque, Aymara; Mukhovi, Stellah; Birachi, Eliud Abucheli; Groote, Per von; Eschen, René; Hilber-Schöb, I.; Kiba, Delwendé Innocent; Frossard, Emmanuel; Robledo-Abad, Carmenza

doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2021.12.017

Cited by 34 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Involving final users can increase their acceptance of findings derived from archetypes (e.g. potential strategies and solutions), and facilitate the translation of findings to solve real-world problems or to make scientific progress (Bleijenbergh et al 2011, Jacobi et al 2022. Finally, the acceptance of archetypes is key to generating actionable knowledge.…”

Section: Encouraging Participatory Approaches To Strengthen Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity and validation in archetype analysis: practical assessment framework and guidelines

Piemontese

Neudert

Oberlack

et al. 2022

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Archetype analysis is a promising approach in sustainability science to identify patterns and explain mechanisms shaping the sustainability of social-ecological systems. Although considerable efforts have been devoted to developing quality standards and methodological advances for archetype analysis, archetype validation remains a major challenge. Drawing on the insights from two international workshops on archetype analysis and on broader literature on validity, we propose a framework that identifies and describes six dimensions of validity: conceptual; construct; internal; external; empirical; and application validity. We first discuss the six dimensions in relation to different methodological approaches and purposes of archetype analysis. We then present an operational use of the framework for researchers to assess the validity of archetype analysis and to support sound archetype identification and policy-relevant applications. Finally, we apply our assessment to 18 published archetype analyses, which we use to describe the challenges and insights in validating the different dimensions and suggest ways to holistically improve the validity of identified archetypes. With this, we contribute to more rigorous archetype analyses, helping to develop the potential of the approach for guiding sustainability solutions.

show abstract

Section: Encouraging Participatory Approaches To Strengthen Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity and validation in archetype analysis: practical assessment framework and guidelines

Piemontese

Neudert

Oberlack

et al. 2022

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research to date on climate science knowledge co-production suggests that success hinges in large part on the quality of collaborative interactions between researchers and stakeholders (Cundill et al 2019 ). The frequency and duration of these interactions have been linked to the production of products with greater utility (Jacobi et al 2022 ; Prokopy et al 2015 ; Lemos et al 2019 ). Yet, researchers and stakeholders alike continue to grapple with various challenges specific to collaborative climate research (Kirchhoff et al 2013 , 2015 ; Briley et al 2015 ), which is often described as ambiguous and lacking in empirical or evidence-based strategies for implementation and metrics for monitoring its progress and outcomes (Eaton et al 2021 ; Singletary and Sterle 2020 ; Wall et al 2017 ).…”

Section: Implications For Knowledge Co-production Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating stakeholder engagement in collaborative research: co-producing knowledge for climate resilience

Singletary

Koebele

Evans

et al. 2022

Socio Ecol Pract Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study describes the development, implementation, and evaluation of an initial stakeholder engagement experience designed to facilitate knowledge co-production. The engagement experience is part of a collaborative research framework (CRF), which facilitates iterative interactions among diverse researchers and stakeholders around the topic of enhanced climate resilience. Here, we describe the: (1) need for and development of a CRF as it relates to stakeholder engagement and knowledge co-production; (2) implementation of the initial engagement experience, focused around individual semi-structured interviews, in the context of a snow-dependent, arid river basin where historical water over allocation, climate change, and diversified water uses challenge the basin’s resilience; and (3) formative evaluation of the engagement experience using an online survey to inform the development of more effective engagement practices. Results of the evaluation indicate that, after participating, most stakeholders understand and recognize the importance of research goals, demonstrate positive attitudes toward collaborative research and researchers, view their contribution of knowledge and expertise as critical to research, and perceive researchers as eager to use their expertise. Moreover, stakeholders emphasized various context-specific goals for knowledge co-production, such as finding innovative ways to adapt to increased competition for diminishing water supplies. To achieve these goals, stakeholders suggested researchers learn about their basin, including its water allocation history and agricultural practices. These results highlight the importance of centering stakeholder engagement experiences within a broader CRF and formatively evaluating such experiences to adapt them to achieve research goals.

show abstract

“…Concerns include giving strong attention to processes as well as outcomes (e.g. development of design principles (Tejada et al 2019); adaptive shaping of the TD processes for societal effectiveness (Lux et al 2019); and how knowledge is co-created and used (Jacobi et al 2022), and how CoPs might be developed for sustainability learning (Cundill et al 2015).…”

Section: Different Models Of Participatory Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building local capacity for managing environmental risk: a transferable framework for participatory, place-based, narrative-science knowledge exchange

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper evaluates a unique, transdisciplinary participatory research and knowledge exchange methodology developed in the Drought Risk and You (DRY) project and offers it as a transferable framework for others engaging stakeholders and systemic connections with environmental risk. Drought in the UK is a complex, diffuse and hidden risk, involving multiple stakeholders and systemic connections across diverse sectors. Historically, drought risk management has been underpinned by specialist science and technology implemented by statutory stakeholders. This paper critically evaluates the social learning from a longitudinal research process that involved co-working with seven river catchment-based, multi-stakeholder groups. The DRY project was a creative experiment in bringing drought science and stories into the same space, aiming to reveal different knowledges—specialist science, practical sector-level insight, and local knowledge—as a new evidence base to support better decision-making in UK drought risk management. An evaluative multi-method research methodology was overlaid on this process, using surveys, within meeting reflective evaluations, and summative semi-structured narrative interviews. This paper reflects on participant experiences of the ‘open’ scientific modelling development, ‘storying’ approaches, and their iterative interaction. It outlines the enablers, inhibitors and required support for this engagement process, which aimed to facilitate integration of different forms of knowledge as evidence, with social and sustainability learning among diverse stakeholders at its core. The process offered opportunity for valuable experiential learning as researchers of the nuanced impacts of intersecting factors on participatory place-based methods. It showed that similar approaches to science-narrative dialogic processes can play out locally to integrate aspects of social and sustainability learning in different ways. This sustainability learning provided a valuable platform for creative multi-stakeholder scenario-ing possible drought futures for increased local climate resilience. It then proposes a transferable research framework that promotes participatory, place-based, narrative-science knowledge exchange for building local capital for managing systemic environmental risk.

show abstract

Transdisciplinary co-creation increases the utilization of knowledge from sustainable development research

Cited by 34 publications

References 45 publications

Validity and validation in archetype analysis: practical assessment framework and guidelines

Validity and validation in archetype analysis: practical assessment framework and guidelines

Evaluating stakeholder engagement in collaborative research: co-producing knowledge for climate resilience

Building local capacity for managing environmental risk: a transferable framework for participatory, place-based, narrative-science knowledge exchange

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About