Transitioning toward “deep” knowledge co-production in coastal and marine systems: examining the interplay among governance, power, and knowledge

Abstract

Knowledge co-production (KCP) is presented as an effective strategy to inform responses to complex coastal and marine social-ecological challenges. Co-production processes are further posited to improve research and decision outcomes in a wide range of problem contexts (e.g., biodiversity conservation, climate change adaptation), for example, by facilitating social learning among diverse actors. As such, KCP processes are increasingly centered in global environment initiatives such as the United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development. However, KCP is not a panacea, and much uncertainty remains about its emergence and implementation, in particular, the manner in which broader governance contexts determine the interplay of knowledge, power, and decision-making. Three objectives guide our analysis: (1) to interrogate more fully the interplay among social relations of power, knowledge production practices, and the (colonial) governance contexts in which they are embedded; (2) to consider the challenges and limitations of KCP in particular places by drawing attention to key governance themes and their implications for achieving better outcomes; and (3) to work toward a fuller understanding of "deep KCP" that cautions against a tendency to view knowledge processes in coastal and marine governance settings as an instrumental or techno-managerial problem. A qualitative and reflective approach was used to examine multiple dimensions of the interplay of KCP, governance, and power in several marine and coastal contexts, including Canada, New Zealand, and Papua New Guinea. In particular, our analysis highlights the importance of: (1) recognizing diverse motivations that frame co-production processes; (2) the manner in which identities, positionality, and values influence and are influenced by governance contexts; (3) highlighting governance capacity with respect to spatial and temporal constraints; (4) institutional reforms necessary for KCP and the links to governance; and (5) the relationship between knowledge sharing, data sovereignty, and governance. We seek to encourage those involved in or considering co-production initiatives to engage carefully and critically in these processes and make co-production more than a box to tick.

Reflections on the past, present, and potential futures of knowledge hierarchies in ocean biodiversity governance research

“…In practice, addressing knowledge hierarchies starts with acknowledging the influence of researcher positionalities. The provision of a positionality statement alongside research outputs is suggested as best practice to make explicit the context within which knowledge is being produced (Trisos et al, 2021;Muhl et al, 2023). As individuals, we are shaped by our geography, race, gender, sex, ability, spirituality, socioeconomic status, discipline, age, and so much more, which again influences our work, our ways of being and knowing (onto-epistemologies), the intended reader (the gaze), and the standpoint we write from (the pose) (Baker et al, 2019;Trisos et al, 2021).…”

“…There is also a tendency to transpose Indigenous and local knowledges into the norms of Western-oriented natural science to fit with demands of Governments (Rivers et al, 2023). Such processes commonly aggregate, abstract and alienate knowledge from its holders (Berkes et al, 2000;Latulippe and Klenk, 2020) and assume a lack of interest of knowledge holders in outputs (Mosimege, 2017;Muhl et al, 2023).…”