Redefining co-design for social-ecological research and practice: A systematic literature review

IF 4.9 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Environmental Science & Policy Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.envsci.2025.103998
Mairéad O’Donnell , Marcus Collier , Melissa Pineda-Pinto , Clair Cooper , Fiona Nulty , Natalia Rodriguez Castañeda
{"title":"Redefining co-design for social-ecological research and practice: A systematic literature review","authors":"Mairéad O’Donnell ,&nbsp;Marcus Collier ,&nbsp;Melissa Pineda-Pinto ,&nbsp;Clair Cooper ,&nbsp;Fiona Nulty ,&nbsp;Natalia Rodriguez Castañeda","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2025.103998","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Collaborative processes such as co-design are increasingly crucial in generating social-ecological research and practice. Fostering change within complex adaptive systems requires collaboratively working with real-world actors or stakeholders to resolve complicated issues. Co-design is a distinct and fundamental component of the co-paradigm, a collective term for co-design, co-production, and co-creation. However, scientific literature currently provides limited definitions of the key concepts within the co-paradigm, leading to misinterpretations or inconsistent usage. Improving the clarity of these definitions is essential because it permits scientific progress and better implementation of processes and engagement in practice. To address this gap, the following paper presents research which critically examines the practice of co-design through a systematic literature review. Using a systematic approach, this study identifies fifty-two papers with empirical methodologies, which are thematically analysed to understand the purpose and process of the co-design approach within social-ecological research and practice. The paper identifies effective co-design methods and discusses the implications of their utilisation within social-ecological study and practice. The review also identifies and examines definitions of co-design and the challenges of implementing a co-design approach, highlighting potential solutions. The paper concludes by proposing an integrative definition of co-design to further understand and enhance the process's implementation within social-ecological systems. The definition proposed in this paper can serve as a roadmap for researchers and practitioners aiming to use co-design as part of sustainable transformation efforts in social-ecological systems.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"164 ","pages":"Article 103998"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Science & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901125000140","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Collaborative processes such as co-design are increasingly crucial in generating social-ecological research and practice. Fostering change within complex adaptive systems requires collaboratively working with real-world actors or stakeholders to resolve complicated issues. Co-design is a distinct and fundamental component of the co-paradigm, a collective term for co-design, co-production, and co-creation. However, scientific literature currently provides limited definitions of the key concepts within the co-paradigm, leading to misinterpretations or inconsistent usage. Improving the clarity of these definitions is essential because it permits scientific progress and better implementation of processes and engagement in practice. To address this gap, the following paper presents research which critically examines the practice of co-design through a systematic literature review. Using a systematic approach, this study identifies fifty-two papers with empirical methodologies, which are thematically analysed to understand the purpose and process of the co-design approach within social-ecological research and practice. The paper identifies effective co-design methods and discusses the implications of their utilisation within social-ecological study and practice. The review also identifies and examines definitions of co-design and the challenges of implementing a co-design approach, highlighting potential solutions. The paper concludes by proposing an integrative definition of co-design to further understand and enhance the process's implementation within social-ecological systems. The definition proposed in this paper can serve as a roadmap for researchers and practitioners aiming to use co-design as part of sustainable transformation efforts in social-ecological systems.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Science & Policy
Environmental Science & Policy 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
332
审稿时长
68 days
期刊介绍: Environmental Science & Policy promotes communication among government, business and industry, academia, and non-governmental organisations who are instrumental in the solution of environmental problems. It also seeks to advance interdisciplinary research of policy relevance on environmental issues such as climate change, biodiversity, environmental pollution and wastes, renewable and non-renewable natural resources, sustainability, and the interactions among these issues. The journal emphasises the linkages between these environmental issues and social and economic issues such as production, transport, consumption, growth, demographic changes, well-being, and health. However, the subject coverage will not be restricted to these issues and the introduction of new dimensions will be encouraged.
期刊最新文献
Institutional dependencies shape adaptation pathways for local service providers: A study of US water utilities responding to climatic stressors Political embedding of climate assemblies. How effective strategies for policy impact depend on context Identifying leverage points for sustainable transitions in urban – rural systems: Application of graph theory to participatory causal loop diagramming Transformative change from below? Linking biodiversity governance with the diversity of bottom-up action Evaluating riverine flood policy: Land use planning trends in Aotearoa New Zealand
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1