Empirical insights into knowledge-weaving processes in strategic environmental research

IF 2.9 3区 社会学 Q1 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning Pub Date : 2022-03-04 DOI:10.1080/1523908X.2022.2044296
K. Korhonen-Kurki, S. Bor, M. Faehnle, A. Kosenius, S. Kuusela, J. Käyhkö, M. Pekkonen, H. Saarikoski, M. Keskinen
{"title":"Empirical insights into knowledge-weaving processes in strategic environmental research","authors":"K. Korhonen-Kurki, S. Bor, M. Faehnle, A. Kosenius, S. Kuusela, J. Käyhkö, M. Pekkonen, H. Saarikoski, M. Keskinen","doi":"10.1080/1523908X.2022.2044296","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Merging scientific and stakeholder knowledge plays a critical part in knowledge co-production processes, yet it is far from straightforward. We describe knowledge co-production processes by drawing on experiences from four strategic research cases that all sought to integrate scientific and stakeholder knowledge, while demonstrating the different settings and methodological choices for knowledge co-production in environmental research. To facilitate systematic analysis, we utilized the knowledge-weaving framework by Tengö et al. (2017) to examine co-production through the phases of knowledge mobilizing, translating, negotiating, synthesizing and applying. We also considered the inclusiveness of the weaving processes, where our results show that all of the study cases were able to engage participants across the four phases. Our analysis indicates that the framework is useful for unpacking the different phases of the knowledge-weaving process as well as the variety of activities that are used throughout the process. However, the results also emphasize the long-term nature of these processes, as knowledge-weaving activities were used predominantly in the mobilize and translate/negotiate phases and less at later phases of the process. This indicates that the benefits may be foreseen in similar future actions through the initiated learning and change processes.","PeriodicalId":15699,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning","volume":"64 1","pages":"733 - 748"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2022.2044296","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

ABSTRACT Merging scientific and stakeholder knowledge plays a critical part in knowledge co-production processes, yet it is far from straightforward. We describe knowledge co-production processes by drawing on experiences from four strategic research cases that all sought to integrate scientific and stakeholder knowledge, while demonstrating the different settings and methodological choices for knowledge co-production in environmental research. To facilitate systematic analysis, we utilized the knowledge-weaving framework by Tengö et al. (2017) to examine co-production through the phases of knowledge mobilizing, translating, negotiating, synthesizing and applying. We also considered the inclusiveness of the weaving processes, where our results show that all of the study cases were able to engage participants across the four phases. Our analysis indicates that the framework is useful for unpacking the different phases of the knowledge-weaving process as well as the variety of activities that are used throughout the process. However, the results also emphasize the long-term nature of these processes, as knowledge-weaving activities were used predominantly in the mobilize and translate/negotiate phases and less at later phases of the process. This indicates that the benefits may be foreseen in similar future actions through the initiated learning and change processes.
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
战略环境研究中知识编织过程的实证见解
科学知识和利益相关者知识的融合在知识协同生产过程中起着至关重要的作用,但它远非直截了当。我们通过借鉴四个战略研究案例的经验来描述知识联合生产过程,这些案例都试图整合科学知识和利益相关者知识,同时展示了环境研究中知识联合生产的不同设置和方法选择。为了便于系统分析,我们利用Tengö等人(2017)的知识编织框架,通过知识动员、翻译、谈判、综合和应用等阶段来考察合作生产。我们还考虑了编织过程的包容性,我们的结果表明,所有的研究案例都能够在四个阶段吸引参与者。我们的分析表明,该框架对于拆解知识编织过程的不同阶段以及整个过程中使用的各种活动是有用的。然而,结果也强调了这些过程的长期性,因为知识编织活动主要用于动员和翻译/谈判阶段,而较少用于该过程的后期阶段。这表明,通过已启动的学习和变革过程,在类似的未来行动中可以预见到这些好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
6.20%
发文量
46
期刊最新文献
Chiefs and floods: hybrid governance and co-production of flood risk adaptation in Tamale, Ghana. City-to-city learning: a synthesis and research agenda The nested hierarchy of urban vulnerability within land use policies fails to address climate injustices in Turkey Does multidimensional distance matter? Perceptions and acceptance of wind power Exploring the potential of city networks for climate: the case of urbact
×
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