Explore the vast range of titles available.

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., colonisation and data sovereignty) that can present roadblocks to equitable sustainability science in the twenty-first century if left unaddressed.

Aquatic telemetry technology generates new knowledge about the underwater world that can inform decision-making processes and thus can improve conservation and natural resource management. Still, there is lack of evidence on how telemetry-derived knowledge can or has informed management, and what factors facilitate or deter its use. We present one of the first quantitative studies related to the science-action gap and evaluate factors that influence the uptake of fish telemetry findings into policies and practices, as well as social acceptance of these findings. We globally surveyed 212 fish telemetry researchers regarding the knowledge uptake of an applied fish telemetry research project of their choice. Respondents’ personal and professional attributes, as well as the attributes of their chosen projects, were analyzed using machine learning algorithms to identify important factors that influenced the uptake (i.e., use, trust, and/or acceptance) of their findings. Researchers with extensive collaborations and who spent more time engaging in public outreach experienced greater uptake of their findings. Respondents with greater telemetry experience and commitment (e.g., more telemetry publications, higher proportion of research on fish telemetry) tended to achieve more social acceptance of their findings. Projects led by researchers who were highly involved and familiar with the fisheries management processes, and those where greater effort was devoted to research dissemination, also tended to experience greater uptake. Last, the levels of complexity and controversy of the issue addressed by the research project had a positive influence on the uptake of findings. The empirical results of this study support recent messages in the science practitioner literature for greater collaboration, knowledge co-production with partners, and public engagement to enable the transfer of knowledge and the use of evidence in decision-making and policies. Scientific organizations should consider shifting reward incentives to promote engagement and collaboration with non-scientific actors, and perhaps even rethinking hiring practices to consider personal and professional characteristics or attitudes such as altruism and networking skills given the influence of these factors in our model. Last, networks composed of both research and practice potentially have a key role in brokering and facilitating knowledge exchange and actions.

Universities are under mounting pressure to partner with societal stakeholders and organizations to collaboratively create and implement sustainability-advancing knowledge, tools, and societal transformations. Simultaneously, an increasing number of societal organizations are reaching out to partner with universities to achieve organizational objectives and increase the effectiveness of strategies to further societal sustainability. Using a conceptual framework of “sustainability co-creation”, this study empirically examines the historical and ongoing experiences of five organizations in Japan that actively partner with universities to enhance sustainability activities and strategies to transform society. We examine motivations for partnering with universities, innovative models of practice, factors hampering the co-creative potential of the university, and desired changes to overcome these. Our empirical study leads to the proposal of a typology that might assist in categorizing and understanding key attributes of differing types of sustainability co-creation. We build our typology from two perspectives: First, in terms of the primary objective of the co-creation (ranging from knowledge production to the transformation of society), and second, in terms of the approach taken (ranging from either socially or technologically-centered). We then reflect on the organizations’ experiences to offer several strategies that could increase the effectiveness of the university when partnering with stakeholders in sustainability co-creation. We also highlight several factors effecting the university’s capacity to move beyond knowledge production towards implementation measures to transform society with external stakeholders.

Palaeoecology has the potential to support practical conservation, offering a long‐term perspective to issues such as biodiversity loss, environmental restoration and peatland carbon storage. However, achieving a widespread and effective application of palaeoecology within conservation practice requires greater and more efficient collaboration between academics, practitioners and policymakers. Translational palaeoecology offers a methodological approach to achieve collaboration between academia and conservation and produce palaeoecological research that can support and inform conservation action. This paper reports the results of a workshop involving academics undertaking palaeoenvironmental research and conservation practitioners concerning the barriers and practical recommendations for effective research‐practice collaboration. The experiences of the participants highlight the benefits of a collaborative approach for producing palaeoecological research that is enriched with experiential and contextual knowledge. Key themes emerging from the workshop include the importance of mutual learning and knowledge exchange, and supporting practitioners to be co‐researchers. Practical implication. The workshop outcomes are presented as a framework of practical guidelines for implementing translational palaeoecology. Key recommendations for academics include engaging with practitioner activities as relationship‐building opportunities, utilising field visits for knowledge exchange, adopting a knowledge facilitation role or involving a facilitator to support practitioner understanding, using workshops to explore the practical relevance of palaeoecological data and enabling practitioners to communicate palaeo‐research findings in their sphere. Key recommendations for practitioners include inviting academics to practitioner meetings, providing tacit and experiential knowledge throughout the process, exploring practitioner‐ or land‐owner‐led funding opportunities for translational research and partaking in communication roles for wider dissemination of research. Palaeoecology has the potential to support conservation practice, but greater collaboration between academics, practitioners and policymakers is needed. Here, we share the findings of a workshop where academics undertaking palaeoenvironmental research and conservation practitioners shared their experiences with research–practice collaboration. We present the workshop findings as a five‐phase framework for implementing translational palaeoecology. This framework is designed to provide practical guidance for undertaking collaborative research.

Transdisciplinary sustainability scientists are called to conduct research with community actors to understand and improve relations between people and nature. Yet, research hierarchies and power relations continue to favour western academic researchers who remain the gatekeepers of knowledge production and validation. To counter this imbalance, in 2018 we structured a multi‐day workshop to co‐design a set of principles to guide our own transdisciplinary, international and intercultural community of practice for biocultural diversity and sustainability. This community includes community collaborators, partner organizations, and early career and established researchers from Argentina, Bolivia, Canada, Germany, Mexico and South Africa. In 2021, we undertook online critical reflection workshops to share our research experiences and deepen our intercultural understanding of the application of the principles. Through these exercises, we adopted seven principles for working together that include: honour self‐determination and nationhood; commit to reciprocal relationships; co‐create the research agenda; approach research in a good way: embed relational accountability; generate meaningful benefits for communities; build in equity, diversity and inclusion; and emphasize critical reflection and shared learning. We explain these principles and briefly highlight their application to our research practices. By sharing these principles and associated practices, we seek to facilitate debate and spur transformations in how we conduct international and intercultural sustainability research. Our efforts also illustrate a strategy for on‐going knowledge co‐production as we cultivate safe and ethical spaces for learning together. Lessons learned may be particularly useful to those who engage in intercultural, collaborative research to advance sustainability transformations. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. Resumen Los científicos que trabajan en sostenibilidad de manera transdisciplinaria están llamados a realizar investigaciones con actores comunitarios para comprender y mejorar las relaciones entre las personas y la naturaleza. Sin embargo, las jerarquías de investigación y las relaciones de poder continúan favoreciendo a los investigadores académicos occidentales que siguen siendo los guardianes de la producción y validación del conocimiento. Para contrarrestar este desequilibrio, en 2018 estructuramos un taller de varios días para co‐diseñar un conjunto de principios para guiar nuestra propia comunidad de práctica transdisciplinaria, internacional e intercultural para la diversidad biocultural y la sostenibilidad. Esta comunidad incluye colaboradores comunitarios, organizaciones socias e investigadores establecidos y de carrera temprana de Argentina, Bolivia, Canadá, Alemania, México y Sudáfrica. En 2021, llevamos a cabo talleres de reflexión crítica en línea para compartir nuestras experiencias de investigación y profundizar nuestra comprensión intercultural de la aplicación de los principios. A través de estos ejercicios, adoptamos siete principios para trabajar juntos que incluyen: honrar la autodeterminación y la nación/nacionalidad; comprometerse a establecer relaciones recíprocas; co‐crear la agenda de investigación; incorporar un rendimiento de cuentas honesto entre investigadores y comunidades; generar beneficios significativos para las comunidades; incorporar equidad, diversidad e inclusión; y enfatizar la reflexión crítica y el aprendizaje compartido. Explicamos estos principios y destacamos brevemente su aplicación a nuestras prácticas de investigación. Al compartir estos principios y prácticas asociadas, buscamos facilitar el debate y estimular las transformaciones en la forma en que llevamos a cabo la investigación internacional e intercultural sobre sostenibilidad. Nuestros esfuerzos también ilustran una estrategia para la coproducción continua de conocimiento a medida que cultivamos espacios seguros y éticos para aprender juntos. Las lecciones aprendidas pueden ser particularmente útiles para aquellos que se dedican a la investigación intercultural y colaborativa para avanzar en las transformaciones para la sostenibilidad. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Introduction Clinical trials must include diverse participants to ensure the wide applicability of results. However, people from ethnic minorities are included in clinical trials at rates lower than expected given their share of the population. Working with South Riverside Community Development Centre (SRCDC), Talking Trials used public engagement to foster discussions around the underrepresentation of those from minority ethnic communities in clinical trials and to identify and address concerns surrounding trial participation. Methods We conducted three workshops with 13 co‐researchers from minority ethnic backgrounds. We explored perceptions and understanding of clinical trials alongside participatory art activities to help move away from verbocentric methods of communication. These artworks formed an exhibition that was presented to the community, prompting further discussions and engagement. Findings Co‐production workshops were an effective tool to introduce the public to trial research. With little knowledge of clinical trials at the beginning of the process, our co‐researchers formed a cohesive group, sharing initial fears and mistrust towards trials. As conversations progressed these attitudes clearly shifted. Artwork produced during the workshops was incorporated into an exhibition. Quotes and creative pieces from the group were included to reflect the themes identified. Presenting the exhibition at Riverside Festival enabled further engagement with a wider diverse community. The focus on co‐production helped build a network of individuals new to research and keen to become involved further. Conclusion Inclusive and democratic co‐production, enriched by participatory art practices, provided a powerful means of enabling our group to create new insights and foster new relationships. Projects like Talking Trials can diversify the research process itself—for example, four co‐researchers have commenced lay research partner roles on trial management groups and a lay advisory group is in development. Patient or Public Contribution Three members of staff at SRCDC were on the project delivery group and involved in the initial project design, subsequently helping to connect us with members of the Riverside community to work as co‐researchers. Two of the SRCDC staff are co‐authors of this manuscript. The project had 13 public co‐researchers guiding the direction of this research and creating the artwork displayed in the art exhibition.

The complexity of sustainability challenges and the need for transformative change have prompted the exploration of novel approaches for knowledge co‐generation and decision‐making. This calls for integrative assessment methods that meaningfully include and represent diverse knowledge systems, capturing multiple values, needs and interests as a strong basis for decision‐making. We present a case study from a dryland biosphere reserve that details our experience in co‐designing participatory monitoring of a sand dune dominated landscape. We wove together local ranchers' and scientific knowledge systems to co‐create an integrated index for monitoring rangeland multifunctionality. This paper focuses on the process of co‐creation and how it can be used to develop actionable knowledge that is essential for tackling the complex challenges faced by extensively managed social‐ecological systems. We demonstrate the significance of establishing a collaborative partnership between interdisciplinary researchers and local ranchers. This partnership was crucial for developing a profound shared understanding of the complex ecohydrological function of the sand dune landscape and its relationship with livestock production, which enabled the co‐creation of the Integrated Rangeland Multifunctionality Index (IRMI). The co‐production process ensured equitable inclusion of diverse knowledge systems in management decision‐making. Our proposed participatory research method is not about simply adding or comparing different knowledge systems. Instead, it is a method for generating integrated quantitative indices based on a shared understanding of rangeland health. This approach can be applied to other social‐ecological systems more broadly, to promote ecosystem health while accounting for future changes in climate, land tenure and market conditions. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. Resumen La complejidad de los retos de la sostenibilidad y la necesidad de un cambio transformador han impulsado la exploración de enfoques novedosos para la cogeneración de conocimientos y la toma de decisiones. Esto requiere métodos de evaluación integradores que incluyan y representen de manera significativa diversos sistemas de conocimiento, captando múltiples valores, necesidades e intereses como base sólida para la toma de decisiones. Presentamos un estudio de caso en una Reserva de la Biosfera en una zona árida que detalla nuestra experiencia en el diseño conjunto de un sistema de monitoreo participativo de un paisaje dominado por dunas de arena. Tejimos los sistemas de conocimiento de ganaderos locales y de científicos para crear conjuntamente un índice integrado para monitorear la multifuncionalidad de los agostaderos. Este artículo se centra en el proceso de creación conjunta y en cómo puede utilizarse para desarrollar conocimientos prácticos que son esenciales para abordar los complejos retos a los que se enfrentan los sistemas socio‐ecológicos gestionados de forma extensiva. Demostramos la importancia de establecer una colaboración entre investigadores interdisciplinarios y ganaderos locales. Esta colaboración fue crucial para desarrollar una comprensión profunda y compartida de la compleja función ecohidrológica del paisaje de dunas de arena y su relación con la producción ganadera, lo que permitió la creación conjunta del Índice Integrado de Multifuncionalidad de los Agostadero (IRMI por sus siglas en inglés). El proceso de coproducción garantizó la inclusión equitativa de diversos sistemas de conocimiento en la toma de decisiones de manejo. El método de investigación participativa que proponemos no consiste simplemente en añadir o comparar diferentes sistemas de conocimiento. Se trata, más bien, de un método para generar índices cuantitativos integrados basados en una comprensión compartida de la salud de los agostaderos. Este enfoque puede aplicarse de manera más amplia a otros sistemas socio‐ ecológicos, con el fin de promover la salud de los ecosistemas y tener en cuenta los cambios futuros en el clima, la tenencia de la tierra y las condiciones del mercado. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Sustainability science research conducted with Indigenous collaborators must be Indigenous-led and achieve impacts that are grounded in local values and priorities, both for ethical reasons and to achieve more robust outcomes. However, there has been limited focus on determining how best to evaluate the way research is used, shared and created to adaptively solve complex sustainable issues facing Indigenous lands. In this paper, we outline a collaborative and adaptive approach for conducting Indigenous-led evaluations of sustainability research and show how this approach was applied to evaluate cross-cultural knowledge co-production practice and impact in Australia’s jointly managed and World Heritage-listed Kakadu National Park. As part of an Indigenous-led research project, indicators were co-developed by Indigenous and non-Indigenous research team members to monitor the health of the knowledge-sharing and co-production practices that underpinned the design, management and success of the project’s research activities. The evaluations focused on determining whether research activities were providing negotiated benefits for local Indigenous people; helping to restore and protect agreed values in priority areas; and supporting Indigenous-led collaborative knowledge sharing and research practices. In Kakadu, we show how the Indigenous-led design of the research evaluation empowered the usability and benefits of knowledge which was negotiated, shared and co-created. The approach shows how sustainability science can be evaluated by Indigenous leaders to test if and how research practice and impact is responding to their priorities for their traditional estates.

Learning, and how we learn, is integral for the governance of complex social‐ecological systems. With the growing interest in knowledge co‐production comes a need to further study how to better enable learning between different actors engaged in dialogue‐based processes. We use an empirical case of a workshop series centred on collaborative water and landscape governance on Öland, Sweden, to explore how a process partly designed for relating to others supported participating actors in their learning. Based on an analysis of reflection exercises and semi‐structured interviews conducted with all 17 actors, we assessed learning outcomes using competencies in sustainability as the analytical lens. Competencies in sustainability allowed us to investigate how and why actors developed individual changes in perception and built and strengthened the skills and attitudes needed to deal with complex challenges in practice. We provide empirical evidence that relational learning takes place in knowledge co‐production processes and supports actors in competency development. The detailed accounts of changed understandings of the problem, pathways forward and especially other actors show that relational learning plays a key role in addressing misunderstandings and conflicts of interest, which could make collaborative governance arrangements more feasible. We found that a mix of discussion and interaction formats and activities specifically designed for relational learning create opportunities for engaging with plural understandings, perspectives, interests, norms and values. Hereby, actors need to draw on active listening, compassionate communication, collaborative and critical self‐reflection skills as well as positive attitudes towards plurality. Different assessment approaches embedded in a process provide time for reflection and revisiting the learning. We argue that designing for, supporting and tracing relational learning in knowledge co‐production leverages dialogue‐based processes as a suitable tool for nurturing collective action for addressing sustainability challenges in complex social‐ecological systems. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

There are both practical and ethical goals for partnering with communities in the co-production of knowledge for sustainable livelihoods. The benefits of partnering with communities include trust creation, enhanced impact, and improved sustainability of development outcomes. However, for Indigenous groups and ethnic minorities, the barriers and burdens of participation in donor-driven initiatives can be immense. We share our experiences in developing and applying an Ethical Community Engagement (ECE) framework to facilitate the inclusion of poor, marginalised women in two villages in the Bankura district of West Bengal, India. People in Hakimsinan and Chakadoba villages identify as Santhals, the largest Indigenous group in West Bengal, and are recognised as a Scheduled Tribe in the Indian constitution. The framework informed both the design of research activities and the team’s interactions with tribal communities. Trialling the framework in an agriculture intensification project that aimed to increase food availability and diversity, and by extension improve nutrition outcomes, created many opportunities to explore more sustainable and culturally appropriate production options. For participating villages, improved agriculture-nutrition links were made but only after local institutions were strengthened. For the broader partnership, the ECE approach presented multiple avenues for cross-learning. We share some of the broader challenges that presented in the course of working this way, providing reflections on the shifts we observed were necessary for the framework to be applied successfully. We conclude with a discussion on navigating the tensions and barriers that transdisciplinary science presents more broadly.