 |
| Titel |
Co-production of knowledge: recipe for success in land-based climate change adaptation? |
| VerfasserIn |
Ingrid Coninx, Rob Swart |
| Konferenz |
EGU General Assembly 2015
|
| Medientyp |
Artikel
|
| Sprache |
Englisch
|
| Digitales Dokument |
PDF |
| Erschienen |
In: GRA - Volume 17 (2015) |
| Datensatznummer |
250108799
|
| Publikation (Nr.) |
 EGU/EGU2015-8580.pdf |
|
|
|
|
|
| Zusammenfassung |
| After multiple failures of scientists to trigger policymakers and other relevant actors to take action when communicating research findings, the request for co-production (or co-creation) of knowledge and stakeholder involvement in climate change adaptation efforts has rapidly increased over the past few years. In particular for land-based adaptation, on-the-ground action is often met by societal resistance towards solutions proposed by scientists, by a misfit of potential solutions with the local context, leading to misunderstanding and even rejection of scientific recommendations. A fully integrative co-creation process in which both scientists and practitioners discuss climate vulnerability and possible responses, exploring perspectives and designing adaptation measures based on their own knowledge, is expected to prevent the adaptation deadlock. The apparent conviction that co-creation processes result in successful adaptation, has not yet been unambiguously empirically demonstrated, but has resulted in co-creation being one of basic principles in many new research and policy programmes. But is co-creation that brings knowledge of scientists and practitioners together always the best recipe for success in climate change adaptation? Assessing a number of actual cases, the authors have serious doubts. The paper proposes additional considerations for adaptively managing the environment that should be taken into account in the design of participatory knowledge development in which climate scientists play a role. These include the nature of the problem at stake; the values, interests and perceptions of the actors involved; the methods used to build trust, strengthen alignment and develop reciprocal relationships among scientists and practitioners; and the concreteness of the co-creation output. |
|
|
|
|
|
|