Disentangling the Pathways and Effects of Ecosystem Service Co-Production

Research on ecosystem services has become a dominant field within environmental management, framing the way in which human–nature relationships are understood and managed. Although ecosystem services are usually defined as ‘the benefits that humans receive from nature’, our work shows that most services are actually co-produced by a mixture of natural capital and various forms of social, human, financial and technological capital. Here, we review how ecosystem services are co-produced, and then we assess how this affects the quantity, quality, trade-offs, resilience and the equity of the distribution of ecosystem services. Then we discuss the implications of co-production for sustainability. Finally, we present some challenges for an adequate consideration of co-production within the assessment of ecosystem services.

Researchers' roles in knowledge co-production: experience from sustainability research in Kenya, Switzerland, Bolivia and Nepal

Co-production of knowledge between academic and non-academic communities is a prerequisite for research aiming at more sustainable development paths. Sustainability researchers face three challenges in such co-production: (a) addressing power relations; (b) interrelating different perspectives on the issues at stake; and (c) promoting a previously negotiated orientation towards sustainable development. A systematic comparison of four sustainability research projects in Kenya (vulnerability to drought), Switzerland (soil protection), Bolivia and Nepal (conservation vs. development) shows how the researchers intuitively adopted three different roles to face these challenges: the roles of reflective scientist, intermediary, and facilitator of a joint learning process. From this systematized and iterative self-reflection on the roles that a researcher can assume in the indeterminate social space where knowledge is co-produced, we draw conclusions regarding training.

Approaching water stress in the Alps: Transdisciplinary co-production of systems, target and transformation knowledge

There is increasing recognition that transdisciplinary approaches are needed to create suitable knowledge for sustainable water management. However, there is no common understanding of what transdisciplinary research may be and there is very limited debate on potentials and challenges regarding its implementation. Against this background, this paper presents a conceptual framework for transdisciplinary co-production of knowledge in water management projects oriented towards more sustainable use of water. Moreover, first experiences with its implementation are discussed. In so doing, the focus lies on potentials and challenges related to the co-production of systems, target and transformation knowledge by researchers and local stakeholders.

Transdisciplinary co-production of knowledge in the development of organic agriculture in Switzerland

The present study analyses transdisciplinary co-production of knowledge in the development of organic farming in Switzerland by using Fleck's theory of thought styles and thought collectives. Three different phases can be identified throughout the historical development. The initial phase lasting from the beginning of the 1920s to the early 1970s contains numerous characteristics of diverse well-established definitions and concepts of transdisciplinarity and represents a successful transdisciplinary process, which has not been perceived as such in the past and present scientific discussion. The second and third phases show an increasing segregation of thought collectives, caused by internal changes such as the establishment of specialised research institutions and external processes like agriculture policy and market development. These developments led to a decreasing degree of transdisciplinarity. We observe an ambiguous trend: the continuously growing and today well-established positive societal recognition of an initially rather little accepted newcomer movement is associated with the gradual loss of its very valuable forms of knowledge co-production and the related philosophical background. In order to maintain the various forms of transdisciplinary co-production of knowledge, one has to reflect not only their results or outcome but also the whole cooperation process, which has led to these results. The understanding of the historical development and characteristic features of knowledge co-production as presented in this study will help to reinforce transdisciplinary research in organic agriculture and research on transdisciplinarity in general.

Potentials and constraints of modeling for transdisciplinary co-producing strategies for sustainable water governance

Both climate change and socio-economic development will significantly modify the supply and consumption of water in future. Consequently, regional development has to face aggravation of existing or emergence of new conflicts of interest. In this context, transdisciplinary co-production of knowledge is considered as an important means for coping with these challenges. Accordingly, the MontanAqua project aims at developing strategies for more sustainable water management in the study area Crans-Montana-Sierre (Switzerland) in a transdisciplinary way. It strives for co-producing system, target and transformation knowledge among researchers, policy makers, public administration and civil society organizations. The research process basically consisted of the following steps: First, the current water situation in the study region was investigated. How much water is available? How much water is being used? How are decisions on water distribution and use taken? Second, participatory scenario workshops were conducted in order to identify the stakeholders’ visions of regional development. Third, the water situation in 2050 was simulated by modeling the evolution of water resources and water use and by reflecting on the institutional aspects. These steps laid ground for jointly assessing the consequences of the stakeholders’ visions of development in view of scientific data regarding governance, availability and use of water in the region as well as developing necessary transformation knowledge. During all of these steps researchers have collaborated with stakeholders in the support group RegiEau. The RegiEau group consists of key representatives of owners, managers, users, and pressure groups related to water and landscape: representatives of the communes (mostly the presidents), the canton (administration and parliament), water management associations, agriculture, viticulture, hydropower, tourism, and landscape protection. The aim of the talk is to explore potentials and constraints of scientific modeling of water availability and use within the process of transdisciplinary co-producing strategies for more sustainable water governance.

Bringing results to fruition through publication: An analysis of a peer-reviewed, open access and context-focused journal's editorial practice

When it comes to helping to shape sustainable development, research is most useful when it bridges the science–implementation/management gap and when it brings development specialists and researchers into a dialogue (Hurni et al. 2004); can a peer-reviewed journal contribute to this aim? In the classical system for validation and dissemination of scientific knowledge, journals focus on knowledge exchange within the academic community and do not specifically address a ‘life-world audience’. Within a North-South context, another knowledge divide is added: the peer review process excludes a large proportion of scientists from the South from participating in the production of scientific knowledge (Karlsson et al. 2007). Mountain Research and Development (MRD) is a journal whose mission is based on an editorial strategy to build the bridge between research and development and ensure that authors from the global South have access to knowledge production, ultimately with a view to supporting sustainable development in mountains. In doing so, MRD faces a number of challenges that we would like to discuss with the td-net community, after having presented our experience and strategy as editors of this journal. MRD was launched in 1981 by mountain researchers who wanted mountains to be included in the 1992 Rio process. In the late 1990s, MRD realized that the journal needed to go beyond addressing only the scientific community. It therefore launched a new section addressing a broader audience in 2000, with the aim of disseminating insights into, and recommendations for, the implementation of sustainable development in mountains. In 2006, we conducted a survey among MRD’s authors, reviewers, and readers (Wymann et al. 2007): respondents confirmed that MRD had succeeded in bridging the gap between research and development. But we realized that MRD could become an even more efficient tool for sustainability if development knowledge were validated: in 2009, we began submitting ‘development’ papers (‘transformation knowledge’) to external peer review of a kind different from the scientific-only peer review (for ‘systems knowledge’). At the same time, the journal became open access in order to increase the permeability between science and society, and ensure greater access for readers and authors in the South. We are currently rethinking our review process for development papers, with a view to creating more space for communication between science and society, and enhancing the co-production of knowledge (Roux 2008). Hopefully, these efforts will also contribute to the urgent debate on the ‘publication culture’ needed in transdisciplinary research (Kueffer et al. 2007).

Koproduktion von Wissen in der Entwicklung des Biolandbaus - Einflüsse von Marginalisierung, Anerkennung und Markt

The empirical analysis of the historical development of transdisciplinary co-production of knowledge (CPK) in organic agriculture (OA) in Switzerland has revealed three distinct phases. The initial phase shows various characteristics of transdisciplinary CPK and a high importance of experiential knowledge. The 2nd and 3rd phases involve an in-creasing segregation of farmers’, extension agents’, and scientists’ knowledge, caused by internal and external impacts, i.e. foundation of independent research institutions, changes in agriculture policy, and new market strategies. These developments strikingly represent an ambiguous trend: the growing societal and political recognition of OA and the increasing market, which are positive achievements, are associated by a gradual loss of very precious forms of CPK. A successful re-establishment of CPK processes and re-integration of experiential knowledge would help to resolve this dilemma and thus improve future research in OA and sustainability research in general.

Valorization of agrobiodiversity products and strengthening of local identities in the Peruvian Andes: Experiences from the BioAndes Programme

In the Peruvian Andes, a long history of interaction between the local populations and their natural environment has led to extraordinary levels of agrobiodiversity. However, in sharp contrast with this biological wealth, Andean indigenous populations live under most precarious conditions. Moreover, natural resources are undergoing severe degradation processes and local knowledge about biodiversity management is under serious pressure. Against this background, the BioAndes Programme is developing initiatives based on a biocultural approach that aim at fostering biodiversity through the enhancement of cultural processes. On the basis of intercultural dialogue, joint learning and capacity development, and transdisciplinary action-research, indigenous communities, development practitioners, and researchers strive for the creation of innovative ways to contribute to more sustainable economic, socio-cultural, and political valorization of Andean biodiversity. Project activities are diverse and range from the cultivation, transformation, and commercialization of organic Andean fruits in San Marcos, Cajamarca Department, to the recuperation of natural dying techniques for alpaca wool and traditional weaving in Pitumarca, Cusco Department, and the promotion of responsible ecotourism in both regions. Based on the projects’ first two-years of experience, the following lessons learnt will be presented and discussed: 1. The economic valorization and commercialization of local products can be a powerful tool for the revival and innovation of eroded know-how; at the same time it contributes to the strengthening of local identities, in parallel with the empowerment of marginalized groups such as smallholders and women. 2. Such initiatives are only successful when they are embedded within activities that go beyond the focus on local products and seek the valorization of the entire natural and cultural landscape (e.g. through the promotion of agrotourism and local gastronomy, more sustainable management of local resources including the restoration of ecosystems, and the realization of inventories of local agrobiodiversity and the knowledge related to it). 3. The sustainability of these initiatives, which are often externally induced, is conditioned by the ability of local actors to acquire ownership of projects and access to the knowledge required to carry them out, which also means developing the personal and institutional capacities for handling the whole chain from production to commercialization. 4. The confrontation of different economic rationalities and their underlying worldviews that occur when local or indigenous people integrate into the market economy implies the need for a dialogical co-production of knowledge and collective action by local people, experts from NGOs, and political authorities in order to better control the conditions relating to the market economy. The valorization of local agrobiodiversity shows much potential for enhancing natural and cultural diversity in Southern countries, but only when local communities can participate in the shaping of the conditions under which this happens. Such activities should be designed in the mid- to long-term as part of social learning processes that are carefully embedded in the local context. Supporting institutions play a crucial role in these processes, but should see themselves only as facilitators, while ensuring that control and ownership remain with the local actors.

Social Learning Processes in Swiss Soil Protection? The 'From Farmer - To Farmer' Project

Social learning approaches have become a prominent focus in studies related to sustainable agriculture. In order to better understand the potential of social learning for more sustainable development, the present study assessed the processes, effects and facilitating elements of interaction related to social learning in the context of Swiss soil protection and the innovative ‘From Farmer - To Farmer’ project. The study reveals that social learning contributes to fundamental transformations of patterns of interactions. However, the study also demonstrates that a learning-oriented understanding of sustainable development implies including analysis of the institutional environments in which the organizations of the individual representatives of face-to-face-based social learning processes are operating. This has shown to be a decisive element when face-to-face-based learning processes of the organisations’ representatives are translated into organisational learning. Moreover, the study revealed that this was achieved not directly through formalisation of new lines of institutionalised cooperation but by establishing links in a ‘boundary space’ trying out new forms of collaboration, aiming at social learning and co-production of knowledge. It is argued that further research on social learning processes should give greater emphasis to this intermediary level of ‘boundary spaces’.

On producing and sharing knowledge across boundaries: experiences from the interfaces of an international development research network

The number of large research networks and programmes engaging in knowledge production for development has grown over the past years. One of these programmes devoted to generating knowledge about and for development is National Centre of Competence in Research (NCCR) North–South, a cross-disciplinary, international development research network funded by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation and the Swiss National Science Foundation. Producing relevant knowledge for development is a core goal of the programme and an important motivation for many of the participating researchers. Over the years, the researchers have made use of various spaces for exchange and instruments for co-production of knowledge by academic and non-academic development actors. In this article we explore the characteristics of co-producing and sharing knowledge in interfaces between development research, policy and NCCR North–South practice. We draw on empirical material of the NCCR North–South programme and its specific programme element of the Partnership Actions. Our goal is to make use of the concept of the interface to reflect critically about the pursued strategies and instruments applied in producing and sharing knowledge for development across boundaries.

Envisioning sustainable water futures in a transdisciplinary learning process: combining normative, explorative, and participatory scenario approaches

Competing water demands for household consumption as well as the production of food, energy, and other uses pose challenges for water supply and sustainable development in many parts of the world. Designing creative strategies and learning processes for sustainable water governance is thus of prime importance. While this need is uncontested, suitable approaches still have to be found. In this article we present and evaluate a conceptual approach to scenario building aimed at transdisciplinary learning for sustainable water governance. The approach combines normative, explorative, and participatory scenario elements. This combination allows for adequate consideration of stakeholders’ and scientists’ systems, target, and transformation knowledge. Application of the approach in the MontanAqua project in the Swiss Alps confirmed its high potential for co-producing new knowledge and establishing a meaningful and deliberative dialogue between all actors involved. The iterative and combined approach ensured that stakeholders’ knowledge was adequately captured, fed into scientific analysis, and brought back to stakeholders in several cycles, thereby facilitating learning and co-production of new knowledge relevant for both stakeholders and scientists. However, the approach also revealed a number of constraints, including the enormous flexibility required of stakeholders and scientists in order for them to truly engage in the co-production of new knowledge. Overall, the study showed that shifts from strategic to communicative action are possible in an environment of mutual trust. This ultimately depends on creating conditions of interaction that place scientists’ and stakeholders’ knowledge on an equal footing.

Health literacy builds resilience among individuals and communities

Health is created in the context of everyday life, and health literacy originates in and helps shape the sociocultural context in which people live. Empowerment, equity, co-production and cultural capital have been shown to be positively associated with people’s health.

Scientists’ situated knowledge: Strong objectivity in transdisciplinarity

Although transdisciplinary research has started addressing important epistemological challenges, as evidenced by the discussion about ‘mode 2’ knowledge production, its relation with postulations of ‘scientific objectivity’ is not yet well clarified. A common way of dealing with the epistemological challenge of situated knowledge production, as proposed by transdisciplinarity, is to point to the fundamental aspect of reflexivity. But reflexivity also includes being aware that power and control over the object is derived from the social position of researchers, an issue not often explicitly discussed in transdisciplinary research. Reflexivity thus represents an important but insufficient principle for guaranteeing appropriate levels of self-reflection within a process of knowledge coproduction. We therefore hypothesize that transdisciplinary research could greatly benefit from feminist scientific tradition, in particular the insights of standpoint theory and the concept of ‘strong objectivity’. We analyse, and reflect upon, how a recent transdisciplinary research initiative – conducted together with civil society organizations in (CSOs) in six countries: Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Ecuador and India – has benefited from the use of ‘strong objectivity’. We analyse how the social position of all stakeholders, including ourselves as the scientific actors in this initiative, influence the process and conditions of transdisciplinary knowledge co-production, and we discuss how power and control by scientists affects the process and conditions of interaction. Thereby we argue for the necessity of explicitly assuming sides in contested contexts for reaching objectivity in transdisciplinary research.