Expanded Ethical Principles for Research Partnership and Transdisciplinary Natural Resource Management Science

Wilmer, Hailey; Meadow, Alison M.; Brymer, Amanda Bentley; Carroll, Stephanie Russo; Ferguson, Donald H.; Garba, Ibrahim; Greene, Christina; Owen, Gigi; Peck, Dannele E.

doi:10.1007/s00267-021-01508-4

Cited by 26 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 91 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…CPG is primed to do this. The field's second tenet (King & Tadaki, 2018) emphasizes reflexive practice that could provide the foundation for ethical partnerships based on self‐determination, deference, and reciprocity (Wilmer et al, 2021). The third tenet of CPG (Law, 2018) argues that all scholarship has an impact on the systems we study; we can extend this to support eco‐social transformation by actively seeking to move the systems towards justice.…”

Section: Conclusion: Where Is Cpg Now and Where Is It Going?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Practicing critical physical geography: New trading zones and interactional expertise in an expanding field

Rader

Biermann

Chignell

et al. 2023

Canadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2014, an intervention paper was published in The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe canadien, calling for greater integration of physical and critical human geography, through an intellectual practice termed critical physical geography (Lave et al., 2014). The 2014 piece took shape following several years of formal and informal conversations among its 19 authors at conference panels, colloquium talks, in hallways, over coffee, and at bathroom sinks. They argued that practicing critical physical geography (CPG) is necessary given the eco-social hybridity of our world. Lave et al. (2014, p. 2) wrote: "It is increasingly impractical to separate analysis of natural and social systems: socio-biophysical landscapes are as much the product of unequal power relations, histories of colonialism, and racial and gender disparities as they are of hydrology, ecology, and climate change." The piece then asked: "What are the opportunities for a more critical physical geography and a more physical critical human geography? What new research, teaching, and political practices can we build on a foundation of subaltern studies, biogeography, political-

show abstract

Section: Conclusion: Where Is Cpg Now and Where Is It Going?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Practicing critical physical geography: New trading zones and interactional expertise in an expanding field

Rader

Biermann

Chignell

et al. 2023

Canadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In many cases, this takes the form of knowledge coproduction, the "collaboration among managers, scientists, and other stakeholders, who, after identifying specific decisions to be informed by science, jointly define the scope and context of the problem, research questions, methods, and outputs, make scientific inferences, and develop strategies for the appropriate use of science" (Beier et al 2017, p. 288). In recent years, researchers have become increasingly engaged in coproducing knowledge with stakeholders to support community adaptation and are beginning to assess the methods, results, and assumptions of these processes (Meadow et al 2015;Arnott et al 2016;Beier et al 2017;Lemos et al 2018;Colavito et al 2019;Grecni et al 2019;Tuler et al 2020;Jagannathan et al 2020;Wilmer et al 2021).…”

Section: E873mentioning

confidence: 99%

The “Nuts and Bolts” of Doing Coproduction: Exploring Implementation Decisions in Climate Adaptation Research with Stakeholders

Clifford

Henderson

McAlear

et al. 2023

Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Developing local climate adaptation strategies that respond to weather and climate extremes is increasingly salient. Coproducing knowledge and climate adaptation strategies can be an important approach to ensuring that they are context specific, meet community needs, and are deemed usable by local decision-makers. Most of the guidance for coproduction has focused on important, overarching themes and ethical considerations like trust, iteration, and flexibility; these are incredibly valuable, but little attention has been focused on specific, highly consequential research decisions that researchers must make that shape project outcomes. Here, we reflect on our experience in a pilot project coproducing climate adaptation knowledge and strategies in six rural communities. We identify eight questions that researchers coproducing science with communities will need to grapple with when designing and conducting research and discuss some of the related trade-offs of each. Topics include community recruitment, champion selection, participant makeup, geography, clarifying expectations, timing, prioritization, and next steps. The questions are broadly applicable to knowledge coproduction and important especially as greater attention is being given to the ethics of doing this work, the power relations, and the potential risk associated with it. We hope that these questions can guide a dialogue for others and motivate explicit discussions of trade-offs involved in planning research that is coproduced with communities. We call for more of this type of self-reflection and sharing across our research community to deepen our knowledge and hopefully lead to a more rapid improvement in outcomes across the many efforts underway today to cocreate climate knowledge for adaptation.

show abstract

“…More broadly, it is the more powerful and elite actors, for example, from formal institutions, that have sufficient resources to be involved, and are more likely to have the confidence, knowledge and skills to actively participate in the process (Clark et al, 2016). Addressing the power relations also requires researchers to recognise that they are not passive participants in a process, and there have been calls for ethics for researchers participating in transdisciplinary processes (Wilmer et al, 2021). It has also been suggested that, since co-production requires different ways of operating, more interaction is required between funders, researchers and participants in the funding of these processes (Arnott et al, 2020).…”

Section: Explicitly Recognising Power In Co-productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development geography I: Co-production

Vincent

2022

Progress in Human Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Co-production of knowledge is a promising approach to promote more just and sustainable development outcomes. However, co-production covers many approaches, with a cleavage between those focusing on outcomes and the production of actionable knowledge; and those focusing on process and inclusion of multiple voices. There is not always dedicated commitment to identify and confront the embodied power relations nor the hegemonic knowledge systems among the participants in the process. Yet, the politics of configuring knowledge cannot be ignored. I argue that learning from the experiences and pitfalls of participatory development is essential if co-production is to meet its transformative potential.

show abstract

Expanded Ethical Principles for Research Partnership and Transdisciplinary Natural Resource Management Science

Cited by 26 publications

References 91 publications

Practicing critical physical geography: New trading zones and interactional expertise in an expanding field

Practicing critical physical geography: New trading zones and interactional expertise in an expanding field

The “Nuts and Bolts” of Doing Coproduction: Exploring Implementation Decisions in Climate Adaptation Research with Stakeholders

Development geography I: Co-production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About