What is co-production? Conceptualising and understanding co-production of knowledge and policy across different theoretical perspectives

Abstract

Background: ‘Co-production’ is one of the key concepts in evidence-informed policy and practice – in terms of both its theoretical importance and its practical applications - being consistently discussed as the most effective strategy for mobilising evidence in policy and practice contexts. The concept of co-production was developed (almost) independently across multiple disciplines and has been employed in various policy and practice fields including environment, sustainability, and health.Aims and objectives: This paper surveys the literature to identify different meanings of co-production across different disciplinary bodies of knowledge. Such exploration is aimed at identifying the key points of convergence and divergence across different disciplinary and theoretical traditions.Methods: We performed a systematic search of Web of Science via a query designed to capture literature likely focusing on co-production, and then manually examined each document for relevance. Citation network analysis was then used to ‘map’ this literature by grouping papers into clusters based on the density of citation links between papers. The top-cited papers within each cluster were thematically analysed.Findings: This research identified five meanings of co-production, understood as a science-politics relationship, as knowledge democracy, as transdisciplinarity, as boundary management, and as an evidence-use intervention.Discussion and conclusions: Even though different clusters of scholarship exploring co-production are closely connected, this concept is mobilised to capture phenomena at different levels of abstraction – from post-structuralist theories of knowledge and power to specific strategies to be employed by researchers and policymakers.<br />Key messages<ul><li>The paper identifies five meanings of co-production: understood as a science-politics relationship, as knowledge democracy, as transdisciplinarity, as boundary management, and as an evidence-use intervention.</li><br /><li>Co-production is a multi-level phenomenon occurring at the level of socio-political systems, the level of institutions, and the level of situated practices.</li><br /><li>The paper identifies a need for definitional transparency and cross-disciplinary learning about co-production.</li></ul>

Knowledge co-production for decision-making in human-natural systems under uncertainty

“…Hence, these studies highlight that the process of integrating actors should become part of the broader political agenda to shift this dominant view (22). This conclusion is shared by other contributions to the literature which synthesise aspects of co-production (30,129,130) and could be said to be the principal motivation for the use of knowledge co-production in science to support decision-making.…”

Tapping into the power of coproduction and knowledge mobilisation: Exploration of a facilitated interactive group learning approach to support equity‐sensitive decision‐making in local health and care services

“…Coproduction demands that the knowledge and experience that end-users bring is valued on a par with that of the traditional knowledge producers; that relationships are reciprocal and mutually beneficial, achieving more together than would be possible apart, and to be facilitated to do so by networks, organisations and a resource infrastructure that enables involvement. 8,11 There is general agreement that coproduction adds value through shaping how knowledge is generated, understood and…”

“…Coproduction has been developed and employed in policy and practice across many disciplines, including environment, sustainability and health, motivated by the need to address complex problems, where the knowledge required to generate solutions requires collaboration between researchers and nonacademic end‐users of the research 10,11 . While there is some agreement across the disciplines that coproduction embraces a range of practices across different levels of engagement, descriptions and definitions vary 11–14 .…”

Knowledge Co‐Production Reveals Nuanced Societal Dynamics and Sectoral Connections in Mapping Sustainable Human–Natural Systems

“…In line with the conclusion from Bandola‐Gill et al. (2023) noted above, we expanded the definition of who was considered an expert to include all participants in our coproduction engagements, with the justification that those with lived experience of the system were its expert knowledge holders. In this way, the development of the systems map was driven by the community, ensuring that we captured what mattered most to them.…”