Co-designing transformation research: lessons learned from research on deliberate practices for transformation

Glenn Page, Russell M. Wise, Laura Lindenfeld, Peter Moug, Anthony Hodgson, Carina Wyborn, Ioan Fazey (Lead / Corresponding author)

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

16 Citations (Scopus)
112 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Co-production of new knowledge can enhance open and integrative research processes across the social and natural sciences and across research/science, practice and policy interrelationships. Thus, co-production is important in the conduct of research about and for transformations to sustainability. While co-design is an integral part of co-production, it often receives limited attention in the conduct of co-produced research. This paper reports on lessons learned from an early stage of the co-design process to develop research on deliberate practices for transformative change. Key lessons learned are the need to: (1) ensure co-design processes are themselves carefully designed; (2) encourage emergence of new ways of thinking about problem formulation through co-design; (3) carefully balance risks for the participants involved while also enhancing opportunities for intellectual risk taking; (4) facilitate personal transformations in co-design as a way to stimulate and encourage further creativity; and (5) for funders to carefully and constructively align criteria or incentives through which a project or future proposal will be judged to the goals of the co-design, including for instrumental outcomes and objectives for creativity and imagination. Given that co-design necessarily involves a reflective practice to iteratively guide emergence of new thinking about the practices of change, co-design can itself be considered an important deliberate practice for transforming the conduct of research and the contribution of that research to social transformations.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)86-92
Number of pages7
JournalCurrent Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
Volume20
Early online date22 Oct 2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2016

Fingerprint

coproduction
creativity
natural sciences
research process
social science
incentive
sustainability
science
knowledge

Cite this

Page, Glenn ; Wise, Russell M. ; Lindenfeld, Laura ; Moug, Peter ; Hodgson, Anthony ; Wyborn, Carina ; Fazey, Ioan. / Co-designing transformation research : lessons learned from research on deliberate practices for transformation. In: Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. 2016 ; Vol. 20. pp. 86-92.
@article{714732f9c457442fa37dd8b78b31e6f4,
title = "Co-designing transformation research: lessons learned from research on deliberate practices for transformation",
abstract = "Co-production of new knowledge can enhance open and integrative research processes across the social and natural sciences and across research/science, practice and policy interrelationships. Thus, co-production is important in the conduct of research about and for transformations to sustainability. While co-design is an integral part of co-production, it often receives limited attention in the conduct of co-produced research. This paper reports on lessons learned from an early stage of the co-design process to develop research on deliberate practices for transformative change. Key lessons learned are the need to: (1) ensure co-design processes are themselves carefully designed; (2) encourage emergence of new ways of thinking about problem formulation through co-design; (3) carefully balance risks for the participants involved while also enhancing opportunities for intellectual risk taking; (4) facilitate personal transformations in co-design as a way to stimulate and encourage further creativity; and (5) for funders to carefully and constructively align criteria or incentives through which a project or future proposal will be judged to the goals of the co-design, including for instrumental outcomes and objectives for creativity and imagination. Given that co-design necessarily involves a reflective practice to iteratively guide emergence of new thinking about the practices of change, co-design can itself be considered an important deliberate practice for transforming the conduct of research and the contribution of that research to social transformations.",
author = "Glenn Page and Wise, {Russell M.} and Laura Lindenfeld and Peter Moug and Anthony Hodgson and Carina Wyborn and Ioan Fazey",
note = "The authors wish to acknowledge all who contributed to the Knowledge Network for Enabling Transformation (KNET) process as well as the financial support from the International Social Science Council (ISSC) as a seed grant from the Transformations to Sustainability Programme (T2S_PP-067). This material is based upon work supported by the ISSC under the Transformations to Sustainability Programme. The Programme is funded by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) and serves as a contribution to Future Earth. Additional support for seed funding was provided by the Swedish Secretariat for Environmental Earth System Sciences (SSEESS). Financial support was also gratefully received from the University of Dundee and its Centre for Environmental Change and Human Resilience.",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1016/j.cosust.2016.09.001",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "86--92",
journal = "Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability",
issn = "1877-3435",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

Co-designing transformation research : lessons learned from research on deliberate practices for transformation. / Page, Glenn; Wise, Russell M.; Lindenfeld, Laura; Moug, Peter; Hodgson, Anthony; Wyborn, Carina; Fazey, Ioan (Lead / Corresponding author).

In: Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, Vol. 20, 2016, p. 86-92.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Co-designing transformation research

T2 - lessons learned from research on deliberate practices for transformation

AU - Page, Glenn

AU - Wise, Russell M.

AU - Lindenfeld, Laura

AU - Moug, Peter

AU - Hodgson, Anthony

AU - Wyborn, Carina

AU - Fazey, Ioan

N1 - The authors wish to acknowledge all who contributed to the Knowledge Network for Enabling Transformation (KNET) process as well as the financial support from the International Social Science Council (ISSC) as a seed grant from the Transformations to Sustainability Programme (T2S_PP-067). This material is based upon work supported by the ISSC under the Transformations to Sustainability Programme. The Programme is funded by the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) and serves as a contribution to Future Earth. Additional support for seed funding was provided by the Swedish Secretariat for Environmental Earth System Sciences (SSEESS). Financial support was also gratefully received from the University of Dundee and its Centre for Environmental Change and Human Resilience.

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Co-production of new knowledge can enhance open and integrative research processes across the social and natural sciences and across research/science, practice and policy interrelationships. Thus, co-production is important in the conduct of research about and for transformations to sustainability. While co-design is an integral part of co-production, it often receives limited attention in the conduct of co-produced research. This paper reports on lessons learned from an early stage of the co-design process to develop research on deliberate practices for transformative change. Key lessons learned are the need to: (1) ensure co-design processes are themselves carefully designed; (2) encourage emergence of new ways of thinking about problem formulation through co-design; (3) carefully balance risks for the participants involved while also enhancing opportunities for intellectual risk taking; (4) facilitate personal transformations in co-design as a way to stimulate and encourage further creativity; and (5) for funders to carefully and constructively align criteria or incentives through which a project or future proposal will be judged to the goals of the co-design, including for instrumental outcomes and objectives for creativity and imagination. Given that co-design necessarily involves a reflective practice to iteratively guide emergence of new thinking about the practices of change, co-design can itself be considered an important deliberate practice for transforming the conduct of research and the contribution of that research to social transformations.

AB - Co-production of new knowledge can enhance open and integrative research processes across the social and natural sciences and across research/science, practice and policy interrelationships. Thus, co-production is important in the conduct of research about and for transformations to sustainability. While co-design is an integral part of co-production, it often receives limited attention in the conduct of co-produced research. This paper reports on lessons learned from an early stage of the co-design process to develop research on deliberate practices for transformative change. Key lessons learned are the need to: (1) ensure co-design processes are themselves carefully designed; (2) encourage emergence of new ways of thinking about problem formulation through co-design; (3) carefully balance risks for the participants involved while also enhancing opportunities for intellectual risk taking; (4) facilitate personal transformations in co-design as a way to stimulate and encourage further creativity; and (5) for funders to carefully and constructively align criteria or incentives through which a project or future proposal will be judged to the goals of the co-design, including for instrumental outcomes and objectives for creativity and imagination. Given that co-design necessarily involves a reflective practice to iteratively guide emergence of new thinking about the practices of change, co-design can itself be considered an important deliberate practice for transforming the conduct of research and the contribution of that research to social transformations.

U2 - 10.1016/j.cosust.2016.09.001

DO - 10.1016/j.cosust.2016.09.001

M3 - Review article

VL - 20

SP - 86

EP - 92

JO - Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability

JF - Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability

SN - 1877-3435

ER -