Knowledge as enablement: additional perspectives influenced by complexity

Abstract

IntroductionKnowledge as Enablement: Engagement Between Higher Education and the Third Sector in South Africa (Erasmus & Albertyn, 2014) reflects on engaged scholarship, knowledge, and the co-generation of mutually beneficial outcomes through community-university partnerships (for a critical subultern perspective see Harley & Butler, 2015). The edited collection focuses on the principles and practices of enablement through reciprocal knowledge sharing and collaborative building and utilisation of knowledge between the third sector of society and higher education in South Africa (Albertyn & Erasmus, 2014, p. 22).1Knowledge as Enablement also aims to create a 'buzz' in the landscape around the potential of this knowledge partnership to provide a generative space for knowledge production and innovation (Albertyn & Erasmus, 2014, p. 22). The rationale for this is that both the third sector and the Higher Education Institution (HEI) partners need knowledge and novel ideas to solve complex [emphasis added] problems in society and enable people, institutions and communities to change conditions in their everyday world (Albertyn & Erasmus, 2014, p. 28) (, citing Filstad and McManus, 2011). Despite the observation that sometimes problems are complex, there is no explanation as to what, specifically, this complexity represents-and the implications for engaged scholarship or enablement. This article aims to contribute to the platform that Knowledge as Enablement has provided by introducing additional theoretical layers from the perspective of complexity, supported by case material from the Limpopo Province, South Africa.The article is structured in the following way: the main enablers that are highlighted in Knowledge as Enablement are introduced. Complexity, including complex adaptive systems, is presented before the case study is described. The ensuing discussion provides additional insights about enablement in the context of complexity and engaged scholarship. This includes (1) roles and responsibilities, focusing on leadership, participation, and praxis; (2) working with complex adaptive systems, focusing on systemic change, sensemaking, and attractors-including tentative links to teachable moments; and (3) identifying and responding appropriately to multi-ontology knowledge contexts.Knowledge as EnablementKnowledge as Enablement emphasised the importance of social change and over purely theoretical academic work. For example, de Beer argued that:Enabling knowledge refers to the process of sharing, generating and transforming knowledge, while enabling knowledge (with a different emphasis) refers to the outcomes or impact of a kind of knowledge that is not simply abstract and theoretical but one that enables local change and transformation. (2014, p. 133)Enabling knowledge is practice-based, developed in context and spans multiple disciplinary boundaries. Typically, it is associated with Mode 2 knowledge, which is knowledge not just for its own sake, but for the sake of social change and transformation (de Beer, 2014, p. 133).Knowledge as Enablement is split into three sections-Conceptual Positionings, Focus on the Third Sector, and Case Studies and New Approaches-presenting the reader with a broad spectrum of frustrations, hopes and aspirations, mechanisms and methodologies relating to enabling knowledge. The gist of the book is that knowledge, per se, does not necessarily facilitate change and social transformation. It is argued that for knowledge to contribute to change and social transformation, particular forms of knowledge must be purposefully enabled in order to achieve sustainable, mutually beneficial outcomes. The purposeful enablement of knowledge includes incorporating a host of factors into the knowledge project, which often entails some institutional risks (Erasmus & Albertyn, 2014, p. 24). These factors include, inter alia, visions for a more engaged future (de Beer, 2014; Magaiza, 2014)-in spite of the structural constraints that frustrate efforts to grow engaged activities in South Africa (Erasmus, 2014; Pienaar, 2014), an improved understanding of the reality and functioning of the third sector (Ellis & van Rooyen, 2014; Hellmuth, 2014; Kaars & Kaars, 2014), and at the level of operations, a focus on reciprocal relations (Hammett & Vickers, 2014) and knowledge sharing (Venter & Seale, 2014). …