Abstract
An increasing need for novel approaches to knowledge co-production that effectively and equitably address sustainability challenges has arisen in the twenty-first century. Calls for more representative and contextual co-production strategies have come from Indigenous communities, scientific research forums, and global environmental governance networks. Despite calls to action, there are no systematic reviews that derive lessons from knowledge co-production scholarship to interpret their significance through the lens of a specific sociopolitical and cultural context. We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature on knowledge co-production published from 2000 to 2020. Using a hybrid inductive and deductive thematic analysis, we identified two conceptual themes—guiding principles and approaches—to structure the synthesis and interpretation of 102 studies. We found that knowledge co-production studies often converged on four interrelated principles: recognition of contextual diversity bounding knowledge co-production, preemptive and intentional engagement with Indigenous knowledge holders, formation of shared understanding of the purpose of knowledge co-production, and empowerment of knowledge holders throughout the co-production cycle. These principles manifested in multiple approaches for interpreting, bridging, applying, and distributing power amongst diverse knowledge systems rooted in different epistemologies. We filter these findings through the social–ecological context that frames an ongoing knowledge co-production project with Inuit communities in Nunatsiavut, Canada: the Sustainable Nunatsiavut Futures Project. Our review suggests that emerging forms of knowledge co-production principles and approaches yield immense potential in diverse contexts. Yet in many regions, including Nunatsiavut, principles alone may not be enough to account for systemic and contextualized issues (e.g., colonisation and data sovereignty) that can present roadblocks to equitable sustainability science in the twenty-first century if left unaddressed.
Highlights
The sustainability challenges of the twenty-first century, including climate change, biodiversity loss, and adaptive environmental governance, demand new forms and uses of Handled by Kirsten Maclean, CSIRO, Australia.Extended author information available on the last page of the article knowledge that mirror their social and ecological complexity and scales
Our objective is to conduct a systematic review of 2 decades of knowledge co-production literature to: (1) identify key principles and approaches of knowledge coproduction for scholars and practitioners; and (2) synthesise and interpret our findings through the contextual lens of Nunatsiavut for the Sustainable Nunatsiavut Futures project
Our systematic review of the literature from the first 20 years of the twenty-first century revealed contextually adaptable principles and approaches for knowledge co-production in diverse settings, including Nunatsiavut and the Sustainable Nunatsiavut Futures project. We conceptualized both as interdependent components of the same process; principles support why different actors should pursue knowledge coproduction, whereas approaches show how different actors can adhere to, enact, and embody those principles in action. This interconnectedness means that they feed into and reaffirm one another, producing multiple benefits at different stages of knowledge co-production
Summary
The sustainability challenges of the twenty-first century, including climate change, biodiversity loss, and adaptive environmental governance, demand new forms and uses of Handled by Kirsten Maclean, CSIRO, Australia.Extended author information available on the last page of the article knowledge that mirror their social and ecological complexity and scales. Practitioners, policymakers, and Indigenous and local communities are increasingly emphasizing the importance of diverse and even competing values systems, academic disciplines, and ways of knowing to address these challenges (Cash et al 2003; Chapman and Schott 2020; Hegger et al 2012; Tengö et al 2014; Wyborn et al 2019). These calls to action magnify efforts to enshrine the worldviews, rights, and responsibilities of Indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) holders in environmental. Contemporary scholars and project planners must wade through this scholarly maze to start, sustain, and position their knowledge co-production efforts among a rapidly growing body of scholarship and practice–much of which extends from a proliferation of case studies in increasingly complex contexts
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
