A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Reflexive use of methods: a framework for navigating different types of knowledge and power in transformative research
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8067-2402
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3432-4938
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1006-8266
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6362-2470
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5221-5992
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7703-9822
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5368-8169
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9050-8451
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3253-5128
In transformative sustainability science, reflexivity is considered critical for ethically sound and socially relevant research. In practice, many transdisciplinary knowledge co-production processes have faced problems in mitigating power hierarchies among the participating actors and the different types of knowledge. In this paper, we develop and test a reflexive framework that enables transdisciplinary researchers to convey more explicitly how their methodological choices play a role in im/balancing power relations in knowledge co-production. The reflexive framework allows researchers to distinguish the different types of knowledge co-produced by the methods, as well as tracking the movements between them. We utilize the framework to reflect upon the methodological choices made through the application of three different transformative methods, namely the Transition Arena, Theory of Change, and Participatory Food Sustainability Assessment and Transformation Framework in different contexts. The results illuminate how the agility between the knowledge types is critical for navigating tensions in power imbalances, as well as producing transformative knowledge. Moreover, the results call further attention to the co-production of critical knowledge in sustainability science.
Reflexive use of methods: a framework for navigating different types of knowledge and power in transformative research
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8067-2402
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3432-4938
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1006-8266
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6362-2470
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5221-5992
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7703-9822
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5368-8169
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9050-8451
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3253-5128
In transformative sustainability science, reflexivity is considered critical for ethically sound and socially relevant research. In practice, many transdisciplinary knowledge co-production processes have faced problems in mitigating power hierarchies among the participating actors and the different types of knowledge. In this paper, we develop and test a reflexive framework that enables transdisciplinary researchers to convey more explicitly how their methodological choices play a role in im/balancing power relations in knowledge co-production. The reflexive framework allows researchers to distinguish the different types of knowledge co-produced by the methods, as well as tracking the movements between them. We utilize the framework to reflect upon the methodological choices made through the application of three different transformative methods, namely the Transition Arena, Theory of Change, and Participatory Food Sustainability Assessment and Transformation Framework in different contexts. The results illuminate how the agility between the knowledge types is critical for navigating tensions in power imbalances, as well as producing transformative knowledge. Moreover, the results call further attention to the co-production of critical knowledge in sustainability science.
Reflexive use of methods: a framework for navigating different types of knowledge and power in transformative research
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8067-2402
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3432-4938
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1006-8266
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6362-2470
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5221-5992
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7703-9822
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5368-8169
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9050-8451
https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3253-5128
In transformative sustainability science, reflexivity is considered critical for ethically sound and socially relevant research. In practice, many transdisciplinary knowledge co-production processes have faced problems in mitigating power hierarchies among the participating actors and the different types of knowledge. In this paper, we develop and test a reflexive framework that enables transdisciplinary researchers to convey more explicitly how their methodological choices play a role in im/balancing power relations in knowledge co-production. The reflexive framework allows researchers to distinguish the different types of knowledge co-produced by the methods, as well as tracking the movements between them. We utilize the framework to reflect upon the methodological choices made through the application of three different transformative methods, namely the Transition Arena, Theory of Change, and Participatory Food Sustainability Assessment and Transformation Framework in different contexts. The results illuminate how the agility between the knowledge types is critical for navigating tensions in power imbalances, as well as producing transformative knowledge. Moreover, the results call further attention to the co-production of critical knowledge in sustainability science.
Reflexive use of methods: a framework for navigating different types of knowledge and power in transformative research
Sustain Sci
Minna, Kaljonen (author) / Jacobi, Johanna (author) / Korhonen-Kurki, Kaisa (author) / Lukkarinen, Jani P. (author) / Ott, Anna (author) / Peltomaa, Juha (author) / Schneider, Flurina (author) / Tribaldos, Theresa (author) / Zaehringer, Julie G. (author)
Sustainability Science ; 19 ; 507-521
2024-03-01
15 pages
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
English
| Springer Verlag | 2024
| Springer Verlag | 2025
Die transformative Stadt : reflexive Stadtentwicklung jenseits von Raum und Identität
| UB Braunschweig | 2016
Transformative research: a conceptual framework for research organisations
| British Library Online Contents | 2011