Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
355N: Co-production of knowledge in landscape restoration
5:15pm - 6:45pm
Session Chair: Christine Ornetsmüller Session Chair: Willemijn de Iongh
Location:MB-206 Main Building, room 206, second floor, east wing, 56 seats
How do we support transformation?
Transformation from degraded landscapes to regenerative landscapes requires not only international collaboration and financial resources but most of all, a grounding in local communities and cooperation between multiple stakeholders. Collaborative production of knowledge (co-production) is, therefore, an approach that becomes increasingly used in many projects that support transformation to sustainability, particularly also within landscape restoration. The approach is promising, but it bears many challenges for scientists to apply it. The practice of co-production can be very different from theory and care must be taken to avoid ‘participation-fatigue’. This session aims to provide space for sharing and learning about what works and what doesn’t work in practice. We invite practitioners, policy makers and scientists alike to take part in an immersive session for learning about co-production of knowledge and landscape restoration. Storytelling and Open Space Technology will be used as a means to facilitate our learning in this session. We encourage sharing of lessons learned – including epic failures – but will also open up the floor for participants to ask for advice on challenges (i.e. feed forward) to tap into the wisdom of the present crowd.
The session will contribute to the conference by enabling knowledge exchange about co-production of knowledge - an emerging field of science and practice that explores how transformation to sustainable land systems and landscape restoration can be supported.
Session Organizers: Christine Ornetsmüller, Willemijn de Iongh, Rajeev Goyal, and Dieter Van den Broek
ID: 778 / 355N: 1 355N Co-production of knowledge in landscape restoration Keywords: Participative (action) resarch; Serious gaming; Landscape managaement; Case study
“I didn’t come yesterday, ‘cause otherwise I would have been a “professor” today”: reflections on serious gaming for participative (action) research in landscape management.
1Section for Geography, Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, University of Copenhague, Copenhague, Denmark; 2Agroecosystems and Sustainable Landscape, International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT)
Participative (Action) Research (PAR) is a constant narrative used in researches about serious gaming in environmental management. However, few studies about serious gaming in environmental management seem to really reflect on PAR processes. That is to say, it is rarely the case that these studies reflect the level of a community’s participation on several research phases. Moreover, little information and analysis exists on the contribution of communities to serious game design. The evaluation from the “researched” of the participative (action) research is rarely reported too. The aim of this paper is, firstly, to recall the guiding principles of participatory action research and to challenge them with the issues and objectives of landscape management. I then analyze the process of designing a serious game within peasant communities in the Caquetá Region of Colombia. We accordingly developed with the peasants several workshops for co-designing a serious game aimed at shedding light on the agroecosystem management in the region. After critically evaluating the process in the light of peasant perceptions, I suggest that serious game practitioners should reflect and integrate more thoroughly the principles for conducting participative (action) research. This means to include in the research design the “targeted” communities and evaluate the process for next research cycles. Finally, this paper argues that truly working within PAR frameworks in environmental management might offer much more positive impact, notably in the search of communities’ self-determination regarding socio-ecological matters.