Reflexive use of methods: a framework for navigating different types of knowledge and power in transformative research

Author:

Minna KaljonenORCID,Jacobi JohannaORCID,Korhonen-Kurki KaisaORCID,Lukkarinen Jani P.ORCID,Ott AnnaORCID,Peltomaa JuhaORCID,Schneider FlurinaORCID,Tribaldos TheresaORCID,Zaehringer Julie G.ORCID

Abstract

AbstractIn 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.

Funder

Suomen Ympäristökeskus

Stiftung Mercator Schweiz

Finnish Environment Institute

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law,Nature and Landscape Conservation,Sociology and Political Science,Ecology,Geography, Planning and Development,Health (social science),Global and Planetary Change

Reference51 articles.

1. Arendt H (1958) The human condition. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

2. Avelino F (2017) Power in sustainability transitions: Analysing power and (dis) empowerment in transformative change towards sustainability. Environ Policy Gov 27:505–520. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1777

3. Avelino F (2021) Theories of power and social change. Power contestations and their implications for research on social change and innovation. Journal of Political Power 14:425–448

4. Barnes B (1988) The nature of power. In: Haugaard M (ed) Power: a reader. Manchester University Press, Manchester

5. Bartels KPR, Wittmayer JM (eds) (2018) Action research in policy analysis. Critical and relational approaches to sustainability transformation. Routledge, London

Cited by 7 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3