Cited by 182Coastal and Marine ManagementMarine and fisheries researchConservation, Ecology, Wildlife Education

Knowledge co-production: A pathway to effective fisheries management, conservation, and governance

Cooke, Steven J, Nguyen, Vivian M, Chapman, Jacqueline M, Reid, Andrea J, Landsman, Sean J, Young, Nathan, Hinch, Scott G, Schott, Stephan +2 more·2021·Fisheries

Abstract

Although it is assumed that the outcomes from scientific research inform management and policy, the so-called knowledge–action gap (i.e., the disconnect between scientific knowledge and its application) is a recognition that there are many reasons why new knowledge is not always embraced by knowledge users. The concept of knowledge co-production has gained popularity within the environmental and conservation research communities as a mechanism of bridging the gap between knowledge and action, but has yet to be fully embraced in fisheries research. Here we describe what co-production is, outline its benefits (relative to other approaches to research) and challenges, and provide practical guidance on how to embrace and enact knowledge co-production within fisheries research. Because co-production is an iterative and context-dependent process, there is no single way to do it, but there are best practices that can facilitate the generation of actionable research through respectful and inclusive partnerships. We present several brief case studies where we describe examples of where co-production has worked in practice and the benefits it has accrued. As more members of the fisheries science and management community effectively engage in co-production, it will be important to reflect on the processes and share lessons with others. We submit that co-production has manifold benefits for applied science and should lead to meaningful improvements in fisheries management, conservation, and governance.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/fsh.10512

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cooke, S. J., Nguyen, V. M., Chapman, J. M., Reid, A. J., Landsman, S. J., Young, N., Hinch, S. G., Schott, S., Mandrak, N. E., & Semeniuk, C. A.
Affiliations
  • Carleton University (CA)
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
  • University of Ottawa (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Great Lakes Institute for Environmental Research (CA)
Corresponding author
Cooke, Steven J
Venue
Fisheries
Published
2020-10-28
Volume
46
Issue
2
Pages
89-97
ISSN
  • 0363-2415 (ISSN-L)
  • 1548-8446
OpenAlex
W3048312104
Cited by
182
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 26 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 3
FWCI
26.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Fisheries (publishedVersion)
  • Scholarship at UWindsor (University of Windsor) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Genome Canada
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  • Genome British Columbia
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Coastal and Marine Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Marine and fisheries research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Conservation, Ecology, Wildlife Education
Keywords
knowledge co-production, knowledge-action gap, fisheries management, fisheries conservation, fisheries governance, science-policy interface, stakeholder collaboration, applied research, knowledge users, fisheries research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review