The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Designing a knowledge co-production operating space for urban environmental governance—Lessons from Rotterdam, Netherlands and Berlin, Germany
Open accessAbstract
Challenges for a sustainable urban development are increasingly important in cities because urbanization and related land take come up with negative challenges for the environment and for city residents. Searching for successful solutions to environmental problems requires combined efforts of different scientific disciplines and an active dialogue between stakeholders from policy and society. In this paper, we present a comparative assessment of the way policy-science dialogues have achieved knowledge co-production about strategic urban environmental governance action using the cities of Berlin in Germany and Rotterdam in the Netherlands as case studies. The ecosystem services framework is applied as a lens for policy–science interaction and a ‘knowledge co-production operating space’ is introduced. We show how policy officers, urban planners, practitioners and scientists learned from each other, and highlight the impact of this knowledge co-production for governance practice. We found that the concerted collaboration and co-creation between researchers and policy officers have led to mutual learning and establishment of relationships and trust in both cities. Not only the policy-relevance of research and its policy uptake were achieved but also new insights for research blind spots were created. In our conclusions we reflect on co-production processes with two types of conditions that we introduced to be most influential in the way knowledge can be co-created. These are conditions that relate to the way knowledge co-production processes are set-up and, conditions that relate to the expected value or benefit that the co-produced knowledge will bring across society, policy and practice.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Synthesis
Assessment, M. E. (2005) · Island Press · doi:10.5281/zenodo.18167309 · Cited by 10,665
Knowledge systems for sustainable development
Cash, D. W., Clark, W. C., Alcock, F., Dickson, N. M., Eckley, N., Guston, D. H., Jäger, J., & Mitchell, R. B. (2003) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1231332100 · Cited by 3,660
A Meta-Analysis of Global Urban Land Expansion
Seto, K. C., Fragkias, M., Güneralp, B., & Reilly, M. K. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0023777 · Cited by 2,344
A Systematic Review of Co-Creation and Co-Production: Embarking on the social innovation journey
Voorberg, W. H., Bekkers, V. J. J. M., & Tummers, L. G. (2015) · Public Management Review · doi:10.1080/14719037.2014.930505 · Cited by 2,315
Dilling, L., & Lemos, M. C. (2011) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.11.006 · Cited by 1,193
Transdisciplinarity: Between mainstreaming and marginalization
Jahn, T., Bergmann, M., & Keil, F. (2012) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.04.017 · Cited by 1,104
The co-production of science and policy in integrated climate assessments
Lemos, M. C., & Morehouse, B. J. (2005) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2004.09.004 · Cited by 905
Co-management and the co-production of knowledge: Learning to adapt in Canada's Arctic
Armitage, D., Berkes, F., Dale, A., Kocho-Schellenberg, E., & Patton, E. (2011) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.04.006 · Cited by 862
Polk, M. (2015) · Futures · doi:10.1016/j.futures.2014.11.001 · Cited by 513
From science to policy through transdisciplinary research
Pohl, C. (2008) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2007.06.001 · Cited by 366
Cited by
A framework for assessing and implementing the co-benefits of nature-based solutions in urban areas
Raymond, C. M., Frantzeskaki, N., Kabisch, N., Berry, P., Breil, M., Nita, M. R., Geneletti, D., & Calfapietra, C. (2017) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2017.07.008 · Cited by 1,362
Self-citationMapping interactions between the sustainable development goals: lessons learned and ways forward
Nilsson, M., Chisholm, E., Griggs, D., Howden-Chapman, P., McCollum, D., Messerli, P., Neumann, B., Stevance, A.-S., Visbeck, M., & Stafford-Smith, M. (2018) · Sustainability Science · doi:10.1007/s11625-018-0604-z · Cited by 640
Frantzeskaki, N., McPhearson, T., Collier, M. J., Kendal, D., Bulkeley, H., Dumitru, A., Walsh, C., Noble, K., van Wyk, E., Ordóñez, C., et al. (2019) · BioScience · doi:10.1093/biosci/biz042 · Cited by 559
Self-citationUrban living labs: governing urban sustainability transitions
Bulkeley, H., Coenen, L., Frantzeskaki, N., Hartmann, C., Kronsell, A., Mai, L., Marvin, S., McCormick, K., van Steenbergen, F., & Voytenko Palgan, Y. (2016) · Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability · doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2017.02.003 · Cited by 522
Self-citationA social-ecological-technological systems framework for urban ecosystem services
McPhearson, T., Cook, E. M., Berbés-Blázquez, M., Cheng, C., Grimm, N. B., Andersson, E., Barbosa, O., Chandler, D. G., Chang, H., Chester, M. V., et al. (2022) · One Earth · doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2022.04.007 · Cited by 373
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Frantzeskaki, N., & Kabisch, N.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Policy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2016-08
- Volume
- 62
- Pages
- 90-98
- ISSN
- 1462-9011 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2299904710
- Cited by
- 319
- References
- 25
- FWCI
- 30.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Designing a knowledge co-production operating space for urban environmental governance—Lessons from Rotterdam, Netherlands and Berlin, Germany. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.01.010
- The paper
- Frantzeskaki, N., & Kabisch, N. (2016). Designing a knowledge co-production operating space for urban environmental governance—Lessons from Rotterdam, Netherlands and Berlin, Germany. Environmental Science & Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.01.010
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
