Cited by 555Interdisciplinary Research and CollaborationSocial Science and Policy ResearchResearch, Science, and Academia

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 62 of the 66 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Researchers' roles in knowledge co-production: experience from sustainability research in Kenya, Switzerland, Bolivia and Nepal

Open access

Abstract

Co-production of knowledge between academic and non-academic communities is a prerequisite for research aiming at more sustainable development paths. Sustainability researchers face three challenges in such co-production: (a) addressing power relations; (b) interrelating different perspectives on the issues at stake; and (c) promoting a previously negotiated orientation towards sustainable development. A systematic comparison of four sustainability research projects in Kenya (vulnerability to drought), Switzerland (soil protection), Bolivia and Nepal (conservation vs. development) shows how the researchers intuitively adopted three different roles to face these challenges: the roles of reflective scientist, intermediary, and facilitator of a joint learning process. From this systematized and iterative self-reflection on the roles that a researcher can assume in the indeterminate social space where knowledge is co-produced, we draw conclusions regarding training.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3152/030234210x496628

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Boillat, S 2007. Traditional ecological knowledge, land use and ecosystem diversity in the Tunari National Park (Bolivia). An ethnoecological approach for dialogue between traditional and scientific ecological knowledge. PhD thesis. Centre for Development and Environment, Institute of Geography of the University of Bern; Faculty of Sciences. Bern: University of Bern.
  2. Ifejika Speranza, C 2006. Drought Vulnerability and Risk in Agro- Pastoral Areas: an Integrative Approach and its Application in Kenya. PhD Thesis. Centre for Development and Environ- ment, Institute of Geography, University of Bern, Switzerland.
  3. Jahn, T, F Keil and E Schramm 2006. Transdisziplinäre Integra- tion. In Soziale Ökologie -Grundzüge einer Wissenschaft von den gesellschaftlichen Naturverhältnissen, eds E Becker and T Jahn, pp. 287-339. Frankfurt/New York: Campus.
  4. Pohl, C, L van Kerkhoff, G Bammer and G Hirsch Hadorn 2008. Integration. In Handbook of Transdisciplinary Research, eds G Hirsch Hadorn, H Hoffmann-Riem, S Biber-Klemm et al., pp. 411-424. Dordrecht: Springer.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 555

Metadata

Authors
Pohl, C., Rist, S., Zimmermann, A., Fry, P., Gurung, G. S., Schneider, F., Speranza, C. I., Kiteme, B., Boillat, S., Serrano, E., Hadorn, G. H., & Wiesmann, U.
Affiliations
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
  • University of Bern (CH)
  • WWF Nepal (NP)
  • German Institute of Development and Sustainability (DE)
  • Centre for Training and Integrated Research In ASAL Development (KE)
Corresponding author
  • Pohl, Christian
  • Rist, Stephan
  • Zimmermann, Anne
  • Fry, Patricia
  • Gurung, Ghana S
  • Schneider, Flurina
  • Speranza, Chinwe Ifejika
  • Kiteme, Boniface
  • Serrano, Elvira
  • Hadorn, Gertrude Hirsch
  • Wiesmann, Urs
Venue
Science and Public Policy
Published
2010-05-01
Volume
37
Issue
4
Pages
267-281
ISSN
  • 0302-3427 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-5430
OpenAlex
W2058744145
Cited by
555
References
66
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 69 · 2020: 59 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 38 · 2017: 42 · 2016: 36 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 17
FWCI
35.43
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Science and Public Policy (publishedVersion)
  • reroDoc Digital Library (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • BORIS (University Library Bern) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
  • Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • ETH Zürich Research Collection
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
  • Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Interdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Social Science and Policy Research
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Research, Science, and Academia
Keywords
knowledge co-production, researcher role, sustainability research, power relations, intermediary role, facilitator role, joint learning, drought vulnerability, soil conservation, conservation versus development, research training, sustainable development

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