Moving toward the deliberate coproduction of climate science knowledge

Alison M. Meadow, Daniel B. Ferguson, Zack Guido, Alexandra Horangic, Gigi Owen, Tamara Wall

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

414 Scopus citations

Abstract

Coproduction of knowledge is believed to be an effective way to produce usable climate science knowledge through a process of collaboration between scientists and decision makers. While the general principles of coproduction - establishing long-term relationships between scientists and stakeholders, ensuring two-way communication between both groups, and keeping the focus on the production of usable science - are well understood, the mechanisms for achieving those goals have been discussed less. It is proposed here that a more deliberate approach to building the relationships and communication channels between scientists and stakeholders will yield better outcomes. The authors present five approaches to collaborative research that can be used to structure a coproduction process that each suit different types of research or management questions, decision-making contexts, and resources and skills available to contribute to the process of engagement. By using established collaborative research approaches scientists can be more effective in learning from stakeholders, can be more confident when engaging with stakeholders because there are guideposts to follow, and can assess both the process and outcomes of collaborative projects, which will help the whole community of stakeholder-engaged climate-scientists learn about coproduction of knowledge.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)179-191
Number of pages13
JournalWeather, Climate, and Society
Volume7
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2015

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Global and Planetary Change
  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Atmospheric Science

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Moving toward the deliberate coproduction of climate science knowledge'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this