Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 274-285 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Science of the Total Environment |
| Volume | 593-594 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| Publication status | Published - 2017 |
Abstract
Boundary work, defined as effort to mediate between knowledge and action, is a promising approach for facilitating knowledge co-production for sustainable development. Here, we investigate a case study of knowledge co-production, to assess the applicability of boundary work as a conceptual framework to support implementing adaptive management in the water sector. We refer to a boundary work classification recently proposed by Clark et al., (2016), based on three types of knowledge uses, i.e. enlightenment, decision-, and negotiation-support, and three types of sources, i.e. personal expertise, single, and multiple communities of expertise. Our empirical results confirm boundary work has been crucial for the three types of knowledge use. For enlightenment and decision-support, effective interaction among knowledge producers and users was achieved through diverse boundary work practices, including joint agenda setting, and sharing of data and expertise. This initial boundary work eased subsequent knowledge co-production for decision-support and negotiations, in combination with stepping up of cooperation between relevant actors, suitable legislation and pressure for problem solving. Our analysis highlighted the temporal dimension matters - building trust around enlightenment first, and then using this as a basis for managing knowledge co-production for decision-, and negotiation support. We reconfirmed that boundary work is not a single time achievement, rather is a dynamic process, and we emphasized the importance of key actors driving the process, such as water utilities. Our results provide a rich case study of how strategic boundary work can facilitate knowledge co-production for adaptive management in the water sector. The boundary work practices employed here could also be transferred to other cases. Water utilities, as intermediaries between providers and beneficiaries of the important water-related ecosystem service of clean water provision, can indeed serve as key actors for initiating such boundary work practices.
Keywords
- Adaptive management, Boundary work, Knowledge co-production, Water utility, Watershed management
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Environmental Science(all)
- Environmental Engineering
- Environmental Science(all)
- Environmental Chemistry
- Environmental Science(all)
- Waste Management and Disposal
- Environmental Science(all)
- Pollution
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: Science of the Total Environment, Vol. 593-594, No. 1, 2017, p. 274-285.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Boundary work for implementing adaptive management: A water sector application.
AU - Adem Esmail, Blal
AU - Geneletti, Davide
AU - Albert, Christian
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2017 Elsevier B.V.
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - Boundary work, defined as effort to mediate between knowledge and action, is a promising approach for facilitating knowledge co-production for sustainable development. Here, we investigate a case study of knowledge co-production, to assess the applicability of boundary work as a conceptual framework to support implementing adaptive management in the water sector. We refer to a boundary work classification recently proposed by Clark et al., (2016), based on three types of knowledge uses, i.e. enlightenment, decision-, and negotiation-support, and three types of sources, i.e. personal expertise, single, and multiple communities of expertise. Our empirical results confirm boundary work has been crucial for the three types of knowledge use. For enlightenment and decision-support, effective interaction among knowledge producers and users was achieved through diverse boundary work practices, including joint agenda setting, and sharing of data and expertise. This initial boundary work eased subsequent knowledge co-production for decision-support and negotiations, in combination with stepping up of cooperation between relevant actors, suitable legislation and pressure for problem solving. Our analysis highlighted the temporal dimension matters - building trust around enlightenment first, and then using this as a basis for managing knowledge co-production for decision-, and negotiation support. We reconfirmed that boundary work is not a single time achievement, rather is a dynamic process, and we emphasized the importance of key actors driving the process, such as water utilities. Our results provide a rich case study of how strategic boundary work can facilitate knowledge co-production for adaptive management in the water sector. The boundary work practices employed here could also be transferred to other cases. Water utilities, as intermediaries between providers and beneficiaries of the important water-related ecosystem service of clean water provision, can indeed serve as key actors for initiating such boundary work practices.
AB - Boundary work, defined as effort to mediate between knowledge and action, is a promising approach for facilitating knowledge co-production for sustainable development. Here, we investigate a case study of knowledge co-production, to assess the applicability of boundary work as a conceptual framework to support implementing adaptive management in the water sector. We refer to a boundary work classification recently proposed by Clark et al., (2016), based on three types of knowledge uses, i.e. enlightenment, decision-, and negotiation-support, and three types of sources, i.e. personal expertise, single, and multiple communities of expertise. Our empirical results confirm boundary work has been crucial for the three types of knowledge use. For enlightenment and decision-support, effective interaction among knowledge producers and users was achieved through diverse boundary work practices, including joint agenda setting, and sharing of data and expertise. This initial boundary work eased subsequent knowledge co-production for decision-support and negotiations, in combination with stepping up of cooperation between relevant actors, suitable legislation and pressure for problem solving. Our analysis highlighted the temporal dimension matters - building trust around enlightenment first, and then using this as a basis for managing knowledge co-production for decision-, and negotiation support. We reconfirmed that boundary work is not a single time achievement, rather is a dynamic process, and we emphasized the importance of key actors driving the process, such as water utilities. Our results provide a rich case study of how strategic boundary work can facilitate knowledge co-production for adaptive management in the water sector. The boundary work practices employed here could also be transferred to other cases. Water utilities, as intermediaries between providers and beneficiaries of the important water-related ecosystem service of clean water provision, can indeed serve as key actors for initiating such boundary work practices.
KW - Adaptive management
KW - Boundary work
KW - Knowledge co-production
KW - Water utility
KW - Watershed management
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85016144241&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.03.121
DO - 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.03.121
M3 - Article
VL - 593-594
SP - 274
EP - 285
JO - Science of the Total Environment
JF - Science of the Total Environment
SN - 0048-9697
IS - 1
ER -