Coproduction of place and knowledge for ecology with the city

A transformative shift in urban ecology toward a more active and relevant future for the field and for cities

This paper builds on the expansion of urban ecology from a biologically based discipline-ecology in the city-to an increasingly interdisciplinary field-ecology of the city-to a transdisciplinary, knowledge to action endeavor-an ecology for and with the city. We build on this "prepositional journey" by proposing a transformative shift in urban ecology, and we present a framework for how the field may continue this shift. We conceptualize that urban ecology is in a state of flux, and that this shift is needed to transform urban ecology into a more engaged and action based field, and one that includes a diversity of actors willing to participate in the future of their cities. In this transformative shift, these actors will engage, collaborate, and participate in a continuous spiral of knowledge → action → knowledge spiral and back to knowledge loop, with the goal of co producing sustainable and resilient solutions to myriad urban challenges. Our framework for this transformative shift includes three pathways: (1) a repeating knowledge → action → knowledge spiral of ideas, information, and solutions produced by a diverse community of agents of urban change working together in an "urban sandbox"; (2) incorporation of a social-ecological-technological systems framework in this spiral and expanding the spiral temporally to include the "deep future," where future scenarios are based on a visioning of seemingly unimaginable or plausible future states of cities that are sustainable and resilient; and (3) the expansion of the spiral in space, to include rural areas and places that are not yet cities. The three interrelated pathways that define the transformative shift demonstrate the power of an urban ecology that has moved beyond urban systems science and into a realm where collaborations among diverse knowledges and voices are working together to understand cities and what is urban while producing sustainable solutions to contemporary challenges and envisioning futures of socially, ecologically, and technologically resilient cities. We present case study examples of each of the three pathways that make up this transformative shift in urban ecology and discuss both limitations and opportunities for future research and action with this transdisciplinary broadening of the field.

The relational shift in urban ecology: From place and structures to multiple modes of coproduction for positive urban futures

This perspective emerged from ongoing dialogue among ecologists initiated by a virtual workshop in 2021. A transdisciplinary group of researchers and practitioners conclude that urban ecology as a science can better contribute to positive futures by focusing on relationships, rather than prioritizing urban structures. Insights from other relational disciplines, such as political ecology, governance, urban design, and conservation also contribute. Relationality is especially powerful given the need to rapidly adapt to the changing social and biophysical drivers of global urban systems. These unprecedented dynamics are better understood through a relational lens than traditional structural questions. We use three kinds of coproduction-of the social-ecological world, of science, and of actionable knowledge-to identify key processes of coproduction within urban places. Connectivity is crucial to relational urban ecology. Eight themes emerge from the joint explorations of the paper and point toward social action for improving life and environment in urban futures.

Forging just ecologies: 25 years of urban long-term ecological research collaboration

We ask how environmental justice and urban ecology have influenced one another over the past 25 years in the context of the US Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) program and Baltimore Ecosystem Study (BES) project. BES began after environmental justice emerged through activism and scholarship in the 1980s but spans a period of increasing awareness among ecologists and environmental practitioners. The work in Baltimore provides a detailed example of how ecological research has been affected by a growing understanding of environmental justice. The shift shows how unjust environmental outcomes emerge and are reinforced over time by systemic discrimination and exclusion. We do not comprehensively review the literature on environmental justice in urban ecology but do present four brief cases from the Caribbean, Africa, and Asia, to illustrate the global relevance of the topic. The example cases demonstrate the necessity for continuous engagement with communities in addressing environmental problem solving.

Towards a pedagogy of social-ecological collaborations: engaging students and urban nonprofits for an ecology with cities

The concept of ecology with cities calls for a broader scope of participatory research and pedagogical tools for engagement with urban environmental issues. Projects that take an ecology with cities approach can provide opportunities for diverse audiences, including students, teachers, community members, and scientists, to participate in urban ecology, thus serving as potential steppingstones for further engagement. While there is increasing scholarship on the value of participatory approaches for increasing ecological literacy (e.g. citizen science), less has been written on the collaborative process of such experiences, particularly the social science aspects that can lead to successful outcomes and lessons learned. This paper describes a collaborative research project that engaged undergraduate students and community outreach staff of an urban nonprofit organization to better understand social uses and values associated with a public park located on the Harlem River in New York City. We explore the outcomes of the project for both students and staff, and provide reflections for educators interested in using a pedagogy of social-ecological collaborations in urban contexts. We argue that such an approach facilitates engagement between universities and community-based nonprofits to engage students in learning about the complexity, uncertainty, and value of urban ecosystem management.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11252-023-01343-x.

Between vision and action: the predicted effects of co-designed green infrastructure solutions on environmental burdens

Green Infrastructure (GI) is gaining wide recognition in cooperative research projects seeking to find solutions for climate adaptation in urbanized areas. However, the potential effects of co-produced GI plans and the underlying preparation process are rarely evaluated. To bridge this gap, the aim of this article is to examine what works in addressing environmental burdens in the urban neighborhood of Dortmund Marten, Germany. As part of a larger transdisciplinary process, selective GI measures were delineated in the case study area through a cooperative workshop between scientists and urban planners. Workshop ideas were incorporated into a mitigative scenario considering a hot summer day to quantify the effects of the derived GI measures on thermal comfort and particulate matter dispersion (PM10 and PM2.5). To evaluate the experiences of the science-practice collaboration, the viewpoints of researchers and urban planners on learning effects, knowledge integration, and GI planning were summarized and compared via an online survey. The results indicate that the proposed GI measures could reduce physiological equivalent temperature (PET) by 25 °C. At the same time, additional roadside trees could increase PM10 concentrations by up to 36 µg/m3 due to wind blocking effects. Reflections on the science-practice workshop show that learning effects were higher for the participating researchers than for planning practitioners, while the integration of individual expertise during the workshop was more difficult for academics. These findings point to the importance of continuous reflections on individual understandings in cooperating stakeholder groups and the value of the evaluation of outcomes in transdisciplinary GI planning.