Structured Collaboration Across a Transformative Knowledge Network—Learning Across Disciplines, Cultures and Contexts?

Evaluating Research for Development: Innovation to Navigate Complexity

Large publicly funded programmes of research continue to receive increased investment as interventions aiming to produce impact for the world's poorest and most marginalized populations. At this intersection of research and development, research is expected to contribute to complex processes of societal change. Embracing a co-produced view of impact as emerging along uncertain causal pathways often without predefined outcomes calls for innovation in the use of complexity-aware approaches to evaluation. The papers in this special issue present rich experiences of authors working across sectors and geographies, employing methodological innovation and navigating power as they reconcile tensions. They illustrate the challenges with (i) evaluating performance to meet accountability demands while fostering learning for adaptation; (ii) evaluating prospective theories of change while capturing emergent change; (iii) evaluating internal relational dimensions while measuring external development outcomes; (iv) evaluating across scales: from measuring local level end impact to understanding contributions to systems level change. Taken as a whole, the issue illustrates how the research for development evaluation field is maturing through the experiences of a growing and diverse group of researchers and evaluators as they shift from using narrow accountability instruments to appreciating emergent causal pathways within research for development.

How context affects transdisciplinary research: insights from Asia, Africa and Latin America

Transdisciplinary research (TDR) has been developed to generate knowledge that effectively fosters the capabilities of various societal actors to realize sustainability transformations. The development of TDR theories, principles, and methods has been largely governed by researchers from the global North and has reflected their contextual conditions. To enable more context-sensitive TDR framing, we sought to identify which contextual characteristics affect the design and implementation of TDR in six case studies in Asia, Latin America, and Africa, and what this means for TDR as a scientific approach. To this end, we distinguished four TDR process elements and identified several associated context dimensions that appeared to influence them. Our analysis showed that contextual characteristics prevalent in many Southern research sites-such as highly volatile socio-political situations and relatively weak support infrastructure-can make TDR a challenging endeavour. However, we also observed a high degree of variation in the contextual characteristics of our sites in the global South, including regarding group deliberation, research freedom, and dominant perceptions of the appropriate relationship between science, society, and policy. We argue that TDR in these contexts requires pragmatic adaptations as well as more fundamental reflection on underlying epistemological concepts around what it means to conduct "good science", as certain contextual characteristics may influence core epistemological values of TDR.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11625-022-01201-3.

Critical social science perspectives on transformations to sustainability

This article introduces a special issue on the contribution of social science to addressing transformations to sustainability. Articles underline the importance of embracing theoretically rooted, empirically informed, and collaboratively generated knowledge to address sustainability challenges and transformative change. Emphasis is placed on the role of the social sciences in elaborating on the politicisation and pluralisation of transformation processes and outcomes, helping situate, frame, reflect and generate societal action, while acknowledging the complexity of societal transformation in different contexts.

Pursuing Plurality: Exploring the Synergies and Challenges of Knowledge Co-production in Multifunctional Landscape Design

Knowledge co-production has emerged as an important conceptual and processual tool in sustainability research addressing the needs of equity and inclusion. Indigenous communities and local people have engaged with the process of knowledge production, foregrounding their historical relationships with landscapes, based on their unique worldviews and knowledges. However, knowledge co-production, especially for multi-functional landscapes remains a contentious and complicated affair with enduring issues of power-sharing related to the different socio-political positions of stakeholders. This work explores the synergies and challenges in knowledge co-production for landscape re-design in the south Island of Aotearoa NZ through an assessment of the work done at the Centre for Excellence, Lincoln University. At this center, a multi-stakeholder team is grappling with designing a farm, through a transdisciplinary framework that attempts to include multiple worldviews. This work explores the various stages of the co-production process, analyzing the exchanges between various members as they prepare for co-production, the knowledge produced through this engagement, and how this knowledge is being utilized to further the goal of sustainability. Our results show that significant gaps remain between co-production theory and co-production practice which are a result of the mismanagement of the co-production process, the mismatch in the time and spatial scales of project goals, and the differences in the values and objectives of the different stakeholders. However, the process of co-production, though flawed, leads to the building of more open relationships between the stakeholders, and leads to some very meaningful knowledge products that address the multi-temporal and multi-spatial aspirations of multi-functional landscapes in Aotearoa NZ, while contributing to the broader scholarship on co-production in sustainability. Finally, both synergies and challenges prove meaningful when challenging the roadblocks to the inclusion of a diversity of worldviews, by clearly highlighting the places of engagement and why they were made possible. We suggest that knowledge co-production attempts in multi-functional landscapes around the world should attempt a similar assessment of their process. This can help build better relationships between scientists and IPLC, address disciplinary bias and marginalization of non-expert opinions, while also ensuring the relevance of the research to the multiple stakeholders of the land.

Improving Governance of Tenure in Policy and Practice: Monitoring in a Space for Multiple Views

The dynamics of current global challenges—like food and nutrition security, environmental degradation, climate change, and emergencies—reduce the availability of and/or access to natural resources, and thereby underline the urgency of achieving transformational changes in the governance of tenure. This is increasingly required to bring the greatest good to the most people, in line with human rights. The globally applicable “Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security” (VGGT) were developed to promote responsible tenure governance. The importance of instituting effective monitoring for the implementation of the VGGT at the country level in order to ensure that they have an impact on the ground is well accepted. However, little progress has been made to date. This paper explores plural perspectives on monitoring by the different stakeholders involved because of the multi-dimensional nature of the VGGT implementation, and because tenure governance is a complex system. Allowing space for multiple views means leaving no one’s view behind. It is proposed to map the multiple pathways of change to achieve responsible tenure governance in a causal framework using the concept of theories of change. A pluralistic approach will entail different theories of change operating simultaneously, which will provide an inclusive and comprehensive tool for monitoring by showing the preferred pathways of progress on the ground, and by contributing to future trajectories.

Planning for change: Transformation labs for an alternative food system in Cape Town, South Africa

There has been a call for more participatory processes to feed into urban planning for more resilient food systems. This paper describes a process of knowledge co-production for transforming towards an alternative food system in Cape Town, South Africa. A 'transformative space' was created though a T-Lab process involving change-agents advocating for an alternative food system, and was designed to discuss challenges in the local food system from a range of perspectives, in order to co-develop potentially transformative innovations that could feed into government planning. In this paper, we describe and reflect on the T-lab in order to consider whether its design was able to meet its objective: to initiate an experimental phase of coalition-building by diverse actors that could feed into the provincial government's strategic focus on food and nutrition security. Our findings indicate that T-labs have the potential to be important mechanisms for initiating and sustaining transformative change. They can be complementary to urban planning processes seeking to transform complex social-ecological systems onto more sustainable development pathways. However, as with all experimental co-production processes, there is significant learning and refinement that is necessary to ensure the process can reach its full potential. A key challenge we encountered was how to foster diversity and difference in opinions in the context of significant historical legacies of inequality, whilst simultaneously acting for 'the common good' and seeking ways to scale impact across different contexts. The paper concludes with deliberations on the nature of planning and navigating towards systemic transformative change.

Mapping Course Sustainability by Embedding the SDGs Inventory into the University Curriculum: A Case Study from National University of Kaohsiung in Taiwan

A course inventory module, based on the Curriculum Framework for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) published by the Commonwealth Secretariat, has been embedded into the online curriculum system at the National University of Kaohsiung (NUK) since 2018. The primary aim of this study is to explore the sustainability status of the course offerings and to understand the interdisciplinary capacity in pursuing the SDGs at NUK. At the university level, a total of 1200–1300 courses (approximately 57% of courses) were reported to be related to SDGs, where the curriculum of NUK mainly emphasized SDGs 3, 4, 8, 9 and 16. However, our study indicates that many SDGs are still not focused in the curriculum of all colleges. Two patterns of the SDGs-related course framework were observed at the college level: One is the college course offerings linked to a wide variety of SDG content; while the second pattern is the college course offerings linked only to specific SDG content, mainly dependent on the subject areas of colleges. Our study suggests that the number of SDGs covered by a course reflects the diversity of the sustainability topics covered in the course. The metric gives an indication of the areas covered and, thus, also points to blind spots (i.e., insufficiencies). Moreover, it can also give an indication of the diversity within colleges, which could suggest future paths for transdisciplinary development. An understanding of the baseline status of sustainability in the university curriculum provides opportunities for universities to plan their strategies for sustainability and prioritize the allocation of resources accordingly.