Co production of knowledge, co creation of shared value and networks for sustainable development

Page 1

Co-production of knowledge, co-creation of shared value and networks for sustainable development R.A.H.J. Clemens March 2015

In this article sustainable development planning in a crowded world is considered a dead-end street without deep-rooted valuation and appreciation of knowledge and values of others resulting in new knowledge that leads to honest collaboration. Co-production of knowledge and the co-creation of shared value in networks and partnerships embody the inclusive, joint problem-solving approaches promoted for sustainable development. Collective leadership and availability of space for emerging initiatives to meet and gain strength is a necessary condition to build capacities inherent to sustainable development and its governance. It is argued that in Mexico, both need and opportunity are there to build an innovative thematic network on sustainable development.

knowledge integration is commonly termed

Values and knowledge

“Joint Knowledge Production” (Offermans Sustainable development planning

& Glasbergen 2015), but here we refer to it

requires the linking of stakeholders with

as the co-production of knowledge as a

sometimes very different worldviews in

way to align it to the concept of co-creation

networks / partnerships. This way they

of values. The main message is the added

have the potential to function as boundary

value of doing it together.

organizations that bring together different Knowledge is the starting point of a vision

domains of society (state, market and civil

and an important ingredient of planning.

society) to produce knowledge and link it

But it is quite a challenge to value

to action. Although knowledge from these

knowledge from another domain as

actors differs in nature, an integration of

equally important as our own and this

different knowledge types is believed to

seriously complicates the possibility of

create unique benefits for vision building

results being more than de sum of its

and decision making. This process of 1


elements. Knowledge has to be valued in

from the market and civil society

order to make it an instrument for further

(Glasbergen, 2007, p. 1). Discussing

knowledge and usable as guidance for

partnerships thus brings us to the heart of

action.

the debate on public and private responsibilities, their relationships and

With the involvement of stakeholders in

even the possibility to unite them as a new

networks and partnerships, scientific

management strategy for sustainable

knowledge is increasingly faced with

development within the liberal democratic

competition from other knowledge

order. […] The development of

providers. Jointly producing knowledge is

partnerships for sustainable development

an important way of creating the shared

is a process in which actors from various

values that ultimately weigh knowledge as

sectors of society (state, market and civil)

being important or not.

restructure and build new social relationships to create a more sustainable management practices. […] In the relevant

Governance and management

literature we recognize three perspectives

practice

on this issue. From the first, partnerships are studied as single collaborative

The conditions in which knowledge

arrangements. From the second

emerges are fundamental for its use. And

perspective, attention is turned to the

especially in more limited conditions it is

external effects of partnerships. The third

maybe even more important to build

perspective takes a broader view on the

mechanisms that can lead us to

governance system. Attention is focused

knowledge that otherwise might not

on the changes that partnerships make in

emerge in the first place and therefore not

the configuration of public decision-making

become part of any management practice

structures. […] These perspectives are

at all. Instead of a strong state to govern

connected in a Ladder of Partnership

sustainability issues, we need to face the

Activity (see fig. 1), a conceptual device

opportunities of a strong society, which is

that allows us to better understand and

at least partly based on private initiatives

analyse partnerships (Glasbergen 2011).

2


Figure 1: The ladder of partnership activity. Source: Glasbergen 2011

Conceptualizing partnerships as a suit of

Shared knowledge and shared values

instruments in sustainability governance

For too long, business and society have

(McAllister & Taylor 2015), they become

been put in competition with each other

fundamental for vision building and long-

and this has complicated the joint

term planning of policies and action. In

production of knowledge and the use of

recent decades we have witnessed a shift

the shared results. Without shared values

in the manner of orientating social change,

it is at least unlikely to happen, and even if

away from the autonomy of the three

it does, it probably will be ineffective. The

domains (state, market, civil society)

concept of shared value resets the

towards their interdependencies. It is now

boundaries of capitalism. That is in part

believed that public choices have to be

because economists have legitimized the

made in a multi-actor context, in which

idea that to provide societal benefits,

private actors and civil society need to,

companies must temper their economic

and are able to, take responsibility for

success. […] By better connecting

public issues as well. Networks have

companies’ success with societal

become fundamental new agents for this.

improvement, it opens up many ways to serve new needs, gain efficiency, create differentiation, and expand markets (Kramer, Mark R.; Porter 2011).

3


Development. These partnerships are

Networks and partnerships

voluntary strategic alliances on

A well-managed thematic network of

sustainability issues between actors from

stakeholders for sustainable development

different societal domains such as

with partnerships as important elements

government, business and/or civil society.

can play a fundamental role in a country

MUNPOP consists of international

such as Mexico in effectively using

research projects and a series of PhD

existing capacities and having new ones

projects.

emerge to increase competitiveness in development policies and science. Co-

Benefits of networks for their members

production of knowledge by the different

can vary for each one in scope and in

domains offers opportunities that we can

time. Both networks and partnership

already see reflected in existing

arrangements (that are network

partnerships in other places like the

organizations by themselves) are

Sustainable Food Lab and the Munpop

considered here as tools for deliberate

programme on partnerships based in the

societal change and can increase

Netherlands. The Sustainable Food Lab

significantly the possibilities for more

incubates partnership projects, sometimes

effective policies and management.

manages those projects, and always

Networks facilitate access to knowledge,

collects and shares learning. They are

information, experience, organisations and

focusing most of their attention on the

people and new links emerge especially

following three priorities: 1) Agriculture and

when functioning under system leadership.

Development; 2) Climate Change and

Having things emerge that formerly made

Sustainability Metrics; and 3) Sustainable

up no part of the vision might be one of the

Commodity Production. The mission of

main strength of networks and co-

Sustainable Food Lab is to accelerate

production. Sometimes you do not exactly

market-driven progress toward a

know where you are heading but you do

sustainable mainstream food system by

recognize it when you see it.

supporting diverse and influential leaders. MUNPOP is a joint research program on Partnerships for Sustainable

4


Emerging initiatives as drivers of change

inertia that were seen as intractable problems before, now can be perceived as

With an overall level of education and

opportunities for innovation and

technique that allows for easy connecting,

(structural) change. And organizational

one might think the most important

self-interest becomes re-contextualized,

conditions are fulfilled for new initiatives to

as people discover that their and their

emerge. And in fact it does help a lot, but

organization’s success depends on

for initiatives to build up into drivers of

creating well-being within the larger

change we should not try too much to set

systems of which they are a part (Senge et

the agenda. The mind and capacity of any

al. 2015).

person trying to plan too much from the beginning is most likely too limited and if

System leaders shift the conditions

one does try, this denies potential new

through which others (those who want to

options that didn’t exist (or one wasn’t

have a problem solved) can learn

aware of) when starting the planning from

collectively and take action. In 2004 a

a beforehand elaborated vision not

group of thirty leaders from business,

connected to the wider system.

NGOs, and government on three continents founded the Food Lab to

System leaders catalyse collective

accelerate sustainability in the mainstream

leadership by having the ability to see

food system. […] The complexity of the

reality through the eyes of people very

food system and the trade-offs that food

different from themselves. By this they

companies must make to reduce their

encourage other people to be more open

environmental impact are daunting. Food

as well. Indeed, one of their greatest

companies need good reputations

contributions can come from the strength

because much of the value of the

of their ignorance, which gives them

corporation lies in its brands. They want to

permission to ask obvious questions and

be associated with cleaning up waterways

to embody an openness and commitment

and improving the lives of small farmers.

to their own ongoing learning and growth

They also need a reliable supply of

that eventually infuse larger change efforts

ingredients, which requires abundant

(Senge et al. 2015). This way, polarized

water and healthy soils. They need the

situations and situations suffering from

approbation of global NGOs like Oxfam 5


and the World Wildlife Fund, and they

that can eventually cause change to be

have learned to benefit from the technical

self-sustaining. They need distinctive

expertise of field staff from these groups.

powers to create space for change (Senge

Food companies need to collaborate with

et al. 2015). If system leadership results in

competitors in order to create common

collaborative project work it really can be

standards and measurement tools. To

transformative. Food Lab is an interesting

accomplish all of this, food companies and

example of knowledge co-production

NGOs need system leaders. […] Larry

resulting in action on the ground.

Pulliam, one of the founders of this Food Lab partnership is a conservative Republican from Houston, and before

Mexico

retirement he was one of the senior executives running a $40 billion company

In Mexico existing conditions could make

later said: It's pretty unusual that fierce

good use of the mentioned mechanisms

competitors can come together and work

and there seems to be good opportunity

for the higher good. That's what it's all

since co-production of knowledge for

about. The essence, the power, of the

example fits perfectly in thematic networks

Sustainable Food Lab is that we can do

as stimulated by Conacyt (the National

100 fold, 1,000 fold more together than we

Council of Science and Technology that

can.do by ourselves. What we're doing is

was established in 1970 as the Mexican

the right thing to do, the good thing to do-

government's advisory body in charge of

for the world. It’s also good for our

implementing public policies on behalf of

businesses. There's a competitive

the Federal Government, to promote

advantage for Sysco to be involved, but

scientific and technological research,

we can't fully realize that competitive

innovation and technological development)

advantage without working together with

has initiated thematic research networks.

others in this group to mainstream

The objective of the thematic research

sustainability (Hamilton 2015).

networks is to create multi-disciplinary and multi-institutional research groups

Often leaders try to make change happen,

addressing national development issues in

but system leaders focus on creating the

strategic themes, by linking academia, the

conditions that can produce change and 6


public sector, and civil society. The

When establishing a thematic network it is

networks aim at reverting the regional

suggested to study its partnering

asymmetries in the country. In 2010,

mechanism from the three perspectives

seven new thematic networks were

mentioned by Glasbergen in order to

created and 11 in 2011, adding to a total

ensure the multi-scale analysis required

of 31 networks. Each network has an

for vision building and strong feedback

allocated budget of €594,000 in 2010, the

mechanisms, to optimize the flow of

latest data available.

knowledge and guide management decisions.

The strategic themes being addressed are: water; genetics; complexity, science

Sustainable development is one of the

and society; physics and energy; energy

issues that can apply for support for the

sources; environment and sustainability;

formation of a thematic network. Co-

nanosciences and nanotechnology; new

production, co-creation and networks

trends in medicine; food, agriculture and

embody the inclusive, joint problem-

biotechnology; information technologies;

solving approaches promoted for

mathematic and computing modelling;

sustainable development. Establishing a

ecosystems; poverty and urban

thematic network for sustainable

development; condensed matters; aging,

development offering space and collective

health and social development; robotics

leadership for new initiatives to emerge

and mechatronics; natural disasters due to

and based on innovative mechanism that

climate change; etno-ecology and bio-

ensure the co-production of knowledge

cultural patrimony; space technologies and

and the co-creation of shared value, could

scientific research; as well as civil society

harness a lot of underutilized energy in the

and democracy (Source: ERAWATCH,

Mexican society for the common good for

Platform on Research and Innovation

now and later.

Policies from the European Union: http://erawatch.jrc.ec.europa.eu . Retrieved 16-03-2015).

7


References: Glasbergen, P., 2011. Understanding partnerships for sustainable development analytically: The ladder of partnership activity as a methodological tool. Environmental Policy and

Governance, 21, pp.1–13. Hamilton, H., 2015. Leading Systems. Stanford Social Innovation Review, (Winter), pp.1–9. Kramer, Mark R.; Porter, M.E., 2011. Creating Shared Value. Harvard business review, (Januari-februari). Available at: http://hbr.org/2011/01/the-big-idea-creating-sharedvalue. McAllister, R.R. & Taylor, B.M., 2015. Partnerships for sustainability governance: a synthesis of key themes. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 12, pp.86–90. Available at: http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.084921479096&partnerID=tZOtx3y1. Offermans, A. & Glasbergen, P., 2015. Boundary work in sustainability partnerships: An exploration of the Round Table on Sustainable Palm Oil. Environmental Science &

Policy, 50, pp.34–45. Available at: http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1462901115000180. Senge, P., Hamilton, H. & Kania, J., 2015. The Dawn of System Leadership. Stanford Social

Innovation Review, Winter.

8


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.