| 1. |
- Almered Olsson, Gunilla, 1951, et al.
(författare)
-
Food systems sustainability - For whom and by whom? : An examination of different 'food system change' viewpoints
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Development Research Conference 2018: “Rethinking development”, 22–23 August 2018, Gothenburg, Sweden.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- The United Nations identifies the food crisis as one of the primary overarching challenges facing the international community. Different stakeholders in the food system have widely different perspectives and interests, and challenging structural issues, such as the power differentials among them, remain largely unexamined. These challenges make rational discourse among food system actors from different disciplines, sectors and levels difficult. These challenges can often prevent them from working together effectively to find innovative ways to respond to food security challenges. This means that finding solutions to intractable and stuck issues, such as the food crisis often stall, not at implementation, but at the point of problem identification. Food system sustainability means very different things to different food system actors. These differences in no way undermine or discount the work carried out by these players. However, making these differences explicit is an essential activity that would serve to deepen theoretical and normative project outcomes. Would the impact and reach of different food projects differ if these differences were made explicit? The purpose of this initial part of a wider food system research project is not to search for difference or divergence, with the aim of critique, but rather to argue that by making these differences explicit, the overall food system project engagement will be made more robust, more inclusive and more encompassing. This paper starts with some discussion on the different food system perspectives, across scales, regions and sectors but focuses primarily on the design of processes used to understand these divergent and at times contradictory views of what a sustainable food system may be. This paper draws on ongoing work within the Mistra Urban Futures project, using the food system projects in cities as diverse as Cape Town, Manchester, Gothenburg and Kisumu as sites for this enquiry.
|
|
| 2. |
- Haysom, Gareth, et al.
(författare)
-
Food systems sustainability: An examination of different viewpoints on food system change
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Sustainability. - : MDPI AG. - 2071-1050. ; 11:12
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Global food insecurity levels remain stubbornly high. One of the surest ways to grasp the scale and consequence of global inequality is through a food systems lens. In a predominantly urban world, urban food systems present a useful lens to engage a wide variety of urban (and global) challenges—so called ‘wicked problems.’ This paper describes a collaborative research project between four urban food system research units, two European and two African. The project purpose was to seek out solutions to what lay between, across and within the different approaches applied in the understanding of each city’s food system challenges. Contextual differences and immediate (perceived) needs resulted in very different views on the nature of the challenge and the solutions required. Value positions of individuals and their disciplinary “enclaves” presented further boundaries. The paper argues that finding consensus provides false solutions. Rather the identification of novel approaches to such wicked problems is contingent of these differences being brought to the fore, being part of the conversation, as devices through which common positions can be discovered, where spaces are created for the realisation of new perspectives, but also, where difference is celebrated as opposed to censored.
|
|
| 3. |
- Smit, Warren, et al.
(författare)
-
Replicating projects for comparative research: Mistra Urban Futures’ experiences with comparative work on knowledge exchange, food and transport
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Simon, D., Palmer, H. and Riise, J. (eds.), "Comparative urban research from theory to practice: Co-production for sustainability". - Bristol : Policy Press. - 9781447353126 - 9781447354093 ; , s. 63-88
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This chapter discusses three comparative projects that were all, at least partially, created through the replication of research across the Mistra Urban Futures cities. A typology of six possible models was developed, illustrating how comparative transdisciplinary knowledge co-production could take place across multiple cities, and the second of these approaches was identified as “local projects replicated”. This is where particular successful projects initiated in individual cities had been, or were intended to be, replicated in other cities, thus opening up possibilities for cross-city comparison. As it turned out, three Mistra Urban Futures comparative projects were partially or entirely based on projects that had been replicated in other cities: the knowledge exchange project, the suite of linked food comparative projects, and transport and sustainable urban development comparative project. This chapter draws on our practical experience in developing and implementing these comparative projects. First, we discuss the issue of “replication” and the different ways that this can occur. Second, we discuss the initial work on these themes (knowledge exchange, food, transport) which formed the basis for the development of these particular comparative projects. Third, we discuss the complex processes through which this work assembled into comparative projects. Finally, we reflect on the challenges and benefits of “replicating” projects for comparative research.
|
|
| 4. |
- Smit, Warren, et al.
(författare)
-
The challenge of conflicting rationalities about urban development : Experiences from Mistra Urban Futures’ transdisciplinary urban research
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Trialog – A Journal for Planning and Building in a Global Context. ; 2:137, s. 31-37
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper reflects on ten years of transdisciplinary urban research by Mistra Urban Futures, a global centre focusing on the co-production of knowledge for more just and sustainable cities across the Global South and Global North. The paper focuses on one of the key challenges that Mistra Urban Futures has faced in its work: in addition to the competing interests and agendas of participants in co-production processes, there are also often deeper underlying conflicting rationalities about many of the key concepts and substantive issues relating to making cities more just and sustainable, driven by ideological, educational, contextual and personal factors. These differences can be even more polarised between different cities and countries, including deep divisions regarding the fundamental nature of the problem, the ultimate goals and objectives of urban development interventions, and the key underlying concepts. This paper explores these challenges and reflects on the various approaches adopted by Mistra Urban Futures to facilitate the understanding of these differences and identify commonalities and overlaps of interest. Ultimately, understanding and engaging with the different rationalities of participants in co-production processes is essential for different actors to work together to co-produce and operationalise knowledge for cities that are more just and sustainable.
|
|
| 5. |
- Smit, Warren, et al.
(författare)
-
The challenge of conflicting rationalities about urban development: Experiences from Mistra Urban Futures’ transdisciplinary urban research
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Trialog 2019 Conference: “Whose knowledge counts? The meaning of co-productive processes for urban development and urban research”, Institute of Urban Planning and Design (Städtebau Institut) at the University of Stuttgart, 7–9 November 2019, Stuttgart, Germany.
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper reflects on ten years of transdisciplinary urban research by Mistra Urban Futures. Mistra Urban Futures was established in 2010 as a global centre focusing on the co-production of knowledge for more just and sustainable cities. The core partners in Mistra Urban Futures are from four countries (Sweden, the United Kingdom, Kenya and South Africa), and the centre also works in two other countries (India and Argentina). In addition to undertaking local knowledge co-production work in each partner city, Mistra Urban Futures has also linked up local work into international transdisciplinary projects. The paper focuses on one of the key challenges that Mistra Urban Futures has faced in its work: in addition to the competing interests and agendas of participants in co-production processes, there are also often deeper underlying conflicting (or diverging) rationalities about urban development. Many of the key concepts and substantive issues relating to making cities more just and sustainable are highly contested. Within cities, people and organisations from different sectors and different disciplines often have very different understandings of what the problems and solutions are, driven by ideological, educational, contextual and personal factors. These differences can be even more polarised between different cities and countries, for example between cities in the global North and global South and between cities in countries with different political cultures. For example, there can be deep divisions about the fundamental nature of the problem (poverty, inequity, lack of economic growth, lack of political empowerment, unsustainability, lack of government capacity, etc.) and the ultimate goals and objectives of urban development interventions (such as equity, economic growth, maintaining the status quo or radical change). In addition, concepts such as such as “fairness”, “justice” and “resilience”, and substantive issues such as “public transport”, “sustainable urban food systems” and “tackling climate change”, can mean very different things to different people and in different places. This paper explores these challenges and reflects on the various approaches adopted by Mistra Urban Futures to facilitate the understanding of these differences and identify commonalities and overlaps of interest. For example, most of the Mistra Urban Futures projects had initial phases to identify and understand the different views of participants in order to be able to identify common ground for collaboration. In some cases, the different terminologies and concepts used by people from different sectors or disciplines required developing a common conceptual vocabulary during this initial phase. In one particular project in Cape Town, the research method included the mapping of the different rationalities of key stakeholders as a basis for identifying opportunities for further collaboration. Having a diversity of rationalities and approaches often stimulates creativity, resulting in the development of innovative methodologies, policies and practices. Ultimately, understanding and engaging with the different rationalities of participants in co-production processes is essential for different actors to successfully work together to co-produce and operationalise knowledge for more just and sustainable cities.
|
|
| 6. |
- Smit, Warren, et al.
(författare)
-
The challenge of conflicting rationalities about urban development – Experiences from Mistra Urban Futures’ transdisciplinary urban research : Die Herausforderung widersprüchlicher Rationalitäten in der Stadtentwicklung: Erfahrungen aus der transdisziplinären Stadtforschung von ‘Mistra Urban Futures‘
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Trialog – A Journal for Planning and Building in a Global Context. - 0724-6234. ; 137:2, s. 31-37
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper reflects on ten years of transdisciplinary urban research by Mistra Urban Futures, a global centre focusing on the co-production of knowledge for more just and sustainable cities across the Global South and Global North. The paper focuses on one of the key challenges that Mistra Urban Futures has faced in its work: in addition to the competing interests and agendas of participants in co-production processes, there are also often deeper underlying conflicting rationalities about many of the key concepts and substantive issues relating to making cities more just and sustainable, driven by ideological, educational, contextual and personal factors. These differences can be even more polarised between different cities and countries, including deep divisions regarding the fundamental nature of the problem, the ultimate goals and objectives of urban development interventions, and the key underlying concepts. This paper explores these challenges and reflects on the various approaches adopted by Mistra Urban Futures to facilitate the understanding of these differences and identify commonalities and overlaps of interest. Ultimately, understanding and engaging with the different rationalities of participants in co-production processes is essential for different actors to work together to co-produce and operationalise knowledge for cities that are more just and sustainable. ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ Der vorliegende Artikel reflektiert zehn Jahre transdisziplinäre Stadtforschung von Mistra Urban Futures, einem globalen Zentrum mit Schwerpunkt auf Koproduktion von Wissen für gerechtere und nachhaltigere Städte im globalen Norden und Süden. Der Artikel konzentriert sich auf eine der Kernherausforderungen, mit der sich Mistra Urban Futures in seiner Arbeit konfrontiert sah: Zusätzlich zu den konkurrieren-den Interessen und Agenden der an Koproduktion Beteiligten liegen häufig gegensätzliche Denkweisen zugrunde. Schlüsselkonzepte und substanzielle Fragen in Bezug darauf, wie Städte gerechter und nachhaltiger gemacht werden können, unterscheiden sich je nach Einfluss von ideologischen, bildungs- und kontextbezogenen sowie persönlichen Faktoren mitunter deutlich. Diese Unterschiede können zwischen verschiedenen Städten und Ländern noch stärker hervortreten, bis hin zu einer tiefen Spaltung in Bezug auf die Natur des zugrundeliegenden Problems, die übergeordneten Ziele sowie den Zweck urbaner Entwicklungsmaßnahmen. Dieser Artikel untersucht die Herausforderungen und reflektiert über die verschiedenen Ansätze, die Mistra Urban Futures verfolgte, um das Verständnis dieser Unterschiede zu fördern und Gemeinsamkeiten und geteilte Interessen zu identifizieren. Letztlich erweist es sich für die verschiedenen an Koproduktion beteiligten Ak-teure als unerlässlich, die unterschiedlichen Denkweisen zu verstehen und sich auf sie einzustellen, um produktiv zusammenzuarbeiten und Wissen für gerechtere und nachhaltigere Städte zu operationalisieren.
|
|
| 7. |
- Smit, Warren, et al.
(författare)
-
The challenge of conflicting rationalities about urban development – Experiences from Mistra Urban Futures’ transdisciplinary urban research
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Trialog. - 0724-6234. ; 137:2, s. 31-37
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper reflects on ten years of transdisciplinary urban research by Mistra Urban Futures, a global centre focusing on the co-production of knowledge for more just and sustainable cities across the Global South and Global North. The paper focuses on one of the key challenges that Mistra Urban Futures has faced in its work: in addition to the competing interests and agendas of participants in co-production processes, there are also often deeper underlying conflicting rationalities about many of the key concepts and substantive issues relating to making cities more just and sustainable, driven by ideological, educational, contextual and personal factors. These differences can be even more polarised between different cities and countries, including deep divisions regarding the fundamental nature of the problem, the ultimate goals and objectives of urban development interventions, and the key underlying concepts. This paper explores these challenges and reflects on the various approaches adopted by Mistra Urban Futures to facilitate the understanding of these differences and identify commonalities and overlaps of interest. Ultimately, understanding and engaging with the different rationalities of participants in co-production processes is essential for different actors to work together to co-produce and operationalise knowledge for cities that are more just and sustainable.
|
|
| 8. |
- Smit, Warren, et al.
(författare)
-
What is meaningful collaboration? Reflections from work on food systems and urban regeneration
- 2019
-
Ingår i: 4th Mistra Urban Futures Annual International Conference: “Lessons, Impacts and Outcomes”, Cutler’s Hall, 14–18 October 2019, Sheffield, UK.
-
Konferensbidrag (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The workshop draws on experiences from two recent Mistra-supported collaboration and co-production projects. The workshop is made up of three aligned components. The first session aligns with a general understanding of co-production, that of the collaboration between academics and policy makers in the pursuit of sustainable neighbourhood development. The second area of work investigates co-production between academics from different contexts and regions. These two sessions raise interesting questions about process, power, voice, values, disciplinary positions, immediacy and contextual dynamics. These questions are opened up to wider discussion with the audience through an interactive final session.
|
|
| 9. |
- Smit, Warren, et al.
(författare)
-
What is meaningful collaboration? Reflections from work on food systems and urban regeneration
- 2019
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- This series of presentations draws on experiences from two recent Mistra-supported collaboration and co-production projects. It is made up of three aligned components. The first one aligns with a general understanding of co-production, that of the collaboration between academics and policy makers in the pursuit of sustainable neighbourhood development. The second investigates co-production between academics from different contexts and regions. The third one raises interesting questions about process, power, voice, values, disciplinary positions, immediacy and contextual dynamics.
|
|
