| 1. |
- Palmer, Henrietta, et al.
(author)
-
Urban research for sustainability: developing a comparative transdisciplinary co-production approach to realise just cities
- 2022
-
In: International Journal of Sustainable Development. - : Inderscience Publishers. - 0960-1406 .- 1741-5268. ; 25:1-2, s. 78-94
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- This paper engages with Manfred Max-Neef’s approach to transdisciplinarity in relation to an innovative international cross-city research program. Given the inadequacies of conventional methods, fundamentally different approaches are required to meet the ‘wicked problem’ challenges of transition towards sustainable societies. Mistra Urban Futures, a Swedish-based research centre with multi-institutional partnerships in eight cities on four continents, designed a co-produced comparative research program to address the realisation of just cities through a typology enabling the comparison of urgent local priorities. This paper reflects on the approach and its relevance to Max-Neef’s call for understanding as central to a transdisciplinary approach. Key findings include how understanding, together with the realisation of just cities, emerges intertwined as methodological outcomes. These outcomes also supported the processes, hence contributing to the discourses on transition and the methodologies of transdisciplinarity and comparative urban research.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Simon, David, 1957, et al.
(author)
-
The challenges of transdisciplinary knowledge production: from unilocal to comparative research
- 2018
-
In: Environment and Urbanization. - : SAGE Publications. - 0956-2478 .- 1746-0301. ; 30:2, s. 481-500
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- This reflective paper surveys the lessons learnt and challenges faced by the Mistra Urban Futures (MUF) research centre and its research platforms in Sweden, the UK, South Africa and Kenya in developing and deploying different forms of transdisciplinary co-production of knowledge. Considerable experience with a distinctive portfolio of such methods has been gained and reflective evaluation is now under way. While it is important to understand the local context within which each method has evolved, we seek to explain the potential for adaptation in diverse contexts so that such knowledge co-production methods can be more widely utilized. Furthermore, the current phase of MUF’s work is undertaking innovative comparative transdisciplinary co-production research across its research platforms. Since the specific local projects differ, systematic thematic comparison requires great care and methodological rigour. Transdisciplinary co-production is inherently complex, time consuming and often unpredictable in terms of outcomes, and these challenges are intensified when it is undertaken comparatively.
|
|
| 4. |
- Smit, Warren, et al.
(author)
-
The challenge of conflicting rationalities about urban development: Experiences from Mistra Urban Futures’ transdisciplinary urban research
- 2019
-
In: 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.
-
Conference paper (peer-reviewed)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.
|
|
| 5. |
- Smit, Warren, et al.
(author)
-
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
-
In: Trialog – A Journal for Planning and Building in a Global Context. - 0724-6234. ; 137:2, s. 31-37
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)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.
|
|
| 6. |
- Joubert, M., et al.
(author)
-
'Pandem-icons' - exploring the characteristics of highly visible scientists during the Covid-19 pandemic
- 2023
-
In: Jcom-Journal of Science Communication. - : Sissa Medialab Srl. - 1824-2049. ; 22:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Covid-19 pandemic escalated demand for scientific explanations and guidance, creating opportunities for scientists to become publicly visible. In this study, we compared characteristics of visible scientists during the first year of the Covid-19 pandemic (January to December 2020) across 16 countries. We find that the scientists who became visible largely matched socio-cultural criteria that have characterised visible scientists in the past (e.g., age, gender, credibility, public image, involvement in controversies). However, there were limited tendencies that scientists commented outside their areas of expertise. We conclude that the unusual circumstances created by Covid-19 did not change the phenomenon of visible scientists in significant ways.
|
|
| 7. |
- Metcalfe, Jenni, et al.
(author)
-
The COVID-19 mirror: reflecting science-society relationships across 11 countries
- 2020
-
In: Journal of Science Communication. - : Sissa Medialab Srl. - 1824-2049. ; 19:7, s. 1-23
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Twelve researchers from 11 countries used autoethnographic techniques, keeping diaries over 10 weeks of the COVID-19 crisis, to observe and reflect on changes in the role and cultural authority of science during important stages of viral activity and government action in their respective countries. We followed arguments, discussions and ideas generated by mass and social media about science and scientific expertise, observed patterns and shifts in narratives, and made international comparisons. During regular meetings via video conference, the participating researchers discussed theoretical approaches and our joint methodology for reflecting on our observations. This project is informed by social representations theory, agenda-setting, and frames of meaning associated with the rise and fall of expertise and trust. This paper presents our observations and reflections on the role and authority of science in our countries from March 10 to May 31, 2020. This is the first stage of a longer-term project that aims to identify, analyse and compare changes in science-society relationships over the course of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
|
|
| 8. |
- Riise, Jan, 1957, et al.
(author)
-
Case study: Makoko floating school
- 2015
-
In: Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. - : Elsevier BV. - 1877-3435. ; 13, s. 58-60
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Makoko is a slum community living in wooden buildings on stilts over the water of Lagos Lagoon in Nigeria, and canoes are the residents' primary means of transportation. The challenges are significant, socially, economically and not least environmentally in view of changing climate and frequent flooding. In search of an appropriate solution, Amsterdam-based architects NLE have demonstrated a new form of floating buildings for Makoko and similar water cities in Africa and elsewhere. The first prototype is a Floating School, addressing appropriately not only building technology but also environmental issues and the everyday lives of people living in Makoko.
|
|
