Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Importance of Communication, Collaboration and Co-production

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Resilience to Climate Change

Abstract

Building resilient responses to nexus shocks requires effective communication and collaboration across sectors and stakeholders, yet this is not always achieved. The Nexus Shocks project examined how communication and collaboration could be enhanced, adopting a co-production methodology with policy, practitioner and scientific communities. This chapter discusses the barriers and challenges to communication and collaboration on specific nexus shocks, such as heatwaves and flooding, and identifies pathways to strengthen responses. Co-production provides a constructive way to deliver more salient decision-making processes which incorporate the needs of those affected in managing and responding to nexus shocks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • ASC. (2016). UK climate change risk assessment 2017 synthesis report: Priorities for the next five years. London: Adaptation Sub-Committee of the Committee on Climate Change.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bammer, G. (2013). Disciplining interdisciplinarity: Integration and implementation sciences for researching complex real world problems (472 pp.). Canberra: ANU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, J. B., Blangiardo, M., Fecht, D., Elliott, P., & Ezzati, M. (2014). Vulnerability to the mortality effects of warm temperature in the districts of England and Wales. Nature Climate Change, 4, 269–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bidwell, D., Dietz, T., & Scavia, D. (2013). Fostering knowledge networks for climate adaptation. Nature Climate Change, 3, 610–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, K., & Howarth, C. (2017). Decision-making and building resilience to nexus shocks locally: Exploring flooding and heatwaves in the UK. Sustainability, 9, 838.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cairns, R., Wilsdon, J., & O’Donovan, C. (2017). Sustainability in turbulent times: Lessons from the Nexus Network for supporting transdisciplinary research. Brighton: The Nexus Network.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christel, I., Hemment, D., Bojovica, D., Cucchiettia, F., Calvo, L., Stefaner, M., et al. (2017). Introducing design in the development of effective climate services. Climate Services, 9, 111–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, B., Stocker, L., Coffey, B., Leith, P., Harvey, N., Baldwin, C., et al. (2013). Enhancing the knowledge governance interface: Coasts, climate and collaboration. Ocean and Coastal Management, 86, 88–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corburn, J. (2007). Community knowledge in environmental health science: Co-producing policy expertise. Environmental Science & Policy, 10(2), 150–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ESRC. (2017a). ESRC research funding guide October 2017. Economic & Social Research Council. Available online at http://www.esrc.ac.uk/files/funding/guidance-for-applicants/research-funding-guide/.

  • ESRC. (2017b). ESRC responsive mode grant assessment process. Economic & Social Research Council. Available online at http://www.esrc.ac.uk/about-us/governance-and-structure/advisory-committees/research-committee/responsive-mode-grant-assessment-process/.

  • Hine, D. W., Reser, J. P., Morrison, M., Phillips, W. J., Nunn, P., & Cooksey, R. (2014). Audience segmentation and climate change communication: Conceptual and methodological consideration. WIRES Climate Change. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.279.

  • Howarth, C. (2016a). What we’ve learnt so far: Findings from the nexus shocks network. Global Sustainability Institute report. UK: The Nexus Network. Available online at http://www.thenexusnetwork.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/01/Nexus-Shocks-Network-What-We-Are-Learning_CandiceH.pdf.

  • Howarth, C. (2016b). Responding to extreme weather events. ESRC Evidence Briefing. Swindon, UK: ESRC. Available online at https://esrc.ukri.org/news-events-and-publications/evidence-briefings/responding-to-extremeweather-events/.

  • Howarth, C. (2016c). Informing decision-making in response to nexus shocks (LWEC PP Note).

    Google Scholar 

  • Howarth, C. (2016d). The nexus shocks network. Nexus Network. Available online at www.nexusnetwork.org.

  • Howarth, C. (2017a). Informing societal responses to shocks to the energy-food-water nexus: The nexus shocks network (Report to the ESRC Nexus Network).

    Google Scholar 

  • Howarth, C. (2017b). Nexus Network fellowship: Nexus shocks summary of findings, 2017. University of Surrey/The Nexus Network. Available online at http://www.thenexusnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Howarthreflective-report-to-Nexus-Network-Sept-2017.pdf.

  • Howarth, C. (2017c). The nexus shocks fellow. Nexus Network. Available online at www.nexusnetwork.org.

  • Howarth, C., & Monasterolo, I. (2016). Understanding barriers to decision-making in the UK energy-food-water nexus: The added value of interdisciplinary approaches. Environmental Science & Policy, 61, 53–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howarth, C., & Monasterolo, I. (2017). Opportunities for knowledge co-production across the energy-food-water nexus: Making interdisciplinary approaches work for better climate decision-making. Environmental Science & Policy, 75, 103–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howarth, C., & Painter, J. (2016). The IPCC and local decision-making on climate change: A robust science-policy interface? Palgrave Communications, 2, 16058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howarth, C., Jones, A., Philip, G., & Hogbin, J.-A. (2015). Nexus Shocks network: Decision-making on nexus shocks. Summaries of workshop discussions, Global Sustainability Institute, Anglia Ruskin University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howarth, C., Viner, D., Dessai, S., Rapley, C., & Jones, A. (2017). Co-producing climate change knowledge: Incorporating practitioner evidence in the IPCC WGII process. Climate Services, 5, 3–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ingold, K., & Fischer, M. (2014). Drivers of collaboration to mitigate climate change: An illustration of Swiss climate policy over 15 years. Global Environmental Change, 24, 88–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, S. (2010). A new climate for society. Theory, Culture & Society, 27(2–3), 233–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LCCP. (2018a). About. Accessed 22 February 2018. Available online at: http://climatelondon.org/lccp/.

  • LCCP. (2018b). Heatwaves. Accessed 22 February 2018. Available online at: http://climatelondon.org/climate-change/heatwaves/.

  • Lemos, M. C., Kirchhoff, C. J., & Ramprasad, V. (2012). Narrowing the climate information usability gap. Nature Climate Change, 2, 789–794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Löhr, K., Weinhardt, M., Graef, F., & Sieber, S. (2017). Enhancing communication and collaboration in collaborative projects through conflict prevention and management systems. Organizational Dynamics. In press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2018.05.002.

  • Martin, S. (2010). Co-production of social research: Strategies for engaged scholarship. Public Money & Management, 30(4), 211–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Met Office. (2015). The heatwave of 2003. Accessed 22 February 2018. Available online at: https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/learning/learn-about-the-weather/weather-phenomena/case-studies/heatwave.

  • Nerlich, B., Koteyko, N., & Brown, B. (2010). Theory and language of climate change communication. WIRES Climate Change, 1, 97–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newton, J. (2017). Shared intentions: The evolution of collaboration. Games and Economic Behavior, 104, 517–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Omondi, F. O., Hayombe, P. O., & Agong, S. G. (2014). Participatory and innovative design guidelines to planning and managing urban green spaces to transform ecotourism. International Journal of Current Reasearch, 6(12), 10397–10402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1996). Crossing the great divide: Co-production, synergy and development. World Development, 24(6), 1073–1088.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pidgeon, N., & Fischhoff, B. (2011). The role of social and decision sciences in communicating uncertain climate risks. Nature Climate Change, 1, 35–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polk, L. (2015). Transdisciplinary coproduction: Designing and testing a transdisciplinary research framework for societal problem solving. Futures, 65, 110–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • POSTnote. (2016, December). The water-energy-food nexus (POSTNote 543).

    Google Scholar 

  • Scandelius, C., & Cohen, G. (2016). Sustainability program brands: Platforms for collaboration and co-creation. Industrial Marketing Management, 57, 166–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tàbara, D. J., St Clair, A. L., & Hermansen, E. A. T. (2017). Transforming communication and knowledge production processes to address high-end climate change. Environmental Science & Policy, 70, 31–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turney, J. (2014). Future earth blog. Last accessed 13 October 2015. Available online at: http://www.futureearth.org/blog/2014-jul-23/be-inclusive-you-need-more-voicesqa-sheila-jasanoff.

  • Vesselinov, X., & Zhang, V. V. (2016). Energy-water nexus: Balancing tradeoffs between to level decision-makers. Applied Energy, 183, 77–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voorberg, W. H., Bekkers, V. J. J. M., & Tummers, L. G. (2014). A systematic review of cocreation and co-production: Embarking on the social innovation journey. Public Management Review, 17(9), 1333–1357. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2014.930505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, V. (2013). Co-production and collaboration in planning—The difference. Planning Theory & Practice, 15(1), 62–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webber, S. (2017). Circulating climate services: Commercializing science for climate change adaptation in Pacific Islands. Geoforum, 85, 82–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Surrey, Guildford, UK

    Candice Howarth & Sian Morse-Jones

Authors
  1. Candice Howarth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sian Morse-Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Candice Howarth .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Howarth, C., Morse-Jones, S. (2019). The Importance of Communication, Collaboration and Co-production. In: Resilience to Climate Change. Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94691-7_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94691-7_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Pivot, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-94690-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-94691-7

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation