Knowledge sharing in interdisciplinary disaster risk management initiatives: cocreation insights and experience from New Zealand
Decision making in complex contexts such as disaster risk management requires collaborative approaches to knowledge production. Evidence-based disaster risk management and pre-event planning relies on robust and relevant disaster risk knowledge. We report on a case study of Project AF8, a "cocr...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Resilience Alliance
2020
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/b416ff73a4b94227a35e4c460b2bda1a |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | Decision making in complex contexts such as disaster risk management requires collaborative approaches to knowledge production. Evidence-based disaster risk management and pre-event planning relies on robust and relevant disaster risk knowledge. We report on a case study of Project AF8, a "cocreation" collaboration involving local- and central-government disaster risk management agencies and groups, critical infrastructure organizations, and scientists from six universities and Crown Research Institutes. Participant observation and interview data are used to document and analyze the processes used to generate, share, and apply multidisciplinary disaster risk knowledge. Project AF8 was conceived as a cross-jurisdictional and multiagency initiative to plan and prepare for a coordinated response across the South Island following a large magnitude earthquake along the Alpine Fault, one of New Zealand's major natural hazard risks. Findings show that (1) practitioners at all levels operate in highly uncertain environments and therefore have specific knowledge needs at different times and for different purposes, (2) disaster risk knowledge was perceived to be most effective when scientifically credible and focused on identifying likely impacts on the capacity of communities to function, and (3) disaster risk knowledge outputs and the processes used to cocreate them were perceived to be equally important. Using cocreation to combine researcher credibility with practitioner relevancy enhanced the legitimacy of Project AF8 processes, the collective disaster risk knowledge they facilitated, and the wider project. In hindsight, a greater focus at the outset on developing a formal coproduction structure may have increased the pace of cocreation, particularly in the early phases. Future interdisciplinary disaster risk management initiatives could benefit by adopting contextually relevant aspects of this example to strengthen the science-practice interface for more effective pre-event planning and decision making. |
|---|