Co-creation – Integration and Implementation Insights

Recognize and value linguistic and conceptual pluralism!

February 24, 2026February 12, 2026

By Ulli Vilsmaier.

How can we best recognise and value linguistic and conceptual pluralism in naming what we do when we work in international environments? What are the limitations of descriptors such as transdisicplinarity, participatory action research and co-creation?

Terminology is really an issue when working across linguistic, disciplinary and professional boundaries. Working internationally we are now accustomed to using the hyper-centralized language, English; we tend to delegate translation more and more to machine-based algorithms; and we easily forget the consequences of working in a language that is not our mother tongue nor anchored in our cultural and social environment.

A hyper-centralized language has great benefits, but also major weaknesses.

Lessons for transformative research from co-creating a conference without a fixed plan

November 27, 2025September 23, 2025

By Thomas Bruhn.

In developing a conference, what does it take for people to leave their comfort zones to co-design something new? What possibilities does this open up for more meaningful conference designs? What are the broader lessons for transformative research?

In 2023–2024, I worked with the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research to develop a conference format for the German sustainability research community – something to help re-establish connection after the isolating COVID pandemic years, and to strengthen interdisciplinary exchange. The Ministry wanted something new and innovative.

Early in the conversation, I sensed hesitation when unconventional, interactive conference formats were suggested.

An approach for operationalizing and sustaining systems improvements

March 25, 2025

By Dintle Molosiwa.

How can we develop more effective interventions that address root causes of insufficient system performance? How can systems-informed interventions achieve and sustain more impactful system improvements? What strategies ensure multisectoral collaboration in systems improvement initiatives?

This i2Insights contribution is based on experience in improving health systems in South Africa, Senegal, Zambia, Botswana and Chemonics global health supply chain portfolio, but is likely to have wider relevance for other systems and countries.

Colleagues and I (Chemonics Health Practice and SYSTAC Africa Hub, 2024) distilled existing system thinking frameworks into a four-step cycle: examine; co-create; implement and adapt; and adopt and scale.

Not just in our heads: Embodied and creative practices for creating connection

February 26, 2026March 19, 2024

By Corinne Lamain and Jillian Student

authors_corinne-lamain_jillian-student — 1. Corinne Lamain (biography)
2. Jillian Student (biography)

How can embodied and creative practices, such as dance and poetry, be used to bridge different forms of knowledge?

Transdisciplinarity requires crossing many boundaries, including knowledge fields, perspectives, languages, personalities, and geographic areas. This is often somewhat uncomfortable. Arts-based and embodied approaches can support creative thinking, perspective-taking and communication. For some, these art-based methods feel more natural than for others, but we suggest that the willingness to leave our comfort zone (‘embracing the discomfort’) opens up space for shared vulnerability that is much needed for integrating perspectives. Moreover, doing these practices under time pressure helps remove the tendency to self-criticise and strive for perfection in artistic expression. To be fair, creative practices are not everyone’s style. It is important to note that the effort is not about co-creating beautiful artwork, but rather to facilitate alternative means of expression.

A pattern language for knowledge co-creation

March 28, 2023

By Yuko Onishi

How can pattern language be used to share tips for knowledge co-creation in transdisciplinary research? What is pattern language?

Pattern language

Pattern language is an idea that originated in the field of architecture and city planning in the 1970s. The American architect Christopher Alexander and his colleagues created a common language, referred to as pattern language, that can be used by non-experts to participate in the process of city planning and building design.  

In this pattern language, the rules of thumb for solving common and timeless problems in design are summarised in units called ‘patterns.’ Each pattern describes a specific problem, the situation or context in which it likely occurs, and the core of the solution to that problem.

The solutions are not written as specific procedures or manuals, but rather as ‘hints’ for solving the problem. Therefore, the solution can be used in many ways based on one’s own needs and situation. 

Stakeholder engagement primer: 4. Options for engagement

November 13, 2024November 4, 2021

By Gabriele Bammer

primer_stakeholder-engagement_4

What options are available to researchers for including stakeholders in a research project in order to develop a more comprehensive understanding of the problem, provide ideas about addressing it and help the research to support policy or practice change? Can different stakeholders be included in different ways? Can the same group of stakeholders participate in different ways in various aspects of the research? What obligations do researchers have to participating stakeholders over the course of that project?

It can be useful to consider 5 ways in which researchers can include stakeholders in a project:

1. Inform:
Researchers provide stakeholders with balanced and objective information to assist them in understanding the research.

2. Consult:
Researchers obtain stakeholder feedback on the research.

Conditions for co-creation

September 11, 2024October 9, 2018

By Gabriele Bammer

This is part of a series of occasional “synthesis blog posts” drawing together insights across blog posts on related topics.

What is required for effective co-creation, especially between researchers and stakeholders? In particular, what contributes to a productive environment for co-creation? And what considerations are relevant for deciding who to involve?

Twelve blog posts which have addressed these issues are discussed. Bringing those insights together provides a richer picture of how to achieve effective co-creation.

What makes a productive environment for co-creation?

A good starting point is to be working in an environment and organizational culture that support co-creation and to have sufficient financial, personnel and other resources, as pointed out by Kit Macleod and Arnim Wiek.

Dialogue-based processes are often an important part of co-creation and they need to be established as a generative space, focused on synergy, not conflict.

Improving mutual consultation among key stakeholders to optimize the use of research evidence

August 24, 2022June 15, 2017

By Allison Metz

Processes to support the uptake of research evidence call for each of the key stakeholders to consider the challenges faced by other key stakeholders in making good use of research evidence. When stakeholders have the opportunity to consider perspectives other than their own, they will generally have a broader understanding of the problem space, and, in turn a greater commitment to co-creating prototypes for improving research translation.

Let’s consider a real world example in New York City’s public child welfare system.

Critical Back-Casting

August 24, 2022February 9, 2017

By Gerald Midgley

How can we design new services or strategies when the participation of marginalized stakeholders is vital to ethicality? How can we liberate people’s creativity so we can move from incremental improvements to more fundamental change?

To answer these questions, I have brought together insights from Russ Ackoff and Werner Ulrich to develop a new method that I call Critical Back-Casting.

Russ Ackoff, writing in the 1980s, is critical of organizations that focus on incremental improvements without ever asking whether they are doing the right thing in the first place. Thus, they are at risk of continually ‘improving’ the wrong thing, when they would be better off going for a more radical redesign. Ackoff makes two far-reaching prescriptions to tackle this problem.

Citizen science and participatory modeling

February 14, 2024February 2, 2017

By Rebecca Jordan and Steven Gray

authors_rebecca-jordan_steven-gray — 1. Rebecca Jordan (biography)
2. Steven Gray (biography)

As investigators who engage the public in both modeling and research endeavors we address two major questions: Does citizen science have a place within the participatory modeling research community? And does participatory modeling have a place in the citizen science research community?

Let us start with definitions. Citizen science has been defined in many ways, but we will keep the definition simple. Citizen science refers to endeavors where persons who do not consider themselves scientific experts work with those who do consider themselves experts (around a specific issue) to address an authentic research question.

Enabling co-creation: From learning cycles to aligning values, rules and knowledge

September 11, 2024January 19, 2017

By Lorrae van Kerkhoff

How do we improve? In the context of sustainable development, we continually confront the question of how we can develop meaningful and positive actions towards a ‘better’ world (social, ecological, economic outcomes) despite inherent uncertainties about what the future holds.

Co-creation is one concept among several that seek to reorientate us from simplistic, largely linear ideas of progress towards more nuanced, subtle ideas that highlight that there are many different aspects of ‘progress’, and these can be deeply contested and challenging to reconcile. Enabling co-creation, then – or operationalizing it – means finding practical ways to work together, to deal with our different experiences, aspirations and expectations as well as the uncertainties of the future.

Co-creation sits within a learning paradigm that suggests engagement, social and mutual learning, adaptation and flexibility are key to enabling action in the face of uncertainty. But how do we think about learning?

Getting to a shared definition of a “good” solution in collaborative problem-solving

August 24, 2022January 12, 2017

By Doug Easterling

How can collaborative groups move past their divisions and find solutions that advance their shared notions of what would be good for the community?

Complex problems – such as how to expand access to high-quality health care, how to reduce poverty, how to remedy racial disparities in educational attainment and economic opportunity, and how to promote economic development while at the same time protecting natural resources – can’t be solved with technical remedies or within a narrow mindset. They require the sort of multi-disciplinary, nuanced analysis that can only be achieved by engaging a variety of stakeholders in a co-creative process.

Bringing together stakeholders with diverse perspectives allows for a comprehensive analysis of complex problems, but this also raises the risk of a divisive process.