11. A new vision of open knowledge systems for sustainability: Opportunities for social scientists

The process of producing, organising and using knowledge in science, education and policy is often depicted as a matter of “filling gaps” in an imaginary closed container. Experts may pour in their exclusive ideas on what needs to be known until it is full (Figure 11.1). Of course, this is a caricature of how knowledge systems function and the type of objectives they are meant to accomplish. It hardly fits with what people need to tackle today’s global societal challenges. The increasing interconnectedness of knowledge, the speed of change, and the complexity of global systems make it difficult to support the view that any single type of knowledge, practice or even learning process alone is sufficient to deal with the major global environmental challenges of today. In addition, local structures are subject to continuous reconfiguration.


Introduction
The process of producing, organising and using knowledge in science, education and policy is often depicted as a matter of "filling gaps" in an imaginary closed container. Experts may pour in their exclusive ideas on what needs to be known until it is full (Figure 11.1). Of course, this is a caricature of how knowledge systems function and the type of objectives they are meant to accomplish. It hardly fits with what people need to tackle today's global societal challenges. The increasing interconnectedness of knowledge, the speed of change, and the complexity of global systems make it difficult to support the view that any single type of knowledge, practice or even learning process alone is sufficient to deal with the major global environmental challenges of today. In addition, local structures are subject to continuous reconfiguration.
A new view is required of how human information and knowledge systems operate, how they should be organised and how they should relate to the functioning of social ecological systems in the organisation of science, education and policy (Figure 11.2).
This world view should unveil the contradictions, deficiencies and misconceptions that particular modes of knowing and learning create, and that are not embodied in specific social-ecological contexts and practices. In this regard, we talk about knowledge systems -not simply "knowledge" -because this concept refers to multiple sets of interrelated knowledge components and their interactions which have their own internal boundaries, dynamics and logic, and which are the result of social-ecological processes.    (Cornell et al., 2013). 1 Many such practices and ways of organising knowledge for sustainability already exist. They range from developing collaborative programmes for climate adaptation in the Andes, to implementing a large-scale project for ecosystem restoration in Niger, to mobilising social expertise and networks of trust in a transition town in the United Kingdom, and to developing new education and research schemes across the globe. 2 These knowledge-building initiatives are not designed or evaluated by experts alone. Instead they are co-decided, co-produced and co-validated in partnership, by knowledge holders in different social-ecological contexts in which specific needs and demands are to be fulfilled.

An important aspect of this vision is that information and knowledge systems operating
in an open space must be coupled with social-ecological systems dynamics. This will allow feedback that encourages the modification of behaviours and practices (Tàbara and Chabay, 2013).
This calls for new capacities to deal with social-ecologically situated problems and needs, which usually requires the empowerment of new agents as well as the redistribution of rights and responsibilities. This process is even more central in the open knowledge landscape. This means that criteria and capabilities to deal with "boundary objects" are important in finding innovative ways in which social scientists can help link contextspecific needs with generalisable research outcomes (see Clark et al., 2011). Social scientists could then use such results, and perhaps organise them in the form of theories and models to support sustainability-oriented transformations.

Grounded transformation theory for sustainability
One of the major contributions social scientists could make from an open knowledge perspective is to develop a solid theory about how to transform global social-ecological systems interactions to meet the sustainability predicament. This could clarify ways to improve the quality of such interactions at various levels and domains of human action; and try to explain the structural constraints and opportunities to doing so. However, such an endeavour cannot be undertaken by one person or discipline alone. A plausible, grounded transformational theory must be built on the civic involvement of many people around the world. They must be committed to contribute to the documentation, classification and analysis of numerous experiences and cases to unravel what works and what does not in terms of changing current arrangements and institutions toward sustainability. 3 A grounded transformational theory should help us understand how to expand our collective perceptual and cognitive capabilities, and sharpen our moral judgement to deal with the complexities of sustainability transformations. It should enable us to identify the types of incentives, options and resources most conducive to triggering this global transition, and foster the institutional and structural social changes needed to deal with the most urgent challenges. If we place learning at the heart of transformation, recognising

New opportunities for social scientists, policymakers and funders
This alternative vision offers a multitude of professional development and innovation opportunities for social scientists. They can play a decisive role in identifying key knowledgeholders relevant to meeting particular needs, and ensuring the sustainable management of a given social-ecological system of reference; and they can contribute to ensuring a fairer distribution of rights and responsibilities in knowledge generation, interpretation, integration and ownership.
The following areas of action may be of interest and relevance to social scientists.
Their individual selection of priorities will depend on their own interests, capabilities and institutional commitments.

Methodological innovation
Developing new concepts, tools and methods that go beyond simple representation of social-ecological systems dynamics and support their transformation (Tàbara et al., 2010). These new tools could be oriented towards stimulating broad public engagement and creating a sense of ownership of knowledge processes and outcomes, for example by including the arts and other forms of knowledge production and representation.

Research and education programming and funding
Integrating agenda-setting processes in national research plans and programmes with other political agendas, in order to mainstream institutional transformative sustainability. Developing new criteria for scientific excellence and evaluation in research policies.
These may not necessarily be incompatible with existing ones, but should be extended and reframed following a reflective process in which context-based processes, goals and capacities to deal with sustainability and institutional transformation are introduced.

Cultural and societal transformation
Carrying out participatory processes to explore place-based transformation pathways Supporting reframing processes concerning societal goal-setting and collective sensemaking. This can be done by embedding knowledge production processes within concrete social-ecological contexts of action in which stakeholders' needs and perspectives have been identified and taken into account.
Counterbalancing existing power structures and inequalities, as inequality is a major driver of unsustainability. This could be done by supporting the redistribution of institutional rights and responsibilities derived from new forms of coupled knowledge production and use. Attention ought also to be drawn to oppressed groups, such as women, ethnic minorities and young people, and giving them the opportunity to speak out.
Developing and implementing economic and social incentives to support sustainability.
Here conflict situations may be reframed and turned into win-win, systemic and sustainability-oriented strategies, perhaps linking climate change mitigation, adaptation and sustainable development.
Helping contemporary societies to extend our perceptual, cognitive and moral systems of reference to include the rights of future generations, and promote respect for the value of non-human forms of life. These should be considered from a global perspective and in a relational way, in order to overcome many of the false modern dualisms that hinder sustainability learning (Tàbara and Pahl-Wostl, 2007). 5

Concluding remarks
Humankind is now engaged on a "learning race" against the speed and intensity  3. Elinor Ostrom's efforts to examine the conditions for the sustainable governance of common pool resources are perhaps the best example of such approaches that link empirical evidence with sustainability theory (see Ostrom, 2009).
4. This could benefit from collaborative learning processes involving problems and projects combined with visioning and modelling techniques and other models of systems learning.
5. Among these cultural dualisms are those related to our contemporary concepts and values about time and space as well as our basic ideas about what constitute social-ecological system processes. Dichotomies between human and non-human information systems, interactions and structures are instances of these; for example, we are in nature as much as nature is in all of us.
6. In this regard, the emergence of "global systems science" could make this possible, with the extensive use of participatory information and communication tools www.gsdp.eu and http://blog. global-systems-science.eu.