Balancing Power and Co-production; Comment on “Research Co-production: An Underused Pathway to Impact”

Document Type : Commentary

Authors

1 School of Social Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, Australia

2 Department of Social Work, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

3 Centre for Patient Quality and Safety, Institute for Health Transformation, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia

4 Department of General Practice and Primary Care, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

Abstract

The editorial by Rycroft-Malone and colleagues highlights the fact that despite considerable efforts, knowledge translation and implementation sciences fail to have the desired impact on practice, policy and service delivery. As integrated knowledge translation and co-production/co-design academics, we resonated with several themes relevant to our own work. First, that co-production amplified opportunity for evidence to be translated into practice. Second, while not a new concept, the notion of partnership approaches needs to pay greater attention to sharing power in a way that ensures decolonsing approaches are embedded with humility and trust. Third, the micro, meso, and macro levels are contributing to the knowledge translation landscape. Our commentary enhances the discussion of decolonising research, of thinking about the impacts of research and indeed, “reimagining” what future impacts may look like. Further, we suggest the neo-liberally positioned academia needs to include other knowledge/livedexperience service users and recognise true, equitable and nurtured collaboration. 

Keywords


  1. Rycroft-Malone J, I DG, Kothari A, McCutcheon C. Research coproduction: an underused pathway to impact. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2024;13:8461. doi:34172/ijhpm.2024.8461
  2. Smith B, Williams O, Bone L. Co-production: a resource to guide co-producing research in the sport, exercise, and health sciences. Qual Res Sport Exerc Health. 2023;15(2):159-187. doi:1080/2159676x.2022.2052946
  3. Boyle D, Harris M. The Challenge of Co-production: How Equal Partnerships Between Professionals and the Public are Crucial to Improving Public Services. London: NESTA; 2009.
  4. Ramage ER, Burke M, Galloway M, et al. Fit for purpose. Co-production of complex behavioural interventions. A practical guide and exemplar of co-producing a telehealth-delivered exercise intervention for people with stroke. Health Res Policy Syst. 2022;20(1):2. doi:1186/s12961-021-00790-2
  5. Hall BL, Tandon R. Decolonization of knowledge, epistemicide, participatory research and higher education. Research for All. 2017;1(1):6-19. doi:18546/rfa.01.1.02
  6. Finlay SM, Doyle M, Kennedy M. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Human Research Ethics Committees (HRECs) are essential in promoting our health and wellbeing. Public Health Res Pract. 2023;33(2):3322312. doi:17061/phrp3322312
  7. Datta R. Decolonizing both researcher and research and its effectiveness in Indigenous research. Res Ethics. 2017;14(2):1-24. doi:1177/1747016117733296
  8. Dudgeon P, Bray A, Darlaston-Jones D, Walker R. Aboriginal Participatory Action Research: An Indigenous Research Methodology Strengthening Decolonisation and Social and Emotional Wellbeing. Melbourne: Lowitja Institute; 2020.
  9. Paradies Y. Unsettling truths: modernity, (de-)coloniality and Indigenous futures. Postcolonial Stud. 2020;23(4):438-456. doi:1080/13688790.2020.1809069
  10. Jagosh J, Bush PL, Salsberg J, et al. A realist evaluation of community-based participatory research: partnership synergy, trust building and related ripple effects. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:725. doi:1186/s12889-015-1949-1
  11. Cameron J, Humphreys C, Kothari A, Hegarty K. Creating an action plan to advance knowledge translation in a domestic violence research network: a deliberative dialogue. Evid Policy. 2021;17(3):467-485. doi:1332/174426421x16106634806152
  12. Cameron J, Humphreys C, Kothari A, Hegarty K. Exploring the knowledge translation of domestic violence research: a literature review. Health Soc Care Community. 2020;28(6):1898-1914. doi:1111/hsc.13070
  13. Moosa IA. Publish or perish: origin, evolution and conceptual issues. In: Moosa IA, ed. Publish or Perish: Perceived Benefits versus Unintended Consequences. Edward Elgar Publishing; 2024:1-19.
  14. Gibbons M. A new mode of knowledge production. In: Rutten R, Boekema F, Kuijpers E, eds. Economic Geography of Higher Education: Knowledge Infrastructure and Learning Regions. London: Routledge; 2003:243-257.
  15. Gibbons M, Limoges C, Scott P, Schwartzman S, Nowotny H, Trow M. The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: SAGE Publications Ltd; 1994.
  16. Grindell C, Coates E, Croot L, O'Cathain A. The use of co-production, co-design and co-creation to mobilise knowledge in the management of health conditions: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022;22(1):877. doi:1186/s12913-022-08079-y
  17. Dunn SI, Bhati DK, Reszel J, Kothari A, McCutcheon C, Graham ID. Understanding how and under what circumstances integrated knowledge translation works for people engaged in collaborative research: metasynthesis of IKTRN casebooks. JBI Evid Implement. 2023;21(3):277-293. doi:1097/xeb.0000000000000367
  18. Fiolet R. Undertaking Co-Design with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Communities? Begin by Addressing Ongoing Mistrust. 2023. https://alivenetwork.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/WIR-3-Renee-Fiolet.pdf. Accessed April 2, 2024.

Articles in Press, Corrected Proof
Available Online from 07 December 2024
  • Receive Date: 15 October 2024
  • Revise Date: 25 November 2024
  • Accept Date: 04 December 2024
  • First Publish Date: 07 December 2024