Co-production of knowledge

A conceptual approach for integrative knowledge management in planning


  • David Brian Kaiser Leibniz Centre for Agriculture Landscape Research
  • Nadin Gaasch Leibniz Centre for Agriculture Landscape Research
  • Thomas Weith Leibniz Centre for Agriculture Landscape Research




Sustainable land use needs a manageable nexus of knowledge from planning practice, policy makers, the private economy, and civic society, as well as from scientific research. This is mutually dependent on the communicative and collaborative turn in spatial planning as well as by transdisciplinary research approaches. This paper offers an approach how to organise knowledge management and co-production of knowledge in the context of complex land use decisions. Therefore, a prototype of an internet-based knowledge platform is introduced based on a theoretical reflection of concepts for integrated information and knowledge management, as well as on practical experiences derived from a German case study. We conclude that sustainable land use requires Planning Support Systems (PSS) that combine transdisciplinary perspectives in order to co-produce robust knowledge. This also implies a transdisciplinary design of PSS. Challenges of implementation are discussed and further research is specified.

How to Cite

Kaiser, D. B., Gaasch, N., & Weith, T. (2017). Co-production of knowledge: A conceptual approach for integrative knowledge management in planning. Transactions of the Association of European Schools of Planning, 1(1), 18–32.







Allmendinger, P., Haughton, G., Knieling, J. and Othengrafen, F. (eds.) (2015) Soft spaces in Europe. Re-negotiating governance, boundaries and borders. London: Routledge.

Allmendinger, P. and Tewdwr-Jones, M. (2002) The communicative turn in urban planning: Unravelling paradigmatic, imperialistic and moralistic dimensions, Space and Polity, 6, pp.5-24.

Anand, A. and Singh, M. D. (2011) Understanding knowledge management: A literature review, International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 3 (2), pp.926-939.

Argyris, C. (1976) Single-loop and double-loop models in research on decision making, Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, pp.363-375.

Argyris, C. and Schön, D. A. (1974) Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Campbell, H. (2012) Planning to change the world: Between knowledge and action lies synthesis, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 32 (2), pp.135-146.

Cash, D. W., Adger, W., Berkes, F., Garden, P., Lebel, L., Olsson, P., Pritchard, L. and Young, O. (2006a) Scale and cross-scale dynamics: Governance and information in a multilevel world, Ecology and Society, 11 (2), p.8.

Cash, D. W., Borck, J. C. and Patt, A. G. (2006b) Countering the loading-dock approach to linking science and decision making: Comparative analysis of El Niño/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) Forecasting Systems, Science, Technology and Human Values, 31, pp.465-494.

Cash, D. W., Clark, W. C., Alcock, F., Dickson, N. M., Eckley, N., Guston, D. H. and Mitchell, R. B. (2003) Knowledge systems for sustainable development, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 100, pp.8086-8091.

Celino, A. and Concilio, G. (2010) Participation in environmental spatial planning: Structuring-scenario to manage knowledge in action, Futures, 42, pp.733-742.

Cornell, S., Berkhout, F., Tuinstra, W., Tàbara, J. D., Jäger, J., Chabay, I. and De Wit, B. (2013) Opening up knowledge systems for better responses to global environmental change, Environmental Science and Policy, 28 (C), pp.60-70.

Cullingworth, B., Nadin, V., Hart, T., Davoudi, S., Pendlebury, J., Vigar, J., Webb, D. and Townshend, T. (eds.) (2015) Town and country planning in the UK. Abingdon: Routledge.

Davoudi, S. (2006) Evidence-based planning: Rhetoric and reality, disP –The Planning Review, 42 (165), pp.14-24.

Davoudi, S. (2015) Planning as practice of knowing, Planning Theory, 14, pp.316-331.

De Roo, G. and Silva, E. A. (eds.) (2010) A planner’s encounter with complexity. Farnham: Ashgate.

Dilling, L. and Lemos, M. C. (2011) Creating usable science: Opportunities and constraints for climate knowledge use and their implications for science policy, Global Environmental Change, 21, pp.680-689.

Enengel, B., Muhar, A., Penker, M., Freyer, B., Drlik, S. and Ritter, F. (2012) Co-production of knowledge in transdisciplinary doctoral theses on landscape development – An analysis of actor roles and knowledge types in different research phases, Landscape and Urban Planning, 105 (1-2), pp.106-117.

Evers, M. and Hofmeister, S. (2010) Flächenpolitik durch nachhaltige, geschlechtergerechte Stadtentwicklung und partizipative Planung. Gender Mainstreaming als Strategie der Flächenvorsorge – Konzepte und mögliche Instrumente (Land use policy through sustainable, gender equitable urban development and participative planning. Gender mainstreaming as a strategy for spatial precaution – Concepts and possible instruments), Raumforschung und Raumordnung, 68, pp.35-47.

Faludi, A. (2000) The performance of spatial planning, Planning Practice & Research, 15 (4), pp.299-318.

Faehnle, M. and Tyrväinen, L. (2013) A framework for evaluating and designing collaborative planning, Land Use Policy, 34, pp.332-341.

Friedmann, J. (1987) Planning in the public domain: From idea to action. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Fürst, D. and Scholles, F. (eds.) (2008) Handbuch Theorien und Methoden der Raum- und Umweltplanung (Handbook theory and methods of spatial planning and environmental planning). 3rd edition, Detmold: Verlag Dorothea Rhon.

Geertman, S. (2006) Potentials of planning support: A planning-conceptual approach, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 33, pp.863-880.

Geertman, S. (2015) Planning support systems (PSS) as research instruments. In: Silva, E.A., Healey, P., Harris, N. and Van Der Broeck, P. (eds.) The Routledge handbook of planning research methods. New York: Routledge, pp.322-334.

Geertman, S. and Stillwell, J. (2004) Planning support systems: An inventory of current practice, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 28, pp.291-310.

Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. and Trow, M. (1994) The new production of knowledge – The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: SAGE.

Goetz, S. J., Shortle J. S. and Bergstrom J. C. (eds.) (2005) Land use problems and conflicts. Causes, consequences and solutions. New York: Routledge.

Hasler Roumois, U. (2007) Studienbuch Wissensmanagement: Grundlagen der Wissensarbeit in Wirtschafts-, Non-Profit- und Public-Organisationen (Knowledge management – A students’ handbook. Principles of knowledge work in business, non-profit and public organisations). Zürich: Orell Füssli Verlag.

Healey, P. (1996) The communicative turn in planning theory and its implications for spatial strategy formations, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 32, pp.217-234.

Healey, P. (2004) The treatment of space and place in the new strategic spatial planning in Europe, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28 (1), pp.45-67.

Hirsch Hadorn, G., Hoffmann-Riem, H., Biber-Klemm, S., Grossenbacher-Mansuy, W., Joye, D., Pohl, C. and Zemp, E. (eds.) (2008) Handbook of transdisciplinary research. Heidelberg: Springer.

Hummelbrunner, R. and Jones, J. (2013) A guide for planning and strategy development in the face of complexity. ODI Background Notes. [Online] Available from: [Accessed 26 May, 2016].

Ibert, O. (2003) Innovationsorientierte Planung. Verfahren und Strategien zur Organisation von Innovation (Innovation-oriented planning. Policies and strategies for organizing innovation). Stadt, Raum, Gesellschaft 19. Opladen: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

Kaiser, D. B., Köhler, T. and Weith, T. (2016) Knowledge management in sustainability research projects: Concepts, effective models, and examples in a multi-stakeholder environment, Applied Environmental Education & Communication, 15, pp.4-17.

Kajikawa, Y., Tacoa, F. and Yamaguchi, K. (2014) Sustainability science: The changing landscape of sustainability research, Sustainability Science, 9, pp.431-438.

Klosterman, R. E. (1997) Planning support systems: A new perspective on computer-aided planning, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 17, pp.45-54.

Kolb, D. A. and Fry, R. (1975) Towards an applied theory of experiential learning. In: Cooper, C. (ed.) Theories of group process. London: John Wiley, pp.33-57.

Lang, D. J., Wiek A., Bergmann, M., Stauffacher, P., Moll, P., Swilling, M. and Thomas, C. J. (2012) Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: Practice, principles, and challenges, Sustainability Science, 7 (1), pp.25-43.

Laurian, L. and Shaw, M. M. (2008) Evaluation of public participation: The practices of certified planners, Journal of Planning Education and Research, 28, pp.293-309.

Lemos, M. C. and Morehouse, B. J. (2005) The co-production of science and policy in integrated climate assessments, Global Environmental Change, 15, pp.57-68.

Mann, C. and Jeanneaux, P. (2009) Two approaches for understanding land-use conflict to improve rural planning and management, Journal of Rural and Community Development, 4, pp.118-141.

Millar, C. C. J. M. and Choi, C. J. (2003) Advertising and knowledge intermediaries: Managing the ethical challenges of intangibles, Journal of Business Ethics, 48, pp.267-277.

Miller, T. R., Wiek, A., Sarewitz, D., Robinson, J., Olsson, L., Kriebel, D. and Loorbach, D. (2014). The future of sustainability science: A solutions-oriented research agenda, Sustainability Science, 9, pp.239-246.

Müller, D. and Munroe, D. K. (2014) Current and future challenges in land-use science, Journal of Land Use Science, 9, pp.133-142.

Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. (1995) The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of information. New York: Oxford University Press.

North, K. (2011) Wissensorientierte Unternehmensführung: Wertschöpfung durch Wissen. 5. Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.

North, K. and Kumta, G. (2014) Knowledge management. Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Opdam, P., Westerink, J., Vos, C. and De Vries, B. (2015) The role and evolution of boundary concepts in transdisciplinary landscape planning, Planning Theory & Practice, 16, pp.63-78.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD] (1996) The knowledge-based economy. Paris: OECD.

Pahl-Wostl, C. (2009) A conceptual framework for analysing adaptive capacity and multi-level learning processes in resource governance regimes, Global Environmental Change, 19, pp.354-365.

Parker, R. and Hine, D. (2013) The role of knowledge intermediaries in developing firm learning capabilities, European Planning Studies, 22, pp.1048-1061.

Pelzer, P., Geertman, S., Van Der Heijden, R. and Rouwette, E. (2014) The added value of Planning Support Systems: A practitioner’s perspective, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 48, pp.16-27.

Pohl, C. (2011) What is progress in transdisciplinary research? Futures, 43, pp.618-626.

Pohl, C., Rist, S., Zimmermann, A., Fry, P., Gurung, G. S., Schneider, F., Speranza, C. I., Kiteme, B., Boillat, S., Serrano, E., Hirsch Hadorn, G. and Wiesmann, U. (2010) Researchers’ roles in knowledge co-production: experience from sustainability research in Kenya, Switzerland, Bolivia and Nepal, Science and Public Policy, 37, pp.267-281.

Rinner, C., Keßler, C. and Andrulis, S. (2008) The use of Web 2.0 concepts to support deliberation in spatial decision-making, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 32, pp.386-395.

Roux, D. J., Rogers, K. H., Biggs, H. C., Ashton, P. J. and Sergeant, A. (2006) Bridging the science–management divide: Moving from unidirectional knowledge transfer to knowledge interfacing and sharing, Ecology and Society, 11 (1).

Rydin, Y. (2007) Re-examining the role of knowledge in planning theory, Planning Theory, 6, pp.52-68.

Rydin, Y., Amjad, U. and Whitaker, M. (2007) Environmentally sustainable construction: Knowledge and learning in London planning departments, Planning Theory & Practice, 8, pp.363-380.

Rubenstein-Montano, B. (2000) A survey of knowledge-based information systems for urban planning: moving towards knowledge management, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 24, pp.155-172.

Saarloos, D. J. M., Arentze, T. A., Borgers, A. W. J. and Timmermans, H. J. P. (2008) A multi-agent paradigm as structuring principle for planning support systems, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 32, pp.29-40.

Salet, W. (2014) The authenticity of spatial planning knowledge, European Planning Studies, 22, pp.293-305.

Scholz, R. (2015) Transdisciplinarity as a method of science-practice collaboration: Definition(s), prerequisites and challenges in the start-up phase. Keynote, 1st JPI Climate Joint Call Kick-off Meeting, Brussels, June 16, 2015. [Online] Available from: [Accessed 26 May, 2016].

Sieber, R. (2006) Public participation geographic information systems: A literature review and framework, Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 96, pp.491-507.

Stuetzer, C. M., Koehler, T., Carley, K. M. and Thiem, G. (2013) “Brokering” behavior in collaborative learning systems, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 100, pp.94-107.

te Brömmelstroet, M. (2012) Transparency, flexibility, simplicity: From buzzwords to strategies for real PSS improvement, Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 36, pp.96-104.

te Brömmelstroet, M. (2013) Performance of Planning Support Systems: What is it, and how do we report on it? Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 41, pp.299-308.

te Brömmelstroet, M. and Bertolini, L. (2008) Developing land use and transport PSS: Meaningful information through a dialogue between modelers and planners, Transport Policy, 15, pp.251-259.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO] (2005) Towards knowledge societies. Paris: UNESCO. [Online] Available from: [Accessed 19 January, 2016].

Von Der Dunk, A., Grêt-Regamey, A., Dalang, T. and Hersperger, A. M. (2011) Defining a typology of peri-urban land-use conflicts – A case study from Switzerland, Landscape and Urban Planning, 101, pp.149-156.

Vonk, G. A. (2006) Improving planning support. The use of Planning Support Systems for spatial planning (published PhD thesis). In Borchert, J. G., Van Amersfoort, J. M. M., Berendsen, H. J. A., Druijven, P. C. J., Kouwenhoven, A. O. and Scholten, H. (eds.) Netherlands Geographical Studies 340, Utrecht: Utrecht University, Faculty of Geosciences. [Online] Available from: [Accessed 19 January, 2016].

Vonk, G., Geertman S. and Schot, P. (2005) Bottlenecks blocking widespread usage of planning support systems, Environment and Planning A, 37, pp.909-924.

Weith, T., Schulz, K., Gaasch, N., Seppelt, R., Werntze, A. and Eppink, F. (2010) Towards integration: Sustainable land management. A new German research funding measure, Local Land & Soil News, 34/35 II/10, pp.21-22.

Weller, K. (2010) Knowledge representation in the social semantic web. Berlin: De Gruyter, Saur.

Wenger, E. (2004) Knowledge management as a doughnut: Shaping your knowledge strategy through communities of practice, Ivey Business Journal, January/February, Richard Ivey School of Business Foundation. [Online] Available from: [Accessed 19 January, 2016].

Wickson, F., Carew, A. L. and Russell, A. W. (2006) Transdisciplinary research: characteristics, quandaries and quality, Futures, 38 (9), pp.1046-1059.

Ziegler, A. (1993) Wer moderieren will, muß Maß nehmen und Maß geben (Who wants to moderate, has to take the measurements and to provide tailor-made solutions). In: Wohlgemuth, A. (ed.) Moderation in Organisationen (Facilitation in organisations). Stuttgart: Haupt, pp.17-53.

Zscheischler, J., Rogga, S. and Weith, T. (2014) Experiences with transdisciplinary research. Sustainable land management third year status conference, Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 31, pp.751-756.