Knowledge mobilization: the important component of the eco-social learning process

Lozhkina A.S.

Knowledge mobilization takes place through the variety of communication channels that humanity can use due to real and virtual communication: conversations, meetings, training sessions, seminars and more. Knowledge is an important intangible asset, part of an eco-value exchange. The mobilization of knowledge, the appeal to eco-social culture can become a self-defense of humanity from dehumanization, unrestrained unfair consumption, and various ugly manifestations of aggressiveness.

Knowledge mobilization involves the design, implementation, and review of social and technological activities and processes to improve the creating, sharing, and applying or using of knowledge” (AS5037, 2005). Researchers (Boland and Tenkasi, 1995; Engestrom, 1999; Toulmin, 1999; Wenger et al., 2002) consider socially-constructed, collective knowledge as the predominant source of learning, creativity, and innovation. We believe that knowledge mobilization is important for the activation of subjectivity, without which it is impossible to acquire practical skills essential for the formation of eco-social processes, assuming compliance with the environmental imperative (non-harm) and creativity in professional activity (Chigirev V. A., Yunatskevich P. I., 2002-2021).

Besides the depletion of planetary resources by sociopaths and parasites, humanity is faced with the phenomenon of digital sociopathy, which exploits an increasing number of people on the planet through the absorption of time and attention via the Internet (meaningless pastime in virtual reality, physical and social inaction, chasing ‘likes’, self-mania, and loss of interest in knowledge as the process of self-improvement) (Boychevska V. V., 2018-2020).

The virus of digital sociopathy happens and is growing exponentially. In these conditions, in order to minimize and limit harmful side effects, humanity needs to mobilize and informalize knowledge to preserve itself as a species (and the human image itself), through intra-group creative cooperation, mutual assistance, establishing positive feedback, self-coordination of collective relations through observing useful cultural traditions, studying and preserving the cultural heritage of people, studying and preserving the natural resources of our beautiful planet, and preventing harm even in outer space.

Effective components of eco-social training are the development of cognitive abilities, the initial development and transfer of behavioral skills in the field of culture, traditions, and linguistic tools (human languages).

The development of culture makes people's lives more protected. Culturally useful identification of interdisciplinary and sectoral knowledge develops socially useful priorities and at the same time restrains parasitic and individually beneficial ones. Culture is more a group phenomenon than an individual one. Research conducted by the laboratories of the Institute of Cultural Values and Resources suggests that collective informational selection of knowledge is better than individual in coping with the task of cutting off "harmful choice" and implementing "useful choice".

Scientists have identified several crucial principles of knowledge mobilization as an approach contributing to community-based natural resource management (e.g., Blaikie, 2006; Robinson, 2006) which we supplement, since in the XXI century these principles can be implemented exclusively through eco-management consisting in making managerial decisions in accordance with the principle of "not harming" people. The mechanism of eco-management is based on reversed social connections. The draft of each management decision is discussed and evaluated in community. Then this solution becomes eco-friendly. Then the community participates in the implementation of this decision and also continues to evaluate and discuss the implementation process itself. It is possible to correct or even completely cancel this management decision if people find harm to themselves and others. It is necessary to teach children Eco-management so that they naturally apply this mechanism in social practice when they become adults. This is how we will change our lives for the better.

Knowledge mobilization is relevant for both quantitatively small and macro-communities. The expressions “community of interest”, “community of learning” and, most significantly, “community of practice” have captured the attention of many in the area of knowledge mobilization (Hasan and Crawford, 2007). Preserving and disseminating natural heritage and local cultural knowledge, generating creative knowledge, learning through practice and experience, and collaborating with bridging organizations to build and maintain learning infrastructure are the major elements of implementing the community-based strategies of knowledge mobilization (Linger and Warne, 2001; Cecez-Kecmanovic and Jerram, 2002).

Knowledge integration studies pay little attention to the forms of knowledge which are privileged within the community and the engagement of different interest groups, especially within environmental planning, eco-management, and eco-social behavior.

Scientists have identified several methods and strategies to build coherent and resilient multi-institutional networks of actors for knowledge mobilization.

There are the variety of the ways through which knowledge is generated: 1) personal experience (Fazey et al., 2006); 2) a formalised process (Pullin and Knight, 2001); 3) problem-based learning (Chigirev V. A., 1980).

Knowledge generated through personal experience constitutes an experiential class (Fazey et al., 2006). This is a broad category that can include non-expert or expert knowledge derived through various experiential processes. Such informal knowledge usually reflects everyday reflection and interpretation of different situations on a local scale. A community-driven approach reflects some level of expertise of a local site or issue and lacks structured processes that regulate the way people’s experiences affect understanding.

Knowledge generated through formalised processes contributes to a scientific class. This is a category that includes systematic recorded knowledge or practice and results in explicit and formal types of knowledge. An evidence-based approach prevails over personal experience and observation. 

Knowledge generated through a social learning process forms a hybrid class (Evely et al., 2008). This is an integrated category derived from multi-disciplinary and interdisciplinary research. Such trans-disciplinary approaches are characterized by knowledge exchange and integration and the engagement of different interest groups including the public.

To overcome the challenges of a hybrid class where scientific evidence can be based on personal experience and knowledge formed through social learning should be equally recognized by scientists and community, it is essential to identify:

• different types of knowledge which stakeholders agree to share;

• the types of content they are willing to offer and discuss;

• the depth of expertise and personal experiences they possess;

• the types of social context that influence people’s perception and understanding 

As these types are mixed and combined from both local and scientific environments, institutional structures are needed to transform interdisciplinary and multi-purpose knowledge to a widely accessible form and unify the ways of trans-disciplinary integration.

To transform the process of knowledge integration into knowledge mobilization characterized by self-organized learning and knowledge dissemination, it is crucial to overcome the challenge of engaging different types of knowledge. It occurs as a result of people’s different perceptions about the nature of their decision-making. People may perceive their opinions as personal, evidence-based (scientific) or implicit and this affects the way they decide on the validity of knowledge.

While the difference in perceptions affects personal attitudes to perceiving information and the willingness to learn, it also defines the way knowledge mobilizationresults in research opportunities and scientific outcomes (Miller et al., 2008). Because of the hybrid nature of knowledge, a consensus on facilitating scientific outputs is needed. Therefore, the involvement of researchers from various disciplines, who assist with knowledge exchange and the engagement of different stakeholders, is essential since the beginning of learning processes. It is possible to do while creating certain institutional structures, developing eco-social training according to individual programs, which is confirmed by the AEST institutes that carry out research in various disciplines.

Applying integrated and mobilized knowledge to social learning is a final step. To facilitate this process, scientists have proposed to rely on participatory monitoring and evaluation (Fabricius et al., 2006), establish institutional structures supporting partnerships, and engage community members in evaluating objectives and outcomes based on the based on a value-based approach.

A person's life in the coordinate system of culture is not limited to the assimilation of information and the expression of emotions, but is a dynamic process of the accumulation of social experience, eco-social learning, discovering oneself as a subject of creativity and exploring the creativity of others, that is, developing a parallel creative reality, a subject-subject paradigm and the formation of the eco-social culture.

Literature

1. Cash, D.W., Clark, W.C., Alcock, F., Dickson, N.M., Eckley, N., Guston, D.H., Jager, J., & Mitchell, R.B. (2003). Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (100/14), 8086–8091

2. Boland R. &Tenkasi R. (1995). Perspective Making and Perspective Taking in Communities of Knowing. Organisation Science (6/4), 350-372

3. Wenger E., McDermott R., & Snyder W. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice. Harvard Business School Press

4. Blaikie, P. (2006). Is small really beautiful? Community-based natural resource management in Malawi and Botswana. World Development 34 (11), 1942-1957

5. Robinson, G.M. (2006). Canada’s environmental farm plans: trans-Atlantic perspectives on agri-environmental schemes. Geographical Journal 172 (3), 206–218

6. Hasan, H., & Crawford, K. (2007). Knowledge mobilisation in communities through socio-technical system. Knowledge Management Research and Practice (5/4), 237-248

7. Linger, H., & Warne, L. (2001). Making the Invisible Visible: modelling social learning in a knowledge management context. Australasian Journal of Information Systems, 9(1)

8. Cecez-Kecmanovic D. Jerram C. A. (2002). A sensemaking View of Knowledge in Organisations. ECIS, Gdansk

9. Fazey, I., Fazey, J. A., Salisbury, J. G., Lindenmayer, D. B., &Dovers, S. (2006). The nature and role of experiential knowledge for environmental conservation. Environmental conservation, 33(1), 1-10

10. Pullin, A.S., & Knight, T.M. (2001). Effectiveness in conservation practice: pointers from medicine and public health. Conservation Biology 15 (1), 50–54

11. Evely, A.C., Fazey, I., Pinard, M., &Lambin, X. (2008). The influence of philosophical perspectives in integrative research: a conservation case study in the cairngorms national park. Ecology and Society (13/2)

12. Miller, T.R., Baird, T.D., Littlefield, C.M., Kofinas, G., Chapin III, F.S., & Redman, C.L. (2008). Epistemological pluralism: reorganizing interdisciplinary research. Ecology and Society (13/2), 46–62

13. Fabricius, C. H. R. I. S. T. O., Scholes, R., &Cundill, G. (2006). Mobilizing knowledge for integrated ecosystem assessments. Bridging scales and knowledge systems: Concepts and applications in ecosystem assessment, 165-182

14. Markov A.V., Markov M.A. Runaway brain-culture coevolution as a reason for larger brains: Exploring the “cultural drive” hypothesis by computer modeling. (2020) Ecology and Evolution.

15. Chigirev V. A. The Moral path of an immoral civilization. St. Petersburg: Institute of Morality, 2006.

16. Boychevska V. V. Sociopathy is a virus that threatens the cultural code. https://icach.ast.social/menu-news/346-sotsiopatiya-virus-ugrozhayushchij-kulturnomu-kodu.html

17. Lozhkina A. S. Eco-cultural objects in the conditions of forming the global moral capitalism. https://icach.ast.social/menu-news/360-eko-kulturnye-ob-ekty-v-usloviyakh-formirovaniya-globalnogo-nravstvennogo-kapitalizma.html