Citizens experiences of participating in knowledge co-production processes to solve community problems
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71068/ss000058Keywords:
implementation, qualitative research, participation, organizational change, sustainabilityAbstract
Introduction: This study examines experiencias ciudadanas sobre participación en procesos de coproducción de conocimiento para resolver problemas comunitarios, focusing on how organizational conditions, resources, participation and governance shape implementation and perceived outcomes. Objective: To analyze quantitative patterns and explain them through participants’ experiences, identifying barriers, facilitators and priorities for improvement. Method: A sequential explanatory mixed-methods design was conducted from September to December 2024. The quantitative phase included 400 participantes de iniciativas comunitarias; the qualitative phase comprised 22 semi-structured interviews selected intentionally from participants with direct experience of the phenomenon. All participants provided informed consent. Survey data were summarized using descriptive statistics and internal-consistency indicators, while interviews were transcribed, anonymized and examined through reflexive thematic analysis. Integration connected quantitative tendencies with convergent, divergent and contextual qualitative accounts. Results: The findings showed generally moderate-to-favorable assessments, but implementation varied according to access to resources, practical capabilities, clarity of responsibilities, communication and opportunities for participation. Interview accounts clarified why similar organizational arrangements could be experienced as supportive in some settings and burdensome in others. Conclusions: Effective implementation depends on combining technical arrangements with institutional learning, transparent governance, contextual adaptation and sustained feedback. The mixed-methods integration supports practical decisions without interpreting descriptive associations as causal effects and highlights the need to monitor both implementation conditions and stakeholder experience over time.
Downloads
References
1. Lengnick-Hall R, Proctor EK, Bunger AC, Gerke DR, Martin JK. Ten years of implementation outcome research: a scoping review. Implement Sci. 2022;17:31. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-022-01205-w.
2. Bullock HL, Lavis JN, Wilson MG, Mulvale G, Miatello A. Understanding implementation of evidence-informed policies and practices. Implement Sci. 2021;16:18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01082-7.
3. Kuchenmüller T, Boeira L, Oliver S, Moat K, El-Jardali F, Barreto J, et al. Domains and processes for institutionalizing evidence-informed policy-making. Health Res Policy Syst. 2022;20:27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-022-00820-7.
4. Haynes A, Rychetnik L, Finegood D, Irving M, Freebairn L, Hawe P. Applying systems thinking to knowledge mobilisation in public health. Health Res Policy Syst. 2020;18:134. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-020-00600-1.
5. MacKillop E. Making sense of knowledge-brokering organisations. Sci Public Policy. 2023;50(6):950-960. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad029.
6. Yoshizawa L. The imposition of instrumental research use. Am Educ Res J. 2022;59(6):1127-1163. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312221113556.
7. Farley-Ripple EN. The use of research in schools. Educ Sci. 2024;14(6):561. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14060561.
8. Ryan A, Prieto-Rodriguez E, Miller A, Gore J. What can implementation science tell us about scaling interventions in school settings? Educ Res Rev. 2024;44:100620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100620
9. Yu L, Li Y. Artificial intelligence decision-making transparency and employees’ trust. Behav Sci. 2022;12(5):127. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12050127.
10. Höddinghaus M, Sondern D, Hertel G. The automation of leadership functions: would people trust decision algorithms? Comput Human Behav. 2021;116:106635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106635
11. Shin D. The effects of explainability and causability on perception, trust, and acceptance. Int J Hum Comput Stud. 2021;146:102551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2020.102551.
12. Guldmann E, Huulgaard RD. Barriers to circular business model innovation. J Clean Prod. 2020;243:118160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118160.
13. Centobelli P, Cerchione R, Chiaroni D, Del Vecchio P, Urbinati A. Designing business models in circular economy. Bus Strategy Environ. 2020;29(4):1734-1749. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2466.
14. Ferasso M, Beliaeva T, Kraus S, Clauss T, Ribeiro-Soriano D. Circular economy business models. Bus Strategy Environ. 2020;29(8):3006-3024. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2554.
15. Geissdoerfer M, Pieroni MPP, Pigosso DCA, Soufani K. Circular business models: a review. J Clean Prod. 2020;277:123741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123741.
16. Mishra R, Singh RK, Govindan K. Barriers to adoption of circular economy practices in SMEs. J Clean Prod. 2022;351:131389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131389.
17. Vidovic D, Reinhardt GY, Hammerton C. Can social prescribing foster individual and community well-being? Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(10):5276. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18105276
18. Determinants of digital technology adoption in innovative SMEs. J Innov Knowl. 2024;9(4):100610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2024.100610
19. Barriers to technological innovations of SMEs: how to solve them? Int J Innov Sci. 2020;12(5):545-564. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-04-2020-0049
20. Braun V, Clarke V. One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in reflexive thematic analysis? Qual Res Psychol. 2021;18(3):328-352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
21. Byrne D. A worked example of Braun and Clarke’s approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Qual Quant. 2022;56:1391-1412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01182-y.
22. Damschroder LJ, Reardon CM, Widerquist MAO, Lowery J. The updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research based on user feedback. Implement Sci. 2022;17:75. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-022-01245-0.
23. Skivington K, Matthews L, Simpson SA, Craig P, Baird J, Blazeby JM, et al. A new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions. BMJ. 2021;374:n2061. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2061.
24. Chan CKY, Hu W. Students’ voices on generative AI: perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. Int J Educ Technol High Educ. 2023;20:43. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8.
25. Chiu TKF. The impact of generative AI on higher education learning and teaching: a study of educators’ perspectives. Comput Educ Artif Intell. 2024;6:100221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100221.
26. Wang K, Ruan Q, Zhang X, Fu C, Duan B. Examining teachers’ behavioural intention of using generative artificial intelligence tools for teaching and learning based on the extended technology acceptance model. Comput Educ Artif Intell. 2024;7:100328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100328.
27. Kamalov F, Santandreu Calonge D, Gurrib I. New era of artificial intelligence in education: towards a sustainable multifaceted revolution. Sustainability. 2023;15:12451. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612451.
28. Braganza A, Chen W, Canhoto A, Sap S. Productive employment and decent work: the impact of AI adoption on psychological contracts, job engagement and employee trust. J Bus Res. 2021;131:485-494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.08.018.
29. Leicht-Deobald U, Busch T, Schank C, Weibel A, Schafheitle S, Wildhaber I, et al. The challenges of algorithm-based HR decision-making for personal integrity. J Bus Ethics. 2022;160:377-392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04204-w.
30. Jacovi A, Marasović A, Miller T, Goldberg Y. Formalizing trust in artificial intelligence: prerequisites, causes and goals of human trust in AI. Proc ACM Hum Comput Interact. 2021;5(CSCW2):1-26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3479523.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Katiuska Adelaida Bastidas Gonzalez
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Los artículos publicados en esta revista están disponibles bajo la licencia Creative Commons Atribución 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0). Esta licencia autoriza a terceros a descargar, copiar, distribuir, adaptar y reutilizar los contenidos, incluso con fines comerciales, siempre que se otorgue el crédito correspondiente al autor original de la obra.
