12 Knowledge Management for Sustainability: The Spatial Dimension …
245
I. Dynamics of the research domain:
As argued by Meusburger et al. (2011), research has to take into account the historicity
of the artefact under investigation. This means that certain elements or configurations
are no longer existent, and thus the research object is not always consistent in itself.
Due to a learner potentially changing into a teacher or provider of an educational offer
via social media channels, open platforms or research networks, it can be assumed that
digitalisation will blur the boundaries between decentralised and central functional
spaces.
II. Development and dissemination of new knowledge:
Overall, the influence of digitalisation on knowledge genesis in the context of
sustainable, fair development should not be underestimated—and is relevant for
achieving strategic development goals (SDGs; Weith and Köhler 2019). The focus
here is on the development and dissemination of new knowledge and the exchange
of knowledge (www.futureearth.org). Supporting a transformation towards sustainability is mentioned there as an explicit goal. The associated research agenda states
that this also necessitates a new form of knowledge generation across disciplinary
boundaries—together with social partners.
References
Bergner, C. (2019). Improving education through technology in school management. Empirical
evidence from schools in Germany. Dresden: Technische Universität.
Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie (BMWi). (2016). Zukunftschance Digitalisierung.
In Gute Geschäfte, zufriedene Kunden, erfolgreicher Mittelstand. Ein Wegweiser (2nd updated
ed.). Berlin.
Cash, D. W., Clark, W. C., Alcock, F., Dickson, N. M., Eckley, N., Guston, D. H., et al. (2003).
Knowledge systems for sustainable development. PNAS, 100(14), 8086–8091.
Cornell, S., Berkhout, F., Tuinstra, W., Tàbara, J. D., Jäger, J., Chabay, I., & De Wit, B.
(2013). Opening up knowledge systems for better responses to global environmental change.
Environmental Science and Policy, 28(C), 60–70.
Davoudi, S. (2015). Planning as practice of knowing. Planning Theory, 14, 316–331.
Dilling, L., & Lemos, M. C. (2011). Creating usable science: Opportunities and constraints for
climate knowledge use and their implications for science policy. Global Environmental Change,
21, 680–689.
Eigenbrodt, O. (2014). Auf dem Weg zur fluiden Bibliothek: Formierung und Konvergenz in integrierten Wissensräumen, S.207-220. In Stang & Eigenbrodt: Formierungen von Wissensräumen.
Optionen des Zugangs zu Information und Bildung. Berlin : de Gruyter Saur.
Enengel, B., Muhar, A., Penker, M., Freyer, B., Drlik, S., & 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), 106–117.
Erber, G., Köhler, T., Lattemann, C., Preissl, B., & Rentmeister, J. (2004). Rahmenbedingungen für
eine Breitbandoffensive in Deutschland. Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaft.
245
I. Dynamics of the research domain:
As argued by Meusburger et al. (2011), research has to take into account the historicity
of the artefact under investigation. This means that certain elements or configurations
are no longer existent, and thus the research object is not always consistent in itself.
Due to a learner potentially changing into a teacher or provider of an educational offer
via social media channels, open platforms or research networks, it can be assumed that
digitalisation will blur the boundaries between decentralised and central functional
spaces.
II. Development and dissemination of new knowledge:
Overall, the influence of digitalisation on knowledge genesis in the context of
sustainable, fair development should not be underestimated—and is relevant for
achieving strategic development goals (SDGs; Weith and Köhler 2019). The focus
here is on the development and dissemination of new knowledge and the exchange
of knowledge (www.futureearth.org). Supporting a transformation towards sustainability is mentioned there as an explicit goal. The associated research agenda states
that this also necessitates a new form of knowledge generation across disciplinary
boundaries—together with social partners.
References
Bergner, C. (2019). Improving education through technology in school management. Empirical
evidence from schools in Germany. Dresden: Technische Universität.
Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie (BMWi). (2016). Zukunftschance Digitalisierung.
In Gute Geschäfte, zufriedene Kunden, erfolgreicher Mittelstand. Ein Wegweiser (2nd updated
ed.). Berlin.
Cash, D. W., Clark, W. C., Alcock, F., Dickson, N. M., Eckley, N., Guston, D. H., et al. (2003).
Knowledge systems for sustainable development. PNAS, 100(14), 8086–8091.
Cornell, S., Berkhout, F., Tuinstra, W., Tàbara, J. D., Jäger, J., Chabay, I., & De Wit, B.
(2013). Opening up knowledge systems for better responses to global environmental change.
Environmental Science and Policy, 28(C), 60–70.
Davoudi, S. (2015). Planning as practice of knowing. Planning Theory, 14, 316–331.
Dilling, L., & Lemos, M. C. (2011). Creating usable science: Opportunities and constraints for
climate knowledge use and their implications for science policy. Global Environmental Change,
21, 680–689.
Eigenbrodt, O. (2014). Auf dem Weg zur fluiden Bibliothek: Formierung und Konvergenz in integrierten Wissensräumen, S.207-220. In Stang & Eigenbrodt: Formierungen von Wissensräumen.
Optionen des Zugangs zu Information und Bildung. Berlin : de Gruyter Saur.
Enengel, B., Muhar, A., Penker, M., Freyer, B., Drlik, S., & 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), 106–117.
Erber, G., Köhler, T., Lattemann, C., Preissl, B., & Rentmeister, J. (2004). Rahmenbedingungen für
eine Breitbandoffensive in Deutschland. Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaft.