Cooperative research involves upstream engagement of practitioners, introducing diverse knowledges and expertise in ways that can, in theory at least, generate new knowledge that is socially robust and publicly accountable. And yet, judging cooperative research solely in terms of accountability may underplay the transformative and nonaccountable/nonconvergent nature of research—the production, in other words, of the new when collectives are drawn together. Using examples from research that sought to provide environmental civil society organisations (CSOs) with the resources to shape cooperative research, this paper argues that cooperative research may not simply mark an extension of public engagement with science but can also seed an anticipatory and thus creative research process. For cooperative research to play this role there is a need to highlight the human and nonhuman attachments that underpin cooperative research activity. We argue that such activity might best have as its aim the empowerment, not simply of participants, but of the political situations that CSOs can help to foment.
AllanT, 2003, “Virtual water—the water, food and trade nexus: Useful concept or misleading metaphor?”Water International284–11
2.
AminARobertsJ, 2008a, “Knowing in action: Beyond communities of practice”Research Policy37353–369
3.
AminARobertsJ, 2008b, “The resurgence of community in economic thought and practice”, in Communty, Economic Creativity, and Organization Eds AminARobertsJ, (Oxford University Press, Oxford) pp 11–36
4.
AminARobertsJ, (Eds), 2008cCommunty, Economic Creativity, and Organization (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
5.
BarryA, 2013Material Politics: Disputes along the Pipeline (Wiley Blackwell, Oxford)
6.
BarryABornGWeszkalnysG, 2008, “Logics of interdisplinarity”Economy and Society3720–49
7.
BognerA, 2012, “The paradox of participation experiments”Science, Technology and Human Values37506–527
8.
BornGBarryA, 2010, “ART-SCIENCE: From public understanding to public experiment”Journal of Cultural Economy3103–119
9.
BrunoriGJigginsJGallardoRSchmidtO, 2008, “The 2nd SCAR Foresight Exercise. New challenges for agricultural research: Climate change, food security, rural development, agricultural knowledge systems”, Standing Committee on Agricultural Research (SCAR) EU Commission, Brussels
10.
CallonM, 1999, “The role of lay people in the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge”Science, Technology and Society481–94
11.
CallonMLascoumesPBartheY, 2009Acting in an Uncertain World (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
12.
CEC, 2007, “The European research area: New perspectives”, Commission of the European Communities, Brussels
13.
DG-Research, 2009, “GovernScience Civil Society Organisations Seminar”Brussels
FeatherstoneD, 2008Resistance, Space and Political Idenities: The Making of Counter-global Networks (Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford)
16.
FoucaultM, 1991, “Governmentality”, in The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality Eds GordonCMillerPBurchillG, (Chicago University Press, Chicago, IL) pp 87–105
HewittK, 1983, “The idea of calamity in a technocratic age”, in Interpretations of Calamity, From the Viewpoint of Human Ecology Ed. HewittK, (Allen and Unwin, Boston, MA) pp 3–32
19.
IrwinA, 1995Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development (Routledge, London)
20.
IrwinA, 2006, “The politics of talk: Coming to terms with the ‘new’ scientific governance”Social Studies of Science36299–320
21.
JasanoffS, 2003, “Breaking the waves in science studies: Comments on H.M. Collins and Robert Evans ‘The Third Wave of Science Studies’”Social Studies of Science33389–400
22.
LaneSOdoniNLandstromCWhatmoreSWardNBradleyS, 2011, “Doing flood risk differently: An experiment in radical scientific method”Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series3615–36
23.
LatourB, 2004Politics of Nature: How to Bring the Sciences into Democracy (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
24.
LatourB, 2013An Enquiry into Modes of Existence: An Anthropology of the Moderns (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
25.
McGrathS, 2013, “Fuelling global production networks with slave labour? Migrant sugar cane workers in the Brazilian ethanol GPN”Geoforum4432–43
26.
MarresN, 2005, “Issues spark a public into being: A key but often forgotten point of the Lippman–Dewey debate”, in Making Things Public: Atmospheres of Democracy Eds LatourBWeibelP, Karlsruhe, ZKM: Centre for Art and Media Karlsruhe (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) pp 208–217
27.
MarresNLezaunJ, 2011, “Materials and devices of the public: An introduction”Economy and Society40489–509
28.
MolA, 2008The Logic of Care: Health and the Problem of Patient Choice (Routeldge, London)
29.
MouffeC, 2005, “Some reflections on an agonistic approach to the public”, in Making Things Public: Atmospheres of Democracy Eds LatourBWeibelP, Karlsruhe, ZKM: Centre for Art and Media Karlsruhe (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) pp 804–809
30.
NowotnyH, 2003, “Democratising expertise and socially robust knowledge”Science and Public Policy30151–156
31.
OreszczynSLevidowLHinchliffeS, 2010, “Cooperative research processes in CREPE” WP8 Report of CREPE ProjectOpen University, Milton Keynes, http://www.crepeweb.net
32.
OwenRStilgoeJMacNaghtenPGormanMFisherEGustonD, 2013, “A framework for responsible innovation”, in Responsible Innovation Eds OwenRBeasantJHeintzM, (John Wiley, Chichester, Sussex) pp 27–50
33.
OwensS, 2009, “Publics, politics and participation: Some critical reflections from planning”Critical Studies of Public Engagement in Science and the EnvironmentSchool of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Birmingham
34.
PellizzoniL, 2001, “The myth of the best argument: Power, deliberation and reason”British Journal of Sociology5259–86
StengersI, 2010a, “Including nonhumans in political theory: Opening Pandora's Box?”, in Political Matter: Technoscience, Democracy, and Public Life Eds BraunBWhatmoreS, (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN) pp 3–33
37.
StengersI, 2010bCosmopolitics 1 (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN)
38.
StengersI, 2011Cosmopolitics II (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN)
39.
StirlingA, 2005, “Opening up or closing down: Analysis, participation and power in the appraisal of technology”, in Science and Citizens Eds LeachMScoonesIWynneB, (Zed Books, London) pp 218–233
40.
StirlingA, 2006From Science and Society to Science in Society: Towards a Framework for ‘Cooperative Research’Directorate General Research and Technology Development, European Commission, Brussels
WhatmoreS, 2006, “Materialist returns: Practising cultural geography in and for a more-than-human world”Cultural Geographies13600–609
43.
WhatmoreS, 2009, “Mapping knowledge controversies: Science, democracy and the redistribution of expertise”Progress in Human Geography33587–598
44.
WhatmoreSLandstromC, 2011, “Flood apprentices: An exercise in making things public”Economy and Society40582–610
45.
WynneB, 1996, “May the sheep safely graze? a reflexive view of the expert–lay knowledge divide”, in Risk, Environment and Modernity: Towards a New Ecology Eds LashSSzersynskiBWynneB, (Sage, London) pp 44–83
46.
WynneB, 2007, “Public participation in science and technology: Performing and obscuring a political–conceptual category mistake”East Asian Science, Technology and Society: An International Journal199–110
