Reinforcing vulnerability? Evaluation of unintended consequences in knowledge co-production for urban adaptation

Although knowledge co-production is gaining traction in urban adaptation, reporting on its failures, tensions, and unintended consequences remains limited. This lack of evaluation constrains opportunities for learning and improvement. This paper applies the concept of epistemic injustice to evaluate unintended consequences arising from knowledge co-production in urban adaptation. It draws on a two-year knowledge co-production process in Malmö, Sweden, focused on co-exploring urban heat vulnerability. Using a mixed-methods approach, the evaluation triangulates data from participant observation, unstructured interviews, and project documentation.

While the process succeeded in many respects, the evaluation identified seven unintended consequences with implications for epistemic injustice. These include the reinforcement of territorial stigmatization; prejudicial stereotypes; intra-neighborhood inequalities; token participation; credibility excesses; and power imbalances. The paper concludes with four key recommendations for future knowledge co-production: embrace transparency around tensions and trade-offs; treat knowledge co-production as a political and moral undertaking rather than a technical exercise; reframe vulnerability as structural and relational rather than individual; and integrate monitoring, evaluation, and learning.