Integrative literature review on co-concepts in connection with nature-based solutions

Collaborative approaches are increasingly analyzed in literature on environmental planning, governance, and management. However, three recent systematic literature reviews found that several co-concepts such as co-creation, co-design and co-production are often used interchangeably. We aim to add conceptual clarity on the co-concepts by using Nature-based solutions (NBS) as a case study. We conduct an integrative qualitative literature review on the concepts of co-creation, co-design, co-production and co-governance as used in connection to NBS. We screened 93 papers to identify key principles associated with the co-concepts linking especially to who are included in collaboration (stakeholders from policy, business, society and science), and why these collaborative approaches are needed (e.g. to develop contextual NBS approaches). We identified also key differences relating especially on the targeted output of the collaboration, and on how the collaboration is envisaged to happen across the co-concepts. Based on the results, we propose definitions for these concepts where co-creation refers to overall NBS “cycle”, co-design links to tools, co-production targets knowledge, and co-governance wider socio-environmental system. Furthermore, we also discuss emerging theme to consider multispecies actors as active collaborators in shaping NBS grounded in coevolutionary view. Our review helps to bring conceptual clarity on the use of co-concepts in NBS literature, and also to enhance their collaborative development, implementation, evaluation and finally impact. This is especially important in the era when co-concepts are widely used, but without clear definitions on their meaning. • The co-concepts are frequently used but weakly defined in the NBS literature. • We examine questions regarding who, what, why and how the co-concepts consider collaboration. • We found that who and why are similar across the concepts, while results on what and how show divergence. • We propose new definitions for the co-concepts to clarify their usage in combination. • We consider that coevolutionary approach and collaboration with non-human actors are emerging themes.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Environmental Science & Policy
Published
2025-04-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104073
Citations
7
Primary Topic
Innovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
19.32

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Integrative literature review on co-concepts in connection with nature-based solutions

Martin Špaček, Juha Hiedanpää, Tatiana Kluvánková, Simo Sarkki et al.
7 citations
Environmental Science & Policy
Innovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development
19.32
article

Integrative literature review on co-concepts in connection with nature-based solutions

Martin Špaček, Juha Hiedanpää, Tatiana Kluvánková, Simo Sarkki, Ann Ojala, Katriina Soini, Himansu Sekhar Mishra, Mia Pihlajamäki
article en
7 citations

Abstract

Collaborative approaches are increasingly analyzed in literature on environmental planning, governance, and management. However, three recent systematic literature reviews found that several co-concepts such as co-creation, co-design and co-production are often used interchangeably. We aim to add conceptual clarity on the co-concepts by using Nature-based solutions (NBS) as a case study. We conduct an integrative qualitative literature review on the concepts of co-creation, co-design, co-production and co-governance as used in connection to NBS. We screened 93 papers to identify key principles associated with the co-concepts linking especially to who are included in collaboration (stakeholders from policy, business, society and science), and why these collaborative approaches are needed (e.g. to develop contextual NBS approaches). We identified also key differences relating especially on the targeted output of the collaboration, and on how the collaboration is envisaged to happen across the co-concepts. Based on the results, we propose definitions for these concepts where co-creation refers to overall NBS “cycle”, co-design links to tools, co-production targets knowledge, and co-governance wider socio-environmental system. Furthermore, we also discuss emerging theme to consider multispecies actors as active collaborators in shaping NBS grounded in coevolutionary view. Our review helps to bring conceptual clarity on the use of co-concepts in NBS literature, and also to enhance their collaborative development, implementation, evaluation and finally impact. This is especially important in the era when co-concepts are widely used, but without clear definitions on their meaning. • The co-concepts are frequently used but weakly defined in the NBS literature. • We examine questions regarding who, what, why and how the co-concepts consider collaboration. • We found that who and why are similar across the concepts, while results on what and how show divergence. • We propose new definitions for the co-concepts to clarify their usage in combination. • We consider that coevolutionary approach and collaboration with non-human actors are emerging themes.

Environmental Science & PolicyVol. 169
University of Erfurt (DE), Slovak Academy of Sciences (SK), Natural Resources Institute Finland (FI), Jan Evangelista Purkyně University in Ústí nad Labem (CZ), University of Oulu (FI), Aalto University (FI)
Slovenská Akadémia Vied, Vedecká Grantová Agentúra MŠVVaŠ SR a SAV, HORIZON EUROPE Framework Programme
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Innovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development
19.32
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.