Author
Listed:
- Nour Chams
- Bouali Guesmi
- Mireia Molins i Folch
- Rosa Cubel
- Jose Maria Gil Roig
Abstract
This study examines the relationship between sustainability performance and knowledge, as well as between innovation transfer and co-production. It moves away from evaluating processes to exploring impact by investigating how explicit and tacit knowledge archetypes are associated with sustainability performance in the agri-food sector. Applying the knowledge-based theory and the Shannon index, we rely on a database from 2013 to 2020 of two case studies selected from a Spanish research institution. At the institutional level, the results postulate that knowledge and innovation transfer tends to have a higher diversity index, mainly driven by explicit knowledge archetype. Tacit type of knowledge in both transfer and co-production mechanisms predominately relies on engagement parameters. At the case study level, as an educational toolkit, the first case study prioritizes engagement that is, transferring and transmitting knowledge to a higher number of participants—tacit knowledge transfer. As an innovative technique, the second case study prioritizes diversity that is, transferring and transmitting knowledge through various channels—explicit knowledge transfer. Regarding sustainability performance, the findings demonstrate that both explicit and tacit knowledge are associated with health and capacity building pillars in the first case study through the transfer mechanism. However, in the second one, tacit knowledge is mainly associated with economic and socioterritorial pillars through transfer and co-production mechanisms. This study sheds light on the micro level of knowledge, proposing an approach for researchers and practitioners to categorize knowledge in different proxies and evaluate their performance.
Suggested Citation
Nour Chams & Bouali Guesmi & Mireia Molins i Folch & Rosa Cubel & Jose Maria Gil Roig, 2024.
"Transfer versus co-production: Knowledge as ‘MEANS’ to sustainability as an ‘END’,"
Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 33(1), pages 207-230.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:rseval:v:33:y:2024:i:1:p:207-30.
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:33:y:2024:i:1:p:207-30.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.