A CO-CREATED APPROACH TO ENVIRONMENTAL LEGAL RESEARCH

Margherita Paola Poto,¹ Arianna Porrone,² and Juliana Hayden-Nygren³

Abstract EN The article illustrates the cross-disciplinary findings from a series of climate-related research projects on the potential for CoPK to be used as a methodological approach in environmental law research. It is built on a multidisciplinary scan of seminal literature across administrative and environmental law, political science, feminism, gender studies, and health studies that highlights how CoPK is productive for increasing public participation in governance efforts. However, CoPK requires careful consideration of the design and implementation of establishing truly inclusive and equitable partnerships and joint research initiatives. Therefore, exploring and applying CoPK as a methodology within the disciplinary and case context of environmental law can help clarify the exact steps needed to appropriately carry out consultation with all parties. This also reflects the right to free, prior, and informed consultation, one of the pillars of participation as laid down in international environmental law. Accordingly, it is expected to be a way to reach acceptable and legitimate research actions and/or legal solutions.

Abstract IT L’articolo esamina come, dai risultati di una serie di progetti di ricerca portati condotti dalle autrici, emerga l’importanza di approcci co-creati alla ricerca anche nell’ambito del diritto ambientale. La ricerca si fonda su una scansione multidisciplinare della letteratura nel campo del diritto amministrativo e ambientale, delle scienze politiche, del femminismo, degli studi di genere e degli studi sulla salute, che evidenzia come la co-creazione del sapere sia necessaria per aumentare la partecipazione pubblica nella governance ambientale. Tuttavia, la co-creazione della conoscenza richiede una attenta considerazione nelle sue fasi di progettazione ed implementazione per stabilire partenariati veramente inclusivi ed equi e iniziative di ricerca congiunte. Pertanto, esplorare e applicare la co-creazione del sapere come metodologia nel contesto disciplinare e di casi del diritto ambientale può aiutare a chiarire i passi necessari per condurre adeguatamente la consultazione con tutte le parti coinvolte. Di conseguenza, ci si aspetta che sia un modo per raggiungere azioni di ricerca e/o soluzioni legali accettabili e legittime.

1. Introduction

Addressing sustainability challenges through participatory approaches is contributing to reshaping the methodology applied in environmental legal research. The current trend is to extend partnerships with stakeholders outside of higher education institutes to tackle global and local sustainability challenges.⁴ Core drivers of this trend are increasing calls from scholars in the field of environmental legal research for new modes of knowledge production (hereinafter interchangeably referred to as knowledge co-production or co-creation) that can account for place-specific and stakeholder needs, further societal and economic development, and integrate expertise from diverse disciplines and sectors. In this chapter, knowledge co-creation is defined as an emerging process, especially in the field of Western law, it is important here to note that hereinafter the terms Western, West, and Eurocentric will be used interchangeably. The process of knowledge co-creation requires a plurality of actors to attempt to solve a shared problem, challenge, or task through a constructive exchange of different knowledge sets, values, expertise, and competencies.⁵

Knowledge co-creation presents several advantages to addressing sustainability challenges, connected to the failure of Western environmental law to acknowledge the interdependencies of the socio-ecological crises of our time.⁶ The process of co-creating solutions is intended to encourage collaborative approaches to such interdependencies, by triggering a positive process of transformative search for solutions among the plurality of actors engaged in the sustainability discourse, and “creating a continuous feedback loop of knowledge integration, and drive knowledge integration into a never-ending spiral.”⁷

This chapter explores the co-creation of knowledge applied to cross-disciplinary environmental research from a methodological perspective. The concept of cross-disciplinarity within this work has several features: 1. it encompasses interdisciplinarity (law, indigenous studies, health); 2. it involves a co-production of activities with scientists, researchers, and other academic and non-academic actors (such as community members); 3. it aims to produce solutions-oriented outcomes, which include capacity building, consensus building, and role-playing reinforcement. In cross-disciplinary research, the concept of knowledge producers is replaced by process facilitators, knowledge brokers, change agents, experts in learning, reflective scientists, self-reflexive scientists, reflexive facilitators, and project managers.⁸

In the following sections, we will describe the steps that have been adopted for the preparation and implementation of the international project ECO_CARE, which led to the development of an innovative methodological approach to environmental legal research.⁹ The implementation of suh innovative co-created methodological approach has not only transformed the landscape of environmental law but has also given rise to a groundbreaking theoretical framework. By fostering effective avenues for participation, this methodology has redefined the boundaries of traditional approaches, ushering in a new era in environmental legal scholarship. Through its novel perspectives and dynamic methodologies, our approach contributes to the development of environmental law, providing not only theoretical advancements but also practical tools for enabling widespread and meaningful participation in the decision-making processes. Such an approach involves researchers and Indigenous communities from Norway and Brazil, as well as partners from Italy, Tanzania, Canada, Portugal, and aims to develop an education and research platform that rethinks participatory environmental rights through emotions. Utilizing emotions within the context of participatory environmental rights thus acknowledges the relational and integral dimensions of environmental challenges and solutions.

2. Applying Participation-Based Approaches in Legal Research

This section provides an overview of participatory approaches to environmental legal research, starting with its foundations in Indigenous methodology, and then exploring tools and outcomes of legal creativity applied to storytelling and legal documents. Finally, reflections on the relational dimension of participatory research and the role of emotions in the construction of inclusive environmental research are explored.

Participatory research has a long tradition of applying the Indigenous methodology, Indigenous legal traditions, and rights-based approaches to nature, which are intrinsically intertwined. ¹⁰ Thus, this approach has created high-impact research for specific legal and social changes. ¹¹ Yet, simultaneously, nature-based approaches are emerging as both theoretical frameworks and concrete legal road maps to promote good environmental governance, environmental justice, equality, and an integrated governance system. As such, research and environmental law rooted in nature-based approaches are steadily developing into powerful tools of legal and socio-ecological change. ¹²

However, the trouble arises in that these two realms, legal and socio-ecological, have not always been affiliated in the field of environmental legal research. In the desire to use a nature-based approach for research leading to legal and social change, this chapter draws on participatory research and Indigenous methodologies to reflect on the role that nature-centered knowledge systems have in informing environmental reforms.

Participatory research prioritizes local perspectives, values, needs, and knowledge through collaboration with community members throughout the entire research process. ¹³ In this approach, research is not conducted on community members, but rather with them. ¹⁴ Prioritizing inclusivity, the borders of such a community extend to include students and learners in general, researchers, and representatives of Indigenous communities. ¹⁵

Cooperation within the research community becomes a driver of change with methodological, relational, and environmental implications since academic and community co-researchers “implement the results in a way that will raise critical consciousness and promote change in the lives of those involved – changes that are in the direction and control of the participating group or community.” ¹⁶

Introducing participatory research into an Indigenous context as a necessary step in nature-centered governance is posed to enrich critical legal analysis. The reflections that Indigenous knowledge and leadership bring to the complexity of solving environmental problems result in a polycentric approach thus moving away from the dominant Western perspective. The Indigenous context guides participatory research through engagement with legal traditions and adapted Western legal tools, ultimately providing insights on how to transform Western legal research on environmental governance into an effective collaborative and participatory experience. ¹⁷ The analysis of participatory research opens spaces to discuss the use of such a framework in the field of environmental law, including its relevance to decolonizing approaches relevant to the environmental discourse. ¹⁸

The next sections will analyze the stages of participatory approaches to research applied in the ideation and implementation of activities connected to the project, ECO_CARE (cited above).

3. Stage One: Encouraging Critical Appraisal in Legal Research

There exists a long history of legal research that marginalizes nature-centered views and their carriers, especially Indigenous peoples, their knowledge, and ways of life. ¹⁹This historical pattern of exploitative research practices perpetuated by Western researchers against indigenous communities and their knowledge can be most clearly expressed by the image of the exploitative effects of ‘helicopter’ research, conducted by non-Indigenous researchers and academics, clambering into a helicopter (or other transport) and simply ‘flying away’ after collecting the desired data and information. ²⁰

Under the guise of scientific colonialism, Western researchers may look into the systems of the colonized lands through the eyes of distant experts, and the communities themselves become objects of research. ²¹ Moreover, the ideology of scientific imperialism and colonization carries with it the belief that researchers are entitled to unlimited rights of access to any data source and information belonging to the population or community they are investigating, and thus they possess the right to exploit data for purposes of research. ²² As a result, traditional knowledge systems can be subject to cultural appropriation, often occurring without adequate recognition of the sources of knowledge. Romanticizing indigenous groups and their traditional knowledge is another common tendency among researchers coming from both academia and communities of activists.²³ Such romanticization tends to overgeneralize indigenous cultures and can suggest that indigenous peoples – because they live closer to nature and may pay reverence to natural cycles – have all the answers to address the current socio-ecological crises²⁴.

Therefore, from a critical legal perspective, both scientific imperialism and colonization need to be considered when engaging in a decolonization intellectual process. ²⁵ Such a critical approach to decolonizing environmental research and opening participation is thus expected to involve a consideration of the following questions: “What are the steps to follow in a research approach that aims to move towards a participatory approach that emphasizes direct engagement of local and Indigenous priorities and perspectives to nature?”, “What are the methods that form such a participatory methodology?” and, ultimately, “Where is the centre of knowledge and information about the research?” ²⁶ The following sections will provide a roadmap of ECO_CARE’s project participatory research methodology. This participatory research methodology has been continuously re-assessed and re-developed with the help of the communities of learners, researchers, and Indigenous representatives, towards the modelling of participatory environmental governance.

4. Stage Two: Reframing Ecological Challenges as Relational Challenges

Environmental and sustainability scholars agree that the divide between human and non-human components of ecology is symptomatic of relational dysfunction. ²⁷ Consequently, an innovative strand of environmental research hones in on the need to expand the subject of the investigation to the relational values in ecology, and explore ways to advance interconnectedness between human and non-human issues, as well as with culture and lived-experience.²⁸ According to preeminent scholars such as Karen O’Brien, one way of integrating diverse perspectives is through action research.²⁹ In essence, participatory research based on the collective action and co-creation of knowledge actively contributes to the deep relational transformation necessary in ecology today. According to O’Brien, the research community must move towards “changing the behaviors, structures, and systems that contribute to what many consider to be undesirable and potentially dangerous outcomes, including increased temperatures and climate extremes, rising sea levels, food and water insecurity, and other environmental and social impacts.” ³⁰ The adoption of participatory approaches within the research context responds to this need for a paradigm shift.

A participatory methodology supports the relationship between agents of change, community needs, and researchers. Such methodology is intended to stimulate reflection on an unequal power dynamic between communities and researchers. ³¹ From a methodological viewpoint, a collective effort to build respectful research relationships can effectively respond to the societal component of ecological challenges.

The subsequent sections will provide examples of the experiential process applied in studies on environmental governance. This process is defined by engaging with the research community and body of work that adheres to relational accountability, respect, reciprocity, and responsibility. In the context of this work, integral ecology has been applied as the integrated research framework to encompass visible and non-visible aspects of natural and social systems, and their relationality. ³² The hypothesis is that a participatory process that observes the environmental threats of our time through the perspective of integral ecology is more likely to find effective co-created solutions to complex climate challenges, by unifying life as an intersubjective system.

5. Stage Three: Integrating Indigenous Methodology in Co-created Research

The particular model of Indigenous methodology this work refers to has been developed by the Indigenous Law Research Unit (ILRU) in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. ³³ The construction of the Indigenous methodology is based on different layers (that the research group identifies in the sources of law, resources, and legal applications) ³⁴ and combines two different approaches (case studies and adaptation of Western legal categories to the Indigenous reality). The process of engaging with different layers of law can be symbolized by the components of a tree: roots, trunk, and branches. ³⁵ The roots are the resources of law and include the sacred law, the positivist law, the natural law, and the deliberative process of law, among others. ³⁶ The trunk is constituted by the sources, whose cornerstones are the stories, ³⁷ the elders’ narratives and memories, dreams, songs, and recounts from community members.

Finally, the branches of the tree are represented by the potential applications of the legal frameworks to the case studies (environmental governance, rights protection, collaborative water stewardship, and water management). ³⁸ Participatory research particularly focuses on the interactive analysis and scrutiny of the sources of law and is conducted following a rigorous collaborative process, involving researchers and the community. In phase (1), a specific research question is asked, for example: “What is the connection that the community establishes with nature?”; “How is the interaction established between human and non-human beings?”; or “How did and does this Indigenous group respond to harms that affect nature?”. The research question is formulated through a collaborative process between the researchers and the community to ensure that community needs are being met, as opposed to solely catering to the aims of the researchers. In phase (2), the research question is applied to Indigenous sources and the response is discovered in formal and informal laws that are often recorded in Indigenous stories. The focus on Indigenous stories and the collective interpretation of the legal principles and processes encoded within the story typically constitutes the core of this three-phased collective approach to the sources.

As Hadley Friedland and Val Napoleon explain,

We can see this as fitting very nicely with Indigenous pedagogies, where stories require astute telling and active listening, and the listener or reader is constantly encouraged to think about what the story means to them and why certain things are happening. ³⁹

The next phase of a participatory methodology involves the process of synthesizing the co-created research to demonstrate patterns of similarities and differences, invite respectful debate, and organize information in the most accessible way. ⁴⁰

As mentioned above, the narrative followed in this multi-phase approach combines the adoption of a case law method for substantively exploring the law and drawing parallels between the Western legal paradigms and Indigenous cosmovisions. By synthesizing legal principles from these different resources, and using this synthesis to sketch a tentative legal theory, the result is grounded in critical legal analysis. Thus, such a result acknowledges interpretative debates, the tensions between legal principles, and the existence of a living Indigenous legal tradition. ⁴¹

It is noteworthy to discuss how obtaining results through a participatory research approach does not conclude the research process. Rather, the results are conceived as a continuous and reciprocal process of learning and establishing relationships. ⁴² As opposed to a positivist research paradigm, the dissemination of co-created results holds researchers accountable to the communities in which they work and ensures that assessments, evaluation, and data analyses reflect the participants’ views and experiences. Finally, it is of utmost importance to collaborate with Indigenous research partners throughout all phases of the research process to establish the depth and ongoing reciprocity required for meaningful community collaboration. ⁴³ Participatory research requires both researchers and community partners to be reflexive; in other words, both parties must remain continuously aware of the relationship dynamics to ensure researchers are upholding the promise of accountability and transparency.

In closing, the ontological set of values that Indigenous methodology offers to a scientific participatory approach to environmental law is rooted in the notion that informed environmental awareness should be generated from within the community of research participants. Further, the line between the research and the object of research becomes blurred, since participatory research aims to give the community and participants equal control of the research process. Given that equitable research practices should be embedded within participatory research, this ontology’s ultimate goal is to further the exploration of how to change and improve the relational flow of the research community.

The following section will demonstrate how a participatory methodology has been transposed and adapted to the study and research on nature and water governance through the ECO_CARE research endeavors.

6. Stage Four: The ECOCARE’s Co-created Learning Toolkit

Through studying environmental governance within a participatory and community-based context, the teachings from Indigenous methodology have been transposed into the context of environmental law and analyzed through critical lenses. The ECO_CARE research team has started applying research methodological tools by close collaboration with Indigenous and non-Indigenous partners and communities and adopting such an approach to the knowledge needs of academia. ⁴⁴

Thus, participation shifted from a dimension of research objectives to a research method, becoming an indispensable approach for retrieving and analyzing the environmental legal framework using empirical, co-generated, and formative research. ⁴⁵ From desktop analysis, the research team’s research methods evolved from an analysis of secondary sources (doctrine and jurisprudence) to progressively including empirical data. The work has been enriched by data collected with the help of communities, Indigenous observations and stories, and interpretation of stories co-created by researchers and community members. ⁴⁶ The ECO_CARE methodological approach has increasingly focused on co-creation as the research results are often published in cooperation with community members and Indigenous participants. ⁴⁷ Additionally, the research has become more problem-solution oriented, focusing on the community interests and needs regarding the relevant environmental challenges.

Concerning the thematic area of integral ecology, this participatory research has developed in the direction of an experiential learning toolkit; a collection of materials and activities for researchers, educators, and communities to promote participatory discussions and co-created results in the context of environmental law research. The learning toolkit includes illustrated stories, interactive activities, and creative solutions to explore conversations around integrated governance approaches to ecology. The primary goal of the toolkit is to generate transformative change at a research and community level; it is not meant to be adopted as a rigid approach or rule book, but rather as a compilation of insights and knowledge that celebrates the interaction between researchers and communities.

The learning toolkit is inspired by the teaching of legal creativity and legal design, two techniques adopted to bridge any language barriers and difficulties arising from dialogue between different parties. Legal design is a method of participatory research aiming to reform the legal system; one that recognizes the importance of digital technologies (computer-based creativity techniques such as virtual platforms, online whiteboards, and mind-mapping), ⁴⁸ but does not privilege such technologies as the only way to innovate.

The participatory model allows for the integration of more stakeholders in decision-making processes through “collaborative workshops, design camps, community awards, co-design sessions, making and prioritization games, and other methods that allow for a wider variety of people to participate in design. The methods are often dynamic and interactive.” ⁴⁹ Overall, incorporating participatory methods into legal design research brings the needs and values of communities to the forefront of the research agenda and creates space for new concepts. Making use of legal creativity and design, the ECO_CARE learning toolkit has especially focused on the power of visual communication to facilitate the conversation on ecological relationality.

One of the benefits of this learning toolkit is its ability to address a wide audience of Indigenous water communities, students, and researchers. The toolkit includes chapters on (1) the conceptualization of the overarching idea (i.e., creating a visualization of a story of stories), represented by a project cover (2019); (2) the development of an illustrated handbook based on an Indigenous story (2020); (3) the illustration and conceptualization of the same story (2021); and (4) the co-creation of illustrated comics on environmental participation in collaboration with the Chiquitano people from Mato Grosso, Brazil.⁵⁰.

The concept was launched with the project cover, an illustration to open the toolkit: ‘An Illustrated Storybook on Indigenous Stories’, ⁵¹ representing the interaction between two shape-shifter feminine spirits who voice Indigenous stories (1). Both stories and storytellers mirror the fluid and immanent governing of water and earth, in such a way that can be understood by students, Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers, and community members at large. The two spirits of water and earth intend to accompany the overall project as if it was an illustrated story of stories in itself, symbolizing the collection of narratives, ideas, and observations on the symbiotic relationship that governs communities and nature. The idea of building bridges between different legal cultures and orders with the help of illustrations led to a successful and well-received first project outcome with the cover published in 2019 during the international event ‘Kjønnsforskning NÅ!’ as a final scientific product. ⁵²

The second element (2) of the learning toolkit developed around the co-creation and publication of the illustrated handbook: “A Story About Knowledge”, inspired by an Arctic story ⁵³ on the search for knowledge. ⁵⁴ The story was chosen for its focus on the search for the best place to find and have custody of knowledge. The story begins with the search for knowledge, which is triggered by Creator’s request addressed to a trickster spirit (Nanabozho), ⁵⁵ to find that place, and from the trickster spirit, the task is delegated to the animals of the Earth (symbolically represented by a bear, an eagle, a salmon, and a mole). The search becomes an interactive process. The reader is prompted to explore how the solution is the result of a collective sum of the individual efforts of all the animals. Following the story plot, the handbook develops several lessons around each animal character, aiming to stimulate reflections on their roles and the relational aspects that generate from their search.

The third element (3) of the learning toolkit consists of a co-created, illustrated book project, based on the same narrative plot as discussed above. This illustrated book project furthers the concept of the need to engage in conversations around the relational dimension of ecology. ⁵⁶ The investigation process is situated in geographical, colourful settings (the mountainside, airspace, waterside, the underground). This visual section of the toolkit helps readers and learners engage in the search for knowledge by giving them the opportunity to interpret and co-create the story as they perceive it.

The fourth element (4) of the learning toolkit consists of visual and narrative materials on environmental participation, co-created with researchers, students, and the Indigenous community of the Chiquitano People from Mato Grosso (Vila Nova Barbecho, Brazil). ⁵⁷ The project, entitled ‘Legal Design and Visual Law in International Environmental Law: Conversion of the Escazú Agreement in Visual Materials for the Chiquitano People’, was developed during a course at the Universidade Federal do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Postgraduate Law Program in 2020. Law students closely cooperated with the Chiquitano People from Mato Grosso (Brazil) to develop the project. ⁵⁸ The project objective was to teach, in practice, an efficient method to create a knowledge base of participatory environmental law, as well as co-creating instructive materials that could work as a tool for strengthening environmental participation. The project participants were assigned to three thematic areas, corresponding to the three pillars of environmental participation (i.e., the tripartite classification of the access rights: access to information, participation, and access to justice). Ideas were transformed into a comic book, ⁵⁹ based on the script that members of the Indigenous community of the Chiquitano people created as per their understanding of the Escazú Agreement. Accordingly, the legal provisions on participation of the Escazú Agreement, written in technical legal language, were translated into an easily accessible dialogue, understandable by everyone. Each sentence in the comic dialogue was paired with an illustrated description of the village that different individuals could recognize and relate to within the story. The illustrations were translated into cartoons by students and community members and accompanied by corresponding speech bubbles. The final work consisted of two versions, in Portuguese and English, discussing the collective, visual storytelling of the community’s interpretation of environmental participation.

The next step in the development of the learning toolkit is to increasingly expand the content to support the reflection on nature-based solutions and their application in diverse real-world settings. ⁶⁰

7. Stage Five: Trial, Error, and Validation

In line with the need to test the participatory research approach with communities of learners, the learning toolkit has been adopted in participatory approaches to teaching and research: in seminars series and academic lectures in environmental law, administrative law, and interdisciplinary global studies. ⁶¹ Accordingly, in collaboration with a group of teachers and researchers, research seminars and academic classes ⁶² have been designed by our team to deepen the individual and collective awareness of the root causes of the ecological crises⁶³ and the role that participatory research and education can play in finding solutions.

A research protocol of respect and mutual understanding is instilled in the development of the learning and investigation experience. ⁶⁴ When Indigenous community members are involved, the session is initiated with the support of their representatives, who serve as advisors to the research team. ⁶⁵

The community representatives are actively involved in the creation of the learning materials and assist with the work that takes place in the classroom and/or research group. The involvement of the community members requires respect for their input and acknowledgement of their full capacity to accept or refuse education and research pathways . ⁶⁶

As the project takes shape, and components of the learning toolkit are applied to initiate a conversation with the involved parties, the representative(s) of the communities are asked to revise the cultural and language components of the teaching or research program.

Before the seminar or class starts, an invitation is sent to all participants to ask for their consent to be actively engaged, informing them of the discussion topics. This notice enables a form of free prior and informed consent⁶⁷ available to all the participants.⁶⁸ Consequently, participants come prepared with background knowledge of why their environment is degraded, and the role that community members, society, and themselves can play in harmful and protective actions.

Each sessions begins with the Indigenous practice to acknowledge traditional territories hosting the communities, an expression of gratitude to the hosting place is expressed by the session leaders.⁶⁹ The session may begin with storytelling, if a particular story is the object of the work. Reading or sharing a story out loud allows for a multisensory connection with the audience. ⁷⁰

Afterward, space is dedicated to sharing and reporting back preliminary impressions before more in-depth discussions. Before, during, and after the sessions, participants are encouraged to engage with the learning materials and stories by providing written and visual answers. Creative answers brought forward through designing, colouring, and journaling prompts are highly encouraged. Through these continued conversations, the key underlying principles forming a common conceptual framework of integral ecology are identified through the relationship with the environment and the affected peoples. Willingness to share and/or listen to traditional narratives, stories, and lived experiences is required as per the roles and obligations of all participants.

The experience of delving into a reciprocal effort to co-create and look for solutions, shifts the conversation toward purpose, intention, and consciousness of the socio-ecological interdependencies.

Discussing concerns for the natural environment including climate change threats, economic and social disparity, and inadequacy of the Western-centric legal approaches to overcome poor environmental governance, led us to reflective questions including but not limited to; “what is the ontological structure of nature that law should mimic?,” “how can we push the international community to shift towards a novel conceptual structure?” Evaluative statements about urgent action were also developed such as, “it will be the next generations who will suffer the most, that’s why we have to build a sustainable model for future generations”. These reflections aim to develop a knowledge exchange that can be understood as a part of a ceremony; ⁷¹ one that raises the level of consciousness of our reciprocal duties to respect, honour, and care for each other and our environment.

8. Stage Six: Applying the Toolkit outside of its intended scope

The primary scope of the learning toolkit is to develop and test a teaching methodology that changes as per the needs of the participants and community of learners, encouraging them to initiate, stimulate, and inspire critical reflections on nature connectivity. Nevertheless, the learning toolkit fits into other educational contexts and fields, prompting creative thinking. The study of citizenship is a particularly interesting field whereby the learning toolkit has demonstrated its potential to open-up new, creative possibilities for learners.

According to Paula Hildenbrandt and Sybille Peters,⁷² modern citizenship is intended as a legal and political institution usually based on the nation-state framework of constitutional rights and obligations as enforced by law and related institutions. The concept refers to one’s entitlement to certain actions, possible behaviours, and inter/intra-acting with other agents in the public sphere.⁷³ Since the beginning of the 21^st century, the debate on citizenship has gained new momentum in academia. Patterns of mobility and connectivity are indeed changing at a rapid pace. In the last twenty years, migration routes have intensified and changed due to wars, climate change, environmental degradation, and the rise of new patriarchal, authoritarian regimes, specifically increasing flight from the global South to the global North. The socioeconomic, political, and environmental pressures boiling over in the global South have resulted in serious challenges to institutional boundaries and pre-conceived models of citizenship. Following Hildenbrandt and Peter’s ethos, it is possible to conceptualize citizenship as a process, one that can be in new ways beyond the given subject positions and institutional networks. ⁷⁴ Beyond the eligibility requirements to apply for citizenship decided by national laws – such as birth, descent, adoption, nationality, ethnicity, language, naturalization – people can mobilize to demand better and different treatments.

In this sense, it is possible that the learning toolkit can serve as a unique platform for experimental activities to assist learners to undertake a process of reflection on their realities within the public sphere. To prompt reflections on the intertwined themes of citizenship and ultimately, participation, a workshop on collective storytelling has been developed in an academic setting, within The Pluriverse of Eco-social Justice summer school (CES, Coimbra) ⁷⁵. This co-creative workshop is a further application of the learning toolkit’s unique methodology. The activity was coordinated by women researchers in the field of queer and feminist studies, political ecology, and environmental law. The workshop aimed to give the community of learners the tools to experiment and perform different modes of what it means to be a citizen. ⁷⁶ To ensure its replicability as an application of the learning toolkit the workshop on collective storytelling was divided into four phases.

In the first phase, participants are given a short amount of alone-time and requested to think about, draw or paint several words that resonate with them when considering the broad topic of performing citizenship. In the second phase, participants are asked to share the reasons behind their artistic choices. This phase is designed to create social bonds on the basis of shared experiences, to allow participants to identify with the perspectives, feelings and/or memories of the other participants. All the participants are involved in a dynamic process of self-reflection and establishing their own narratives. The act of sharing stories and art within the context of citizenship advances participants’ awareness and sensitivities to each other’s realities, misconceptions, socio-cultural representations, prejudices and power.

In the third phase, everyone’s written word is collected, shuffled with the others and re-composed in a new order so as to compose a group story that includes every individual’s story. The group can brainstorm around the words to see how they flow together and eventually create a collective story. In the fourth and final phase, the group is asked to perform the collective story, for instance by reading a written text, a poem, singing, dancing, or acting. At the end of the workshop, the participants are asked to share ideas on their experience, specifically to consider the two aspects involved in performing citizenship⁷⁷ and reflecting on how one can contribute to their community, what means to be part of a community, and how one can support others’ voices, visions and struggles.

A conclusion drawn from the performing citizenship exercise is that the concept of citizenship in law appears to be formed by two components: citizenship in theory – as developed in theoretical and academic settings: and citizenship in action –valuing social struggles based on real-life needs and sensitivity.⁷⁸ Thus, the concept of citizenship takes into account the complex needs and struggles of a fast-changing society at the individual and collective levels. Any creative act which facilitates the ‘performance’ of citizenship, such as through workshops specifically designed to encourage learners to think beyond any prior assumptions, contributes to re-creating a community of actors (on a small scale) who can speak to the complexity of citizenship.

9. Broadening the Spectrum of Participatory Methods: Problem-Based Learning and Delphi rounds Enter the Legal Research Scene

Understanding the mechanisms of active participation from a wide range of stakeholders is critical to the instrumentation of best research practices within the domain of international environmental law. In the face of climate and ecological crisis, establishing integrated efforts to increase compliance with international environmental legislation is crucial for the protection of our green and blue ecosystems, biodiversity, and human health. These efforts cannot come to fruition without innovative research design. To address this challenge within the theory (research) and practice (legislation and reforms), a growing community of environmental and legal researchers argue for a participation-based approach to decision-making and regulation that is equal measures equitable and sustainable.⁷⁹ It is widely accepted that direct participation of climate-vulnerable communities and civil society organizations is essential to actualizing sustainable, multi-perspective governance⁸⁰. Yet the current state of play within environmental regulatory regimes is top-down, exclusory, and highly defensive of respective jurisdictions. The result of this particular legal architecture is a sectoral, anthropocentric approach to environmental decision-making and regulation which inherently favours the subordination of natural spaces. Thus, the regulatory regimes intended to protect the health of our environments are at risk of chronically undermining their own efforts to push back environmental degradation.

This section will serve as an exploration of the future applications of co-created approaches to research to strengthen international environmental law and governance. It will be argued that it is practical to apply participation-based research methods to the critical legal analysis of environmental law and governance matters. Due to the diversity of actors involved in the field of environmental governance, defining, and testing the application of problem-based learning (PBL) and Delphi rounds within co-created legal research is necessary to facilitate the effectiveness of future climate governance efforts. Legal research including critical legal analysis takes the form of studying court cases such as case notes, statutes, and reforms and regulations. The information in these documents is widely accepted as objective evidence. While objective, this information is a secondary source of data that typically excludes first-hand knowledge and lived experiences which could provide pivotal insights into the construction of environmental decision-making and regulatory practices.⁸¹ Incorporating participation-based methodologies in the process of critical legal analysis may allow for the complexities of utilizing participation in environmental decision-making to be practically and systematically implemented.

10. Adopting Problem-Based Learning (PBL) in Legal Research

Problem-based learning (herein referred to as PBL) is most commonly defined as, “A teaching and learning method which puts a problem first, and in which further learning is conducted in the context of that problem.”⁸² The method is often characterized by a set of five attributes including flexible knowledge, effective problem-solving skills, self-directed learning skills, effective collaboration skills, and intrinsic motivation. The method has been primarily applied within the field of medicine, however other disciplines, increasingly including law, have integrated this approach into curriculum and practice.⁸³ In medical-related study and practice, smaller groups of students are given a scenario and tasked with deconstructing the problem at hand, typically a patient with a certain set of symptoms.⁸⁴ Small group members then work together to identify two components, first what they need to know regarding the patient in question and second, how they can uncover this knowledge. This learning experience usually includes patient history, diagnosis, and treatment plan. The goal of PBL is in fact not to focus on solving the problem but rather on developing a strong foundation in problem analysis.

Within a legal research context, PBL may be applied by substituting the word ‘patient’ with ‘client’ or even ‘community.’ In legal education, notably within legal clinics, this method can be utilized to explore the case at hand with the communities and its affected members (i.e. students, researchers, teachers, and Indigenous representatives), working together to identify its unique attributes, thus encouraging co-creation in the law. It must be noted that while PBL can be applied to the world of law firms and research, the focus of this section is primarily to explore the applicability of PBL to legal research and as a legal educational tool.

While well suited as a methodology for legal learning environments, such as legal clinics, it is plausible that such an approach could be applied to an attorney client setting in order to clarify and advance all communication concerning the legal matter in question between attorney and client. In both a legal learning environment and client attorney setting, PBL creates the space for feedback between all parties and trial and error throughout the problem-solving process. This space is critical to enhancing mutual understanding for all participants. A traditional teaching methodology and/or structure of attorney-client relationships may insufficiently address a collaboration-oriented approach to law. The methodology is notably suited to bridge this lag in collaboration within issues of international law, such as cross-border transactions and disputes. Utilizing a PBL approach in this way allows the parties to examine all interconnections between national and international laws and regulations and reforms. Rather than analyzing issues of domestic law, international law, and conflicts of law as separate, distinct domains, a PBL lens should entail the consideration of these issues in tandem. Thus, the discussion of different perceptions of an issue according to various legal lenses provides a more nuanced understanding of all parties’ conflicts and mutual interests.

It is arguable that such a participatory method can be implemented beyond the legal educational tools and mainstreamed into research projects and legal practice thus increasing co-creation in international environmental law. Given PBL’s central tenants of exploration and investigation, the method creates opportunities for all cooperative parties to learn, exchange, and collaborate throughout their legal process, as in a case or simply requesting information on an environmental matter.

In the context of international environmental law, the emerging practices of visual law and legal design often require direct input from the affected community. The practices of visual law and legal design are intended to turn complex, opaque legalese into understandable sources of legal information. With the goal of presenting critical legal information in an effective and user-friendly manner, clients may often be involved in the creation and/or selection of visuals to communicate the legal information in question⁸⁵. The application of visual, design elements to numerous legal documents including but not limited to contracts, petitions, claims, and law inherently lends itself to the adoption of PBL through its participation-based structure.

In sum, co-created legal research and action should always facilitate the contribution of all parties’ lived experiences and expertise in legal, local, and indigenous knowledge systems. Applied to the emerging practice of knowledge co-creation in environmental law, PBL strengthens all parties’ abilities to compare, contrast, and even reframe the issue in question. Through the participatory, problem analyzing process, PBL propels all participants to learn from one another’s diverse expertise.

11. Applying the Delphi Method (DM) to Legal Research

Although the practice of participatory climate governance research has become increasingly commonplace given the anthropogenic demands on finite natural resources, in practice, many countries and communities face barriers to compliance. Actors face complex challenges including but not limited to communication lags, poor resource management, ineffective institutional arrangements, insufficient human capacity, and inadequate financial investment. Any of these factors can undermine good climate governance research and implementation efforts at large. To bridge the barriers to effective, equitable climate governance, research must take into consideration the harmonization of policy action, scientific discovery and efforts, and community participation. To promote this harmonization, active input, alignment, and collaboration between all stakeholders, especially local communities, in research and decision-making settings must be present. It is thus presumed that instituting a methodological framework can help advance this process of cooperation through the delineation of research and practice foci and scope. This section argues that to determine the most suitable route for ascertaining a community’s legal needs, it is possible to use the Delphi Method (DM). The implementation of the DM can help establish the necessary synergies between environmental concerns, community concerns, and natural resource management within legal research and practical settings. The DM is most simply defined as a process used to arrive at a group opinion and/or decision by surveying a panel of experts.⁸⁶ The panel experts, comprised of individuals with a deep understanding of various aspects of the problem at hand, respond to multiple rounds of questionnaires. Their responses are aggregated and anonymously shared with the full panel after each survey round. The panel experts can then adjust their answers after each round as per the group response and discussion. The method’s goal is for the panel to achieve a consensus with regard to what the panel perceives the problem to be and/or determine what is the best course of action.⁸⁷

As per the methodology’s central focus on achieving consensus through discussion, Delphi rounds can help pinpoint the realities and needs of all stakeholders, including indigenous and local communities, public and private sector actors in environmental decision-making processes. The active consideration of a diverse set of needs is an integral function of the establishment and implementation of legitimate, effective, and egalitarian co-created law.

Using the DM allows participants to gather expert consensus on which course of action would be most appropriate for the matter at hand. As a systematic and collaboration-based research technique for procuring the judgment of a panel of experts on a topic, this method is often applied in emerging topics where there is a lack of empirical evidence.⁸⁸ As reiterated above, the panel experts, which can include community representatives, are selected as per predefined guidelines to participate in two or more rounds of structured surveys. In a research setting, following each survey, the lead researcher (PI) will deliver an anonymous summary of the results of the previous survey as an integrated part of the next survey round. The method is inherently based on co-creation through its design of survey rounds which require the review of all members’ anonymous opinions. Group revision helps to achieve a co-created response to the problem. Additionally, this method can decrease the variability of the responses and facilitate group consensus, a difficult task in any research and/or legal context.⁸⁹

It must be noted that over the course of the past three decades, the concept of co-creation has made an impact on environmental rights and governance as seen in the precedents of the Åarhus Convention (1998) and Escazú Agreement (2018). These agreements expanded the role of participation in environmental decision-making at the international level by including the voices of non-state actors such as NGOs and vulnerable populations and establishing access rights for the public.⁹⁰ Yet this progress towards true co-creation in environmental research and decision-making has been repeatedly undermined by misunderstanding and discord between stakeholders to adequately implement the principles and conventions of international governance.⁹¹

Laws and regulations are at risk of falling short of their intended impact if there is no domestic legislation, independent review, financial backing, and critical community support to successfully carry them out. The implementation of the Delphi Method may serve as a mitigation strategy to assuage attrition from climate governance research and action goals. The survey rounds’ identification of obstacles, competing perspectives, interests, and overall gaps in understanding local needs and practices regarding an issue (i.e. research question or case) can streamline and clarify the information needed to determine the most sustainable course(s) of action for all concerned parties.

12. Brief conclusions on the potential benefits of PBL and Delphi Method in Legal Research

The overarching goal of applying more rigorous approaches to co-created legal research, governance, and legislation is threefold. First, to create a practice that can document all the information, needs, concerns, and goals of all parties involved in a legal research project and/or legal matter. Secondly, identify when collaboration is feasible, and delineate at which points the project’s trajectory may be modified to become more inclusive. And lastly, mainstream the implementation of respectful and multi-perspective communications in legal research and practice, in turn supporting greater participation in international environmental law and governance.

13. Concluding Remarks

This contribution has explored some of the methodological applications of knowledge co-creation. The analysis was prompted by a conscious effort to find the best practices and routes to understanding participation from multiple perspectives: the epistemological (as a grounding element of environmental governance, in its procedural and substantive implications), the ecological (as the fundamental link that restores the relationship between all elements of the ecosystem) and the methodological (as the way to inform new approaches to environmental legal research). The trajectory of this effort over the coming years will largely depend on the methodological attitude of legal researchers to integrate multiple perspectives when developing environmental solutions.

As illustrated in the previous sections, the process of participatory research applied to law enables pluralism by facilitating the relationship between researchers and participants, encompassing different views and methods, raising critical consciousness, and promoting change in the lives of those involved.

Following the theory of Richard B. Norgaard, whose research focused on the expansion of pluralistic approaches to transdisciplinary knowledge, this concluding section argues for ‘conscious methodological pluralism.’ ⁹²

The exploration of multiple insights and corresponding methods, in the context of dialogue between researchers, students, and community members, offers an example of the multiplicity of social and ecological systems and the corresponding difficulties of making meaningful change. Moreover, methodological pluralism helps to sustain biological and cultural diversity, enhancing participation in environmental decision-making processes. If a methodological approach that encourages knowledge co-creation can open new avenues to increasing equitable participation, it is plausible that a new level of effectiveness of participation, where all parties are involved in the research process, may course correct the divisive status quo of the law determining the environment. However, the path toward the consolidation of effective co-creation in legal methodology is fraught with challenges. Further research is needed to refine the aforementioned steps of co-created approaches to research. Critical legal approaches and cross-disciplinarity need to be considered within the context of empirical case studies, involving researchers from different legal orders and disciplines.

It is, therefore, necessary that researchers from different disciplines join forces to define concepts and test methods and processes in comparative studies. Interaction with indigenous and local communities is essential to develop tools and methods, test new creativity techniques, and advance pluralistic perspectives on ecological knowledge and sustainability.