Exploring tensions in co-creating a proposal for floodplain meadows research

This paper explores tensions between the theory and practice of science communication, comparing longstanding concerns about 'top-down' privilege and the hegemonic dominance of academic perspectives in science-society interactions, with the idealism of 'bottom-up' emergence and openness on behalf of wider societal constituencies. We scrutinise these issues through 'Mitti' Matters, an engaged research project designed to co-create a research proposal based on 'scientific and public needs'. In this paper, we document how we sought to identify and resolve tensions through the co-construction of 'third spaces' for equitable engagement involving polyvocal and poly-peripheral exchanges with community representatives, high-school students, professionals working in nature and/or education, and environmental researchers. We conclude by arguing that there is no ideal way to co-create proposals for research. But we ought to aim for greater equity and procedural justice in how these processes are planned and enacted. We argue that the integrity of scientists and science communicators in how they engage with wider constituencies is as significant as the scientific knowledge and theories of engagement that we seek to explore. In resolving the tensions in co-creating ideas for a proposal requires to research floodplain meadows we combined participatory methodologies, inclusive approaches to communication, and facilitation to build on pre-existing knowledge, experiences and processes of participants. Together, this enabled a form of epistemic justice.