IntroductionKnowledge as Enablement: Engagement Between Higher Education and the Third Sector in South Africa (Erasmus & Albertyn, 2014) reflects on engaged scholarship, knowledge, and the co-generation of mutually beneficial outcomes through community-university partnerships (for a critical subultern perspective see Harley & Butler, 2015). The edited collection focuses on the "principles and practices of enablement through reciprocal knowledge sharing and collaborative building and utilisation of knowledge between the third sector of society and higher education institutions" in South Africa (Albertyn & Erasmus, 2014, p. 22).1Knowledge as Enablement also aims to "create a 'buzz' in the landscape around the potential of this knowledge partnership to provide a generative space for knowledge production and innovation" (Albertyn & Erasmus, 2014, p. 22). The rationale for this is that "both the third sector and the Higher Education Institution (HEI) partners need knowledge and novel ideas to solve complex [emphasis added] problems in society and enable people, institutions and communities to change conditions in their everyday world" (Albertyn & Erasmus, 2014, p. 28) (, citing Filstad and McManus, 2011). Despite the observation that sometimes problems are complex, there is no explanation as to what, specifically, this complexity represents-and the implications for engaged scholarship or enablement. This article aims to contribute to the platform that Knowledge as Enablement has provided by introducing additional theoretical layers from the perspective of complexity, supported by case material from the Limpopo Province, South Africa.The article is structured in the following way: the main enablers that are highlighted in Knowledge as Enablement are introduced. Complexity, including complex adaptive systems, is presented before the case study is described. The ensuing discussion provides additional insights about enablement in the context of complexity and engaged scholarship. This includes (1) roles and responsibilities, focusing on leadership, participation, and praxis; (2) working with complex adaptive systems, focusing on systemic change, sensemaking, and attractors-including tentative links to teachable moments; and (3) identifying and responding appropriately to multi-ontology knowledge contexts.Knowledge as EnablementKnowledge as Enablement emphasised the importance of social change and transformation over purely theoretical academic work. For example, de Beer argued that:Enabling knowledge refers to the process of sharing, generating and transforming knowledge, while enabling knowledge (with a different emphasis) refers to the outcomes or impact of a kind of knowledge that is not simply abstract and theoretical but one that enables local change and transformation. (2014, p. 133)Enabling knowledge is practice-based, developed in context and spans multiple disciplinary boundaries. Typically, it is associated with "Mode 2 knowledge, which is knowledge not just for its own sake, but for the sake of social change and transformation" (de Beer, 2014, p. 133).Knowledge as Enablement is split into three sections-"Conceptual Positionings," "Focus on the Third Sector," and "Case Studies and New Approaches"-presenting the reader with a broad spectrum of frustrations, hopes and aspirations, mechanisms and methodologies relating to enabling knowledge. The gist of the book is that knowledge, per se, does not necessarily facilitate change and social transformation. It is argued that for knowledge to contribute to change and social transformation, particular forms of knowledge must be purposefully enabled in order to achieve sustainable, mutually beneficial outcomes. The purposeful enablement of knowledge includes incorporating a host of factors into the knowledge project, which often entails some institutional "risks" (Erasmus & Albertyn, 2014, p. 24). These factors include, inter alia, visions for a more engaged future (de Beer, 2014; Magaiza, 2014)-in spite of the structural constraints that frustrate efforts to grow engaged activities in South Africa (Erasmus, 2014; Pienaar, 2014), an improved understanding of the reality and functioning of the third sector (Ellis & van Rooyen, 2014; Hellmuth, 2014; Kaars & Kaars, 2014), and at the level of operations, a focus on reciprocal relations (Hammett & Vickers, 2014) and knowledge sharing (Venter & Seale, 2014). …

中文翻译：

---

以知识为基础：受复杂性影响的其他观点

引言知识作为赋能：南非高等教育与第三部门的互动（Erasmus和Albertyn，2014年）反映了敬业的学术知识，知识以及通过社区与大学之间的伙伴关系共同产生互利成果的观点（关于批判性的次要观点，请参见Harley＆Butler，2015年）。编辑后的藏书着眼于南非的“通过互惠的知识共享以及社会第三部门与高等教育机构之间的知识的相互积累和合作建设与利用来实现的原则和实践”（Albertyn＆Erasmus，2014年，第22页）。1知识因为Enablement也旨在“创造“嗡嗡声” 本文旨在通过从复杂性的角度介绍其他理论层面，并以南非林波波省案例材料为支持，为以知识为基础的实现提供平台。本文的结构如下：引入启用后，在“知识”中突出显示。在描述案例研究之前，先介绍了复杂性，包括复杂的自适应系统。随后的讨论提供了关于在复杂性和敬业精神的背景下实现能力的其他见解。这包括（1）角色和责任，重点在于领导，参与和实践；（2）使用复杂的自适应系统，着重于系统的变化，意义的形成和吸引子，包括与可教时刻的初步联系；（3）识别和应对多本体论知识上下文。知识作为赋能知识作为赋能强调社会变革和变革对纯理论研究工作的重要性。例如，德比尔（De Beer）辩称：启用知识是指共享，生成和转化知识的过程，而启用知识（具有不同的重点）是指一种知识的结果或影响，这种知识不仅是简单的抽象和理论的，而是一种可以实现本地变化和转型的解决方案。（2014，p。133）知识是基于实践的，是在上下文中发展的，并且跨越了多个学科领域。通常，它与“模式2知识相关联，这不仅是为了自身，而且是为了社会变革和转型的知识”（de Beer，2014，p。133）。知识的实现分为三个部分：“概念定位”，“专注于第三部门”和“案例研究和新方法”，向读者展示了广泛的挫折感，希望和抱负，机制和与促成知识有关的方法。该书的要旨是，知识本身并不一定促进变革和社会转型。有人认为，为了使知识有助于变革和社会转型，必须有目的地启用特定形式的知识，以实现可持续的互利成果。知识的有目的的实现包括将许多因素纳入知识项目，这通常会带来一些制度上的“风险”（Erasmus＆Albertyn，2014，第24页）。这些因素包括，尤其是远景的参与（de Beer，2014； Magaiza，2014），尽管结构性限制阻碍了在南非开展参与活动的努力（Erasmus，2014； Pienaar，2014），对第三部门的现实和功能有更好的理解（Ellis＆van Rooyen，2014; Hellmuth，2014; Kaars＆Kaars，2014），并且在运营层面上，关注对等关系（Hammett＆Vickers，2014）和知识共享（Venter和Seale，2014年）。… van Rooyen，2014年；Hellmuth，2014年；Kaars＆Kaars，2014年），在运营层面，重点是对等关系（Hammett＆Vickers，2014年）和知识共享（Venter＆Seale，2014年）。… van Rooyen，2014年；Hellmuth，2014年；Kaars＆Kaars，2014年），在运营层面，重点是对等关系（Hammett＆Vickers，2014年）和知识共享（Venter＆Seale，2014年）。…