Abstract and Organization of the Session: "Co-production of knowledge" or "plural knowledge integration" are presented as social and methodological processes and conditions for the resilience of socio-ecosystems. But few information are provided on: (i) the modalities and practical conditions for these socio-cognitive processes, and (ii) the political and ethical dimensions of the co-production of knowledge for the resilience. Some studies discuss the resilience benefits from the complementary of different knowledge systems (Berkes & al., 2000 ; Long & al., 2003). These researches support that a combination of different knowledge systems can improve the management and the resilience of socioecological systems (Folkes, 2004). But what are the concrete modalities (kinds of articulation, redefinitions) of the various knowledge integration? As Bohensky and Maru (2011) point out, references to resilience are mostly theoretical or hypothetical rather than empirical. Furthermore, the word ?integration' remains problematic implying unequal social relationships between groups provided with different cognitive frameworks, as well as it suggest new ways of thinking the social act to "integrate" and the links created between different categories of knowledge (hybridization is not the only form - or result - of these news links). So, the words "Integration" and "Co-production" of knowledge impose to question the political issues of the socio-cognitive processes implied and the way the coproduced knowledge constitute instrumental categories for actors in development or political arenas. This point imply to consider the motivations, the forms of engagement and their justification by actors (researchers, politics, social groups) working in these processes of knowledge co-production for the socio-ecological systems resilience. Organization of the session After a brief introduction reminding the focus of the session, four papers will be presented. The both first ones will dis