Current post
What is needed to institutionalise transdisciplinarity?
By Gabriele Bammer
What are the indicators that transdisciplinarity has been institutionalised? How close is it? What still needs to be done to achieve institutionalisation?
Transdisciplinary teaching and research are becoming more common in universities and a range of research organisations. So how will we know that transdisciplinarity is an integral and accepted part of the research and higher education scene, nationally and internationally?
I suggest that there are two primary criteria:
- The expertise required to undertake transdisciplinary research is recognized and codified
- Acknowledged transdisciplinary experts are given an equal voice with established disciplines when research and higher education policy are made and when funding is allocated.
Recent posts
Trust at the science-policy interface
By Chris Cvitanovic and Rebecca Shellock
2. Rebecca Shellock (biography)
How important is trust at the science-policy interface? How can you build trust when working with decision-makers? And how can trust be repaired after a break-down?
How important is trust when working at the science-policy interface?
Trust is important at 3 levels:
- Trust in individuals (eg., an individual researcher and an individual policy-maker), which is important for providing space for open dialogue;
- Trust in the research organisation, which focuses on organisational legitimacy and credibility, and acting in a way that is free of bias;
- Trust in the process by which knowledge is generated and exchanged.
System redesign toward creating shared value
By Moein Khazaei, Mohammad Ramezani, Amin Padash and Dorien DeTombe
2. Mohammad Ramezani (biography)
3. Amin Padash (biography)
4. Dorien DeTombe (biography)
How can services that are provided to citizens be overhauled so that they will survive, be competitive and be fair (eg., accessible to all)? Is there a systematic way in which shared value can be created? By shared value we mean combining social and environmental interests with corporate interests.
We have developed a methodology that we call “System redesign toward creating shared value” or SYRCS. It comprises 4 stages, shown in the figure below. They are:
- emancipation and critical thinking
- problem structuring
- multi-criteria and quantitative decision-making
- creating shared value.
A new alliance between the natural and human sciences?
By Sergio Mariotti
How can we forge a new alliance between the natural and human sciences in order to deal with complex problems? Can economics and engineering show the way? Where does transdisciplinarity fit?
Ilya Prigogine based his 1990s theory of complexity on the need for a “new alliance” between the natural and human sciences in order to restore a unified knowledge based on plurality, diversity and multiple perspectives.
I explore what this would mean if we focus on two disciplines – economics and engineering – in the context of one complex problem: a future society increasingly influenced by the cluster of organizational and market innovations induced by Artificial Intelligence technologies.
Economists and engineers have played a vital role in the evolution of our modern society. The related disciplines have intertwined with each other, leading to mutual cross-fertilization.
Navigating intercultural relations in transdisciplinary practice: The partial overlaps framework
By David Ludwig, Vitor Renck & Charbel N. El-Hani
2. Vitor Renck (biography)
3. Charbel N. El-Hani (biography)
How can local knowledge be effectively and fairly incorporated in transdisciplinary projects? How can such projects avoid “knowledge mining” and “knowledge appropriation” that recognize marginalized knowledge only where it is convenient for dominant actors and their goals? In addition, how can knowledge integration programs avoid being naive or even harmful by forcing Indigenous people into regimes of knowledge production that continue to be dominated by the perspectives of external researchers?
Highlighted posts
Research impact in government – three crucial elements you will need for success
By Anthony Boxshall
What is the less visible ‘stuff’ that helps (or hinders) the uptake of research findings into government policy?
As a researcher it can be frustrating to have a great idea, connected to a seemingly important need, and even good networks, and yet still not be able to help your research have impact in the daily life of the relevant public sector decision-makers.
From more than 20 years of being involved in and with the senior decision-making levels of public sector environment agencies and running a business all about increasing the impact of science into public sector decision-making, I offer three insights that you should look for to see if the time and place are right for the uptake of your research. If these three elements exist, your research stands a good chance for uptake.
Skilful conversations for integration
By Rebecca Freeth and Liz Clarke
2. Liz Clarke (biography)
Interdisciplinary collaboration to tackle complex problems is challenging! In particular, interdisciplinary communication can be very difficult – how do we bridge the gulf of mutual incomprehension when we are working with people who think and talk so very differently from us? What skills are required when mutual incomprehension escalates into conflict, or thwarts decision making on important issues?
It is often at this point that collaborations lose momentum. In the absence of constructive or productive exchange, working relationships stagnate and people retreat to the places where they feel safest: their own disciplines, their offices, or the colleagues who are on their ‘side’. As a consequence, prospects for meaningful collaboration and integration dwindle.
A flexible framework for stakeholder engagement
By Michelle Banfield
How can stakeholder engagement in research be effectively planned? What parameters need to be taken into account? How can flexibility be built in to accommodate different levels of researcher and stakeholder experience?
The framework presented here was developed for health services research, but is more broadly applicable. The framework has three separate dimensions.
Four strategies for improving knowledge exchange among scientists and decision-makers
By Chris Cvitanovic
How can we improve knowledge exchange among scientists and decision-makers to facilitate evidence informed decision-making? Of course there is no one size fits all approach, but here I outline four strategies that could be adapted and implemented across different contexts: (i) knowledge co-production, (ii) embedding, (iii) knowledge brokers, and (iv) boundary organisations. These are illustrated in the figure below.