By Julia Schegg, Rea Pärli, Manuel Fischer and Eva Lieberherr.
2. Rea Pärli (biography)
3. Manuel Fischer (biography)
4. Eva Lieberherr (biography)
How do contextual factors influence the effects of transdisciplinary research projects? How can assessment of transdisciplinary research move from only considering outcome effectiveness to understanding the reasons behind how and why something works?
Our framework considers both context and the effects of transdisciplinary research projects, as summarised in the figure below. Each aspect of the framework is described in more detail.
Context
We based the conceptualization of context for any given problem on three established frameworks from policy studies, emphasising system conditions, public action resources and events.
As shown in the figure, these three contextual conditions are nested.
System conditions
The system conditions for any particular problem involve:
- The relevant governance system in place, namely the role of public actors and institutions, along with private, civil society and academic entities.
- The relevant biophysical system, namely the natural resources, which may involve a specific geographic area, such as a natural reserve, or a particular sector, such as forestry or agriculture.
The system conditions are based on Ostrom’s (2009) Social-Ecological Systems Framework, which provides a systematic means for understanding spaces where a diverse group of actors implements joint projects. When analysing the influence of contextual factors in transdisciplinary research projects, system conditions help to identify and understand the implicit and explicit “rules” a project is operating under.
Public action resources
The public action resources for any particular problem are the relevant:
- financial capital, namely the availability and strategic use of financial means
- political support, namely support from, and collaboration with, different government entities
- law, namely the availability and enforcement of laws and policies
- organization, namely the participating organizations’ experience in the field, quality of service, networks and capability to access information or resources
- time, namely the availability and strategic use of time resources, along with efficiency of relevant processes
- consensus, namely agreement on the approach and aim of the project, along with trust in the project implementation and its implementers
- infrastructure, namely material assets, such as land, property, roads and equipment
- information, namely access to knowledge, information and data about the technical, economic, political and social aspects of the project
- personnel, namely the number of people available for project implementation and their education and skill levels.
The public action resources come from Knoepfel’s (2018) work and his definition: “the means of action available to each of the public and private actors affected by the collective problem to be resolved” (p. 43). Compared to the system conditions, the concept of action resources puts more emphasis on the resources available to actors. With our framework, we propose examining action resources at the project level. This means using them to analyse which resources are available to both academic and non-academic actors in the project.
Events
Relevant events that may affect a particular project comprise:
- Natural events, such as pandemics, extreme weather events, and earthquakes
- Economic events, such as economic crises and labour market developments
- Political events, such as national or international conflicts and elections.
The focus on events comes from Weible and Sabatier’s (2007) work on advocacy coalitions, where external influences are crucial to understanding major policy changes and Engwall’s (2003) work which highlights that external events and shocks can affect transdisciplinary research projects by changing system conditions and action resources.
Effects of transdisciplinary projects
We grouped effects into three groups:
- knowledge production
- knowledge uptake comprising:
- knowledge integration into practice
- knowledge integration into policy
- knowledge integration into science
- learning, and societal effects.
Knowledge production
Knowledge production encompasses the generation of knowledge about:
- the current system under study (system knowledge)
- the goals (target knowledge)
- the measures and tools to achieve the goals (transformation knowledge).
This is based on the work of Pohl and Hirsch Hadorn (2007).
Knowledge uptake
Uptake of knowledge is defined as the integration of knowledge produced within a transdisciplinary research project:
- Integration of knowledge into practice could, for example, refer to the use of platforms or technologies developed within the project.
- Integration of knowledge into policy could, for example, refer to the implementation of policy recommendations.
- Integration of knowledge into science could mean, for example, the dissemination of scientific knowledge via publications, conferences, and collaborations.
This is based on the work of Fritz et al. (2019).
Learning and societal effects
Learning refers to the process of acquiring new knowledge, skills, or understanding through collaboration within a multidisciplinary setting that includes non-academic actors.
Social effects of transdisciplinary research encompass long-term social, cultural, environmental, and economic benefits that result from research outcomes, leading to transformations within and beyond the project sphere. More concretely, the enhancement of trust, mutual understanding, and joint action among diverse actors has been argued to lead to improved decision-making processes and institutional changes. These are based on the work of Jacobi et al. (2020).
Concluding questions
Would this framework be useful in your research? Are there other contextual factors and further action resources that should be considered? Are there other effects that you would highlight?
To find out more:
Pärli, R., Byamungu, M., Fischer, M., Kantengwa, S., Kintche, K., Konlambigue, M., Lieberherr, E., Six, J., Wilde, B. and Späth, L. (2024). The reality in the DRC is just not the reality in Rwanda – How context factors affect transdisciplinary research projects. Research Policy, 53, 7: 105035. (Online – open access) (DOI): https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2024.105035
Schegg, J., Pärli, R., Fischer, M. and Lieberherr, E. (2025). Research shaped through context: Lessons from transdisciplinary projects. Environmental Science and Policy, 174: 104286. (Online – open access) (DOI): https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104286
Much of the text is taken verbatim from these papers, which provide more extensive references, as well as case examples from the Global South and Global North.
References:
Engwall, M. (2003). No project is an island: Linking projects to history and context. Research Policy, 32, 5: 789–808.
Fritz, L., Schilling, T. and Binder, C. R . (2019). Participation-effect pathways in transdisciplinary sustainability research: an empirical analysis of researchers’ and practitioners’ perceptions using a systems approach. Environmental Science and Policy, 102: 65–77.
Jacobi, J., Llanque, A., Bieri, S., Birachi, E., Cochard, R., Chauvin, N. D., Diebold, C., Eschen, R., Frossard, E., Guillaume, T., Jaquet, S., Kämpfen, F., Kenis, M., Kiba, D.I., Komarudin, H., Madrazo, J., Manoli, G., Mukhovi, S. M., Nguyen, V. T. H. and Robledo-Abad, C. (2020). Utilization of research knowledge in sustainable development pathways: Insights from a transdisciplinary research-for-development programme. Environmental Science and Policy, 103: 21–29.
Knoepfel, P. (2018). Public Policy Resources. Policy Press: Bristol, United Kingdom.
Ostrom, E. (2009). A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science, 325 (5939): 419–422.
Pohl, C. and Hadorn, G. H. (2007). Principles for designing transdisciplinary research. Oekom: Munich, Germany.
Weible, C. M. and Sabatier, P. A. (2007). A guide to the advocacy coalition framework. In: F. Fischer, G. J. Miller and M. S. Sidney (Eds.), Handbook of public policy analysis: Theory, politics, and methods. Routledge: Oxfordshire, United Kingdom.
Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Statement: Generative artificial intelligence was not used in the development of this i2Insights contribution. (For i2Insights policy on generative artificial intelligence please see https://i2insights.org/contributing-to-i2insights/guidelines-for-authors/#artificial-intelligence.)
Biography: Julia Schegg BSc is a scientific assistant at the Natural Resource Policy Group (NARP) at the Institute for Environmental Decisions, Department of Environmental Systems Science at ETH Zurich in Switzerland. She is a Masters Student at the University of Basel in the program “Changing Societies.”
Biography: Rea Pärli PhD works at the Translational Centre for Biodiversity Conservation at the Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research (WSL) in Birmensdorf, Switzerland. She coordinates transdisciplinary working groups that produce synthesis materials to inform policy and support practical conservation efforts.
Biography: Manuel Fischer PhD is a research group leader for Policy Analysis and Environmental Governance (PEGO) at the Department of Environmental Social Sciences at Eawag in Duebendorf and an adjunct professor at the Institute of Political Science, University of Bern, both in Switzerland. His research analyzes governance arrangements, decision-making processes and political networks, with a focus on water and environmental issues.
Biography: Eva Lieberherr PhD is adjunct professor and group leader of the Natural Resource Policy Group (NARP) at the Institute for Environmental Decisions, Department of Environmental Systems Science at ETH Zurich in Switzerland. Her research addresses socio-ecological challenges such as the use and protection of the natural resources water, forest and landscapes.
I like both frameworks, the one for considering context as well as Dan’s which looks at a project in its socio-techno-ecological ecosystem. Both frameworks show how multi-dimensional and complex a project’s context is. My question from a practical perspective is: How, for a specific project context, can I identify the most relevant elements of the context? Or do I always have to consider all of them?
Great question, Christian! My approach to identifying the “effective context” or those contextual variables that exert greatest influence on a particular phenomenon (such as the collaborative processes and products of a cross-disciplinary team working on a particular project) is to consider the contextual scope (including its spatial, temporal, and socio-cultural dimensions) that best match the situation under study. For instance, is the collaboration relatively short or long-term, does it involve partners co-located or dispersed across different geographical sites; is the collaboration mono- or multi-cultural (e.g., involve participants from different political and cultural contexts working, within a single or multiple time zones; and is the collaboration primarily among scholars from different fields or does it bridge academic and non-academic partners and sectors)? So, the idea of contextual scope and efforts to delimit the “effective context” of a “target phenomenon) offer at least a partial theoretical basis for identifying contextual variables that are most robust in predicting the short and longer-term success of the collaboration. The third chapter of my book, Social Ecology in the Digital Age (2018 Academic Press, http://bit.ly/2uqjqlz) discusses these issues in more detail and considers key differences between contextually-oriented and non-contextual research. I’m happy to send a digital copy of the book to anyone interested. Sorry to go on so long, Christian, but your question is an important and provocative one. Warm regards, Dan
Very important question indeed, Christian. Dan already gave a great answer based on his framework. I’ll add to this from the perspective of how our framework can be applied.
We designed the framework to also function as a kind of checklist for project planning and evaluation. While the list of context factors is quite extensive, the intention is to go through them and ask, for each one, whether it is actually relevant for your specific project. For example: which sectors or biophysical systems really matter here? How does the governance context influence the project? Are there key resources available or missing?
This process helps you systematically identify the most relevant elements without overlooking important aspects. At the same time, it allows you to narrow things down: if certain factors clearly do not apply, you can simply drop them.
So in practice, you don’t need to analyze everything in detail, but it is useful to briefly consider all factors to make a conscious and transparent decision about what really matters in your project context.
Thank you Manuel! Best wishes, Dan
Excellent article! See also these earlier discussions of contextual influences on transdisciplinary research collaboration and evaluation related to your post – https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7zb1s7w1 and. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/41z0x2kr Best wishes, Dan
Thank you Dan. These are indeed relevant, happy to have a look at them. Best, Manuel