Moderator note: We are aware that the ‘Select date range’ field in the search box below is not currently working. We are seeking a solution and once obtained, will remove this warning box. All other fields in the advanced search box below are working correctly. Last updated 6 November 2025.
Results from your search will be shown on this page below the search form – you may need to scroll down to the results if the page does not automatically take you there after you submit your search.
Instructions:
- All blog posts are searched (pages from the menu are not searched)
- Search outputs are weighted by relevance.
- If searching with two or more words, the system uses an AND operator.
- Selecting a tag, author tag and/or category binds the search to only those posts which have those taxonomy term/s.
- A search output can be obtained by filling out any one field (ie., the search box; or, categories; or, tags; or, authors; or, date). If all fields are left blank, then the search returns the blog scroll.
- Exact word combinations can be searched for by using quotation marks (eg., “transdisciplinary learning”).
- Keyword matching is on partial words.
- The reset button (beneath the ‘Submit search’ button) will clear all entries in the search form, as will clicking on the ‘Advanced search…’ link in the top of the right sidebar.
- For more information on how advanced search works, see the ‘in-detail’ instructions below.
The search function checks all blog posts but not pages (ie., it does not check the ‘About’, ‘Index’ and other pages listed in the main menu).
For posts, search checks within titles, body text, category and tag text, and comments.
Searches are weighted by relevance, with affects the order in which posts appear, with titles and content getting the most weighting, tags and categories lesser weighting, and comments the least weighting.
Increasing the number of search terms and selections generally focuses the search output (ie., decreases the number of outputs).
Keyword matching is based on partial word/s, ie., the search will find any word containing the term you are searching on, provided the word begins or ends with the search term (eg., searching for ‘ion’ will not only find the word ‘ion’ but will also find ‘caution’ or ‘ionized’, but not “cautionary’).
If you enter two or more words into the search box, the relationship between the words is based on an AND operator (meaning the more words you add, the tighter (less content is returned in) the search output).
- For example, entering transdisciplinary learning into the search box would provide an output that lists all posts with both the word transdisciplinary and the word learning anywhere in the text, Posts with only transdisciplinary in the text or posts with only learning in the text would not be included in the output.
To find a specific word combination (eg., critical systems), wrap in quotation marks (ie., “critical systems“).
When you open a post that was found by your search, you can find where your specific word or word combination appears by using your computer’s search function (eg., on a computer running Microsoft Windows, Control ‘F’ will allow you to search the post (as well as anything else in the active screen)).
Restrict searches to particular tags, categories and/or author tags by using the dropdown selectors.
- Eg., if you choose the tag Advocacy, the search will only be conducted within posts that have that tag assigned to them.
- If you added the category Cases to that search, then only posts that had both the tag Advocacy and the category Cases assigned to them would be searched.
An alternative to selecting categories, tags or authors from their respective long drop-down list is to type the term or author name you are looking for in the relevant selector field. Typing one letter will jump to the lead word in the alphabetical listing (ie, typing ‘s’ takes you to the first tag or category in the list of those starting with ‘s’). Further addition of letters will home in on a tag, category or author until it is found or until the choice of letters exhausts the possible set of tags, categories or authors (in which case that tag, category or author is not in our list). NOTE: all authors are also available in reverse name order under ‘Authors‘ in the menu bar.
In the category, tag and author dropdown list, the number in brackets after each entry indicates the number of posts with that category, tag or author assigned to them.
Tags or authors with a zero in brackets “(0)”, placed after the tag or author text, are not currently linked to any blog posts. In the case of tags, most of these tags identify alternative tags, which, if searched, will yield a result. For example, “Assumptions – see ‘Mental models’ tag (0)” signifies that blog posts about ‘assumptions’ are tagged with ‘mental models’ and not ‘assumptions.’ Occasionally there will be a tag (or author tag) with “(0)” which refers to a new tag (or author tag) on a blog post which has not yet been made public. This tag (or author tag) will be searchable once the blog post is public (usually within a week).
For the category selector, choosing one of the two parent categories (main topics or resource types) searches all blog posts, as all blog posts are assigned a main topic and a resource type.
Using cross-cultural dialogue to break down inappropriate knowledge hierarchies
By Roxana Roos.

How can indigenous, local, artisanal, craft, tacit, counter, gendered and experiential knowledge better inform solutions to complex problems, such as climate change? How—when faced with conditions of complexity, uncertainty and competing tenable knowledge claims—can the actionable knowledge base be pluralized and diversified to include the widest possible range of high-quality, potentially actionable knowledges and sources of relevant wisdom? What are the pitfalls and challenges ahead?
I start with some cautions for the usual practice of transdisciplinary research and then highlight key aspects of cross-cultural dialogue, alongside pitfalls and challenges.
Integration can reproduce undue asymmetries
Dealing with imperfection in tackling complex problems
By Gabriele Bammer.

Why is an appreciation of imperfection and its inevitability important for those seeking to understand and act on complex societal and environmental problems? Which traps can imperfection lead to and what are the most effective ways of dealing with it?
The inevitability of imperfection
Imperfection is inevitable both in attempting to develop a comprehensive understanding of complex societal and environmental problems and in acting on them. The multiple underpinning reasons include:
● Complex problems are systems problems, and all systems views are partial, so that the whole system cannot be taken into account. Even then, boundaries need to be set to effectively deploy available resources and these artificial boundaries further constrain understanding of the whole system.
Transforming North-South academic collaborations through collective reflexivity
By Adriana Moreno Cely, Kewan Mertens and Viola Nilah Nyakato.

2. Kewan Mertens (biography)
3. Viola Nilah Nyakato (biography)
How can we challenge entrenched colonial dynamics in North-South academic collaborations and foster meaningful transformation? How can we move away from power asymmetries where Northern partners assume roles as donors and agenda-setters, leaving Southern collaborators as recipients and implementers? How can we promote equitable knowledge production, allowing diverse voices to speak while being open to listening to them?
In grappling with these challenges in our own collaborations, we used collective reflexive dialogues to unpack our complicity in reproducing problematic power dynamics.
Transforming and weaving knowledge in a complex world: The butterfly and the spider
By Frédéric Darbellay.

Inter- and transdisciplinarity is today increasingly recognized as a field of study in its own right, with its own theoretical and conceptual foundations, its methodological approaches, its national and international scientific communities and networks.
The field aims to meet the demand for the collaborative, integrated and forward-looking responses that are needed to address the complexity of global issues. Inter- and transdisciplinarity is establishing itself not only as a pioneering and transformative field of research, but also as an essential approach to rethinking the organization of knowledge in academic structures and beyond.
However, inter- and transdisciplinarity remains a diverse and constantly evolving field, shaped by various schools of thought and enriched by a global and intercultural perspective. This diversity constitutes its richness and calls for an inclusive approach, capable of representing the plurality of scientific communities, approaches and practices.
Boundary spanning: A leadership perspective
By Gemma Jiang, Jenny Grabmeier, Diane Boghrat and Susan Simkins.

2. Jenny Grabmeier (biography)
3. Diane Boghrat (biography)
4. Susan Simkins (biography)
What does boundary spanning in cross-disciplinary science teams entail, and how does it relate to leadership?
At its core, boundary spanning is about bridging differences. These differences usually fall into two categories:
- Interdisciplinary differences, which involve varying perspectives across different disciplines, such as vocabulary, methods, epistemologies, and cultures.
- Transdisciplinary differences, which involve perspectives from science, society, policy, and practice that transcend institutional and sectoral boundaries.
The expertise required to bridge these differences is often referred to as “integration expertise” (Hoffman et al., 2024) or as one of us (Simkins) refers to it “interdisciplinary translation.” For simplicity, we’ll refer to all these forms of expertise as “boundary spanning,” and those who play these roles as “boundary spanners.”
Better understanding trust
By Gabriele Bammer.

Trust is regarded as essential for effective teamwork and stakeholder engagement, so how can we better understand trust? How can that understanding underpin more effective action in establishing trust and in remedying loss of trust?
I use ideas about trust developed by Piotr Sztompka (1999) to reflect on trust in teamwork and in stakeholder engagement in research projects. Stakeholder engagement is divided into two broad types:
- engagement with those affected by the problem being researched, and
- engagement with those in a position to act on the problem; they are often decision makers.
Sztompka provides a useful definition of trust (p. 25) as:
“a bet about the future contingent actions of others.”
Trust consists of beliefs or specific expectations about others which influence how we act, what Sztompka calls “commitment through action” (p. 26).