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 field experiences to generate transdisciplinary research questions
By Kimberly Bourne and Alison Deviney.
2. Alison Deviney (biography)
What are the benefits of field experiences for large convergence research centers? How can they be used to generate new research questions that cross disciplines and benefit local communities?
We draw on a two-day retreat centered around a geographically specific issue to provide lessons that may be useful for others. The retreat combined field excursions and a brainstorming workshop to generate new research questions. An additional benefit was that it positively changed the power dynamics in the group.
In our case, the large convergence research center focuses on innovations for sustainable phosphorus management. A central field site is in South Florida, USA, where phosphorus pollution from agricultural and urban areas threatens a wetlands national park (the Everglades).
The enablers of effective knowledge exchange between science and policy
By Vivian Nguyen and Chris Cvitanovic.
2. Chris Cvitanovic (biography)
What are the practical enabling conditions necessary for effectively implementing strategies to enhance knowledge exchange at the science-policy interface?
To address this question, we undertook a comprehensive and global review of the published literature in the field of environmental management. Specifically, following established scoping review protocols, we examined 56 empirical case studies that document enablers of effective knowledge exchange between science and policy. By doing so, we also identified and provided actionable insights that can help anyone working at the interface of science and policy to enhance their knowledge exchange efforts, ultimately leading to more impactful and desirable outcomes, and ensuring that the benefits of knowledge exchange efforts outweigh the cost of implementation.
Ninth annual review
By Gabriele Bammer.
This is the ninth annual “state of the blog” review.
As we wrap up another year of i2Insights, what are the key issues to reflect on in our nine year history? What have been the highlights of year nine? What changes are underway or planned?
Moving forward globally
A key issue to reflect on in our nine year history is how well i2Insights is achieving its goal of being a global resource. In tackling complex problems through Integration and Implementation Sciences (i2S), transdisciplinarity, systems thinking, action research, post-normal science or other approaches, I have always thought that we have a unique opportunity to advance globally, combining experience from around the world. This would make us different from most disciplines and fields, which were first established in the Global North and then exported to the Global South.
Being a “conscious” leader: Three foundational commitments
By Gemma Jiang and Jeni Cross.
2. Jeni Cross (biography)
As a leader, are you prone to defensiveness, blame and avoidance? Is your team trapped in a similar pattern? What is the alternative and how to get there?
The Conscious Leadership framework’s 15 commitments (Dethmer, Chapman and Klemp, 2014) offer powerful tools for addressing these questions. Central to this framework is the distinction between operating “above the line,” which involves openness, curiosity, and a commitment to growth, and “below the line,” characterized by defensiveness, blame, and avoidance. The first three commitments—taking radical responsibility, learning through curiosity, and feeling all feelings—serve as foundational steps for leaders and teams to maintain an “above the line” mindset. This post explores these commitments and the associated tools to empower leaders in guiding their teams from below to above the line.
Fostering transdisciplinary research in the Global South: Lessons for funders
By Flurina Schneider, Zarina Patel, Katsia Paulavets, Tobias Buser, Jacqueline Kado and Stefanie Burkhart.
How can research funding programmes address existing inequalities in global science systems? How can they foster science-society-policy interactions and transdisciplinary research in the Global South?
Inequalities in science disadvantage the Global South in terms of classical science metrics such as the number of researchers and publications, but also in terms of access to research, funding and infrastructure. Early career researchers are particularly affected.
To address these inequalities, financial investment in research capacity is needed from both national governments and international donors. However, dependence on international funding reinforces the influence of the Global North in setting research agendas in the Global South. We argue that international research funders can mitigate this challenge by supporting transdisciplinary research, because transdisciplinary research integrates different perspectives to resonate with local realities and problems.
Epistemic justice and its relevance to transdisciplinary research
By Sarah Cummings, Charles Dhewa, Gladys Kemboi, Stacey Young and Mike Powell.
Can you imagine that you are in a situation where no-one listens to you or believes what you have to say? And the reason they are not listening or believing is because of your race or your gender or where you come from or your accent, or an intersectional combination of all four?
Or imagine that the knowledge of your community is seen as worthless and ignored, even when the community will suffer most when efforts to change it go awry?
This phenomenon is called epistemic injustice. Originally elaborated by social philosopher Miranda Fricker (2007), epistemic (or knowledge-related) injustice comprises unfair treatment in which the voices, experiences and solutions of marginalized individuals, communities and societies are ignored. We consider that it poses an existential threat to individuals and communities.