Transdisciplinary Sustainability Research Research Articles

Operationalizing ambiguity in sustainability science: embracing the elephant in the room

Ambiguity is often recognized as an intrinsic aspect of addressing complex sustainability challenges. Nevertheless, in the practice of transdisciplinary sustainability research, ambiguity is often an ‘elephant in the room’ to be either side-stepped or reduced rather than explicitly mobilized in pursuit of solutions. These responses threaten the salience and legitimacy of sustainability science by masking the pluralism of real-world sustainability challenges and how research renders certain frames visible and invisible. Critical systems thinking (CST) emerged from the efforts of operational researchers to address theoretical and practical aspects of ambiguity. By adapting key concepts, frameworks, and lessons from CST literature and case studies, this paper aims to establish (1) an expansive conceptualization of ambiguity and (2) recommendations for operationalizing ambiguity as a valuable means of addressing sustainability challenges. We conceptualize ambiguity as an emergent feature of the simultaneous and interacting boundary processes associated with being, knowing, and intervening in complex systems, and propose Reflexive Boundary Critique (RBC) as a novel framework to help navigate these boundary processes. Our characterization of ambiguity acknowledges the boundary of a researcher’s subjective orientation and its influence on how ambiguity is exposed and mediated in research (being), characterizes knowledge as produced through the process of making boundary judgments, generating a partial, contextual, and provisional frame (knowing), and situates a researcher as part of the complexity they seek to understand, rendering any boundary process as a form of intervention that reinforces or marginalizes certain frames and, in turn, influences action (intervening). Our recommendations for sustainability scientists to operationalize ambiguity include (1) nurturing the reflexive capacities of transdisciplinary researchers to navigate persistent ambiguity (e.g., using our proposed framework of RBC), and (2) grappling with the potential for and consequences of theoretical incommensurability and discordant pluralism. Our findings can help sustainability scientists give shape to and embrace ambiguity as a fundamental part of rigorous sustainability science.

Cross-case knowledge transfer in transformative research: enabling learning in and across sustainability-oriented labs through case reporting

The field of transdisciplinary sustainability research has brought forward a number of approaches aimed at fostering sustainability transformations and generating knowledge through collaborative experimentation in real-world settings. These cases are strongly embedded in their local context and thus the transfer of knowledge remains a key challenge. In this paper, we propose a case reporting approach that supports the structured and coherent reporting of such cases. This scheme is aimed at sustainability-oriented labs, where sustainability solutions are collaboratively developed through experimentation. The scheme focuses the reporting on local contexts, lab processes, and experiments. It is accompanied by a logic model and a set of four principles guiding the reporting procedure. The approach is designed to be general, in that it is applicable to diverse contexts and project designs, while its modularity allows the scheme to be adapted to the needs and specifics of each cases. The scheme was jointly developed and tested by a group of seven Urban Living Labs, each in their own unique context. With our approach we aim to contribute to knowledge transfer from and across cases of sustainability-oriented labs as emerging approaches in action-oriented research bridging the divide of case-based research and (meta) comparison.

Guiding principles for transdisciplinary sustainability research and practice

AbstractTransdisciplinary sustainability scientists are called to conduct research with community actors to understand and improve relations between people and nature. Yet, research hierarchies and power relations continue to favour western academic researchers who remain the gatekeepers of knowledge production and validation.To counter this imbalance, in 2018 we structured a multi‐day workshop to co‐design a set of principles to guide our own transdisciplinary, international and intercultural community of practice for biocultural diversity and sustainability. This community includes community collaborators, partner organizations, and early career and established researchers from Argentina, Bolivia, Canada, Germany, Mexico and South Africa. In 2021, we undertook online critical reflection workshops to share our research experiences and deepen our intercultural understanding of the application of the principles.Through these exercises, we adopted seven principles for working together that include: honour self‐determination and nationhood; commit to reciprocal relationships; co‐create the research agenda; approach research in a good way: embed relational accountability; generate meaningful benefits for communities; build in equity, diversity and inclusion; and emphasize critical reflection and shared learning. We explain these principles and briefly highlight their application to our research practices.By sharing these principles and associated practices, we seek to facilitate debate and spur transformations in how we conduct international and intercultural sustainability research. Our efforts also illustrate a strategy for on‐going knowledge co‐production as we cultivate safe and ethical spaces for learning together. Lessons learned may be particularly useful to those who engage in intercultural, collaborative research to advance sustainability transformations.Read the freePlain Language Summaryfor this article on the Journal blog.

On being oriented: Strengthening transgressive orientations in transdisciplinary sustainability research through queer theory

We move from a provocative analogy: that transdisciplinary sustainability researchers are to academia what queer people are to a heteronormative and sex/gender binary world. Both may experience disorientation and need to learn how to transgress established norms. Queer people and scholars have extensively dealt with (dis)orientation and celebrated transgression. We suggest that queer theory can help transdisciplinary sustainability researchers to raise questions that intensify the transgressive orientations of their work when contributing to just and equitable sustainability transformations.

Making sense of power through transdisciplinary sustainability research: insights from a Transformative Power Lab

If transdisciplinary sustainability research is to contribute to sustainability transitions, issues of power dynamics need to be understood and accounted for. However, examples of concrete methods that put this into practice are sparse. This paper presents a conceptual and methodological framework that develops a better understanding of the power phenomenon, while providing actionable knowledge. By focussing on the context of social innovation in energy transitions, we demonstrate how different theoretical conceptualisations of power can be translated into a collaborative, transdisciplinary research design. In a facilitated process, researchers, policy workers and practitioners from diverse social innovation fields developed and tested the Transformative Power Lab approach and co-wrote a ‘Power Guide’ as a strategic exploration of power dynamics in sustainability transitions, specifically regarding social innovation in energy transitions. Based on the insights that emerged during this process, we discuss how transdisciplinary and action-oriented approaches in sustainability transition studies might benefit from this approach and, potentially, develop it further.

Making transdisciplinarity happen: Phase 0, or before the beginning

Both within science and society, transdisciplinary approaches are increasingly employed to address today’s sustainability challenges. Often transdisciplinary research processes are structured in three core phases: a) problem identification and formation of a common research object; b) co-production of solution-oriented and transferable knowledge; c) embedding co-produced knowledge through transdisciplinary reintegration. In all phases of this ideal-typical model, the involvement of non-academic actors is essential to meet the challenges of real-world problems, and of transformative research practices. Despite existing guidance for the core transdisciplinary process, its initiation often remains an uncharted area because of its strong context dependency. Based on a concrete transdisciplinary case study addressing sustainability transformation in Transylvania, we bring together our learned experience with initiating a transdisciplinary process using a research-driven approach. To this end, we introduce the notion of Phase 0, as an initiating phase prior to beginning an ideal-typical transdisciplinary process. Within Phase 0, we propose three empirically and literature informed sub-phases: Sub-Phase 0.1) selecting the case study; Sub-Phase 0.2) understanding the case study context from a transdisciplinary perspective; Sub-Phase 0.3) fostering premises for coming together. We outline the general rationale behind these sub-phases, and we illustrate how we carried out each sub-phase in practice. By deriving cross-cutting lessons from the three sub-phases, we enhance the practice of transdisciplinary sustainability research with the aim to leverage its transformative potential.

Integrating knowledge within and between knowledge types in transdisciplinary sustainability research: Seven case studies and an indicator framework

Transdisciplinary research aims to generate knowledge through science-practice interactions and is attracting increasing attention in sustainability science. However,sustainable development is characterized by vast complexities and context specificities, with a broad spectrum of relevant actors. Transdisciplinary research projects targeting at socio-ecological transformations, therefore, require the integration of different bodies of knowledge from diverse actors to gain an accurate and comprehensive understanding of existing problems and potential solutions. This knowledge integration involves both the active exchange of knowledge and the creation of a joint understanding of problems and solutions. Hence, the focus of this article is to analyse how and why knowledge integration is successful in transdisciplinary research processes. We conceptualize and define knowledge types and goals of knowledge integration. By analysing seven transdisciplinary research projects, we develop and empirically test indicators for knowledge integration. We examine knowledge integration (i) within three specific knowledge types (systems, target, and transformative knowledge), and (ii) between these different knowledge types. Furthermore, we reflect on the roles of researchers and non-academic actors. The description, comparison and discussion of knowledge integration lead to the identification of barriers and success factors to improve such processes in transdisciplinary research activities.

Envisioning ocean governability transformations through network-based marine spatial planning.

The globally accelerating environmental crisis calls for radical changes in the governance of ocean resources towards a more sustainable and socially equitable world. Transdisciplinary sustainability research and networked knowledge-to-action approaches are critical parts of this change. The effective application of such approaches still puzzles social actors (individuals and networks) willing to act in more transformative ways. We conducted twelve participatory network mapping activities to assess the perception of high-level federal government institutional entrepreneurs on the structure and dynamics of an emerging socio-political arena for marine spatial planning (MSP) in Brazil. Our informants, mostly cognizant of their own intra-governmental structures, anticipate the MSP arena to remain self-enclosed, with changes only occurring within the federal government structures in the coming years. Their perceptions were largely conservative, narrow, and unambitious and therefore unfit to generate regime transformations. The limited awareness of response capacities beyond the federal government potentially leads to the endurement of the low performance already present in the MSP arena. Results from the participatory network mapping informed a five-step functional ocean governability analysis pointing to key potential contributions to support a critical turn in MSP: 1. envision situated interactional narratives to leverage regime shifts; 2. build a shared understanding of and anticipating transformative coevolutionary dynamics; 3. build awareness of the potential synergies among disparate but innovative area-based responses; 4. specify inter-network-based limitations and the necessary changes underpinning potential leaps in performance levels of ocean governance orders; 5. make power asymmetries explicit to stir structurally tailored strategic action by less influential groups. We discuss the potential role of inter-network strategies and actions and how they may confront the symptoms of depoliticized MSP pathways and the risks of it becoming an instrument of further marginalisation and power asymmetry in Brazil.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40152-021-00250-1.

Transdisciplinary sustainability research. Procedural perspectives and professional cooperation

This article draws on social theory to advance conceptualization and methodology in transdisciplinary research. It starts with a short introduction to the state of debate on transdisciplinarity and its challenges and proposes adopting a procedural perspective on sustainability. It argues that sustainable development, understood as a learning process, is the subject matter for which transdisciplinary research provides the means. This is followed by sociological reflections on the main challenge of transdisciplinary research: the collaboration between scholars and non-academics. Such collaboration points to an ambivalence in conceptualizations of transdisciplinarity, as transdisciplinary research involves scientific activity while at the same time claiming to essentially be an activity beyond the sciences, namely, a joint activity of scientists and non-academics. This has led to several inconsistencies in the debates. Achieving greater consistency requires acknowledging the specific ‘scientific bias’ inherent in the concepts in the first place: the debate on transdisciplinary research is basically scientific self-reflection about the role of scholars in collaborative activities with non-academics. As a practical answer, professionalization is recommended. The subsequent section introduces a procedural approach to learning processes in transdisciplinary sustainability research. A general model of procedures promises conceptual progress by providing a methodological foundation for sustainable learning in science–practice cooperation as well as formal criteria for evaluating such learning. Finally, transdisciplinary research is defined as a specific kind of applied science.

Creating spaces and cultivating mindsets for learning and experimentation: International Transdisciplinarity Conference 2021

In this communication, we present the background and core elements of the 2021 edition of the International Transdisciplinarity Conference. Beginning with a brief history of how the event was initiated and the role played by saguf in supporting its development, we then detail the main features of the conference and its relevance for transdisciplinary sustainability research and education.

Business models for the Anthropocene: accelerating sustainability transformations in the private sector

The rapid pace and escalating severity of climate change impacts have made clear that current incremental approaches to pressing global socio-ecological challenges are insufficient to address the root causes of unsustainable development. This has spurred increasing interest in the dynamics of transformation: the actors, capacities and resources needed to fundamentally shift development paths. The private sector is at the core of essential transformative processes necessary to build a future premised on environmental integrity, social inclusivity, and resilience. The activities of the private sector are structured and driven by their underlying business model, which is at its core a set of assumptions about how a business creates, extracts and delivers value. Dominant conceptualizations of the business model remain a narrow imagining of how business interacts with societal processes and shape development patterns. In this article we call for the conceptualization and design of business models anchored in societal purpose and operating within planetary boundaries, apt for the Anthropocene. We identify five building blocks for business models where transdisciplinary sustainability research can accelerate entrepreneurial activity that fosters desirable sustainable pathways by enabling the creation of new capabilities in support of broader transformational processes. This article seeks to inform (and potentially re-orient the efforts of) transdisciplinary scholars engaging the private sector in the co-production of community-based sustainability and resilience-building initiatives. Likewise, the building blocks provide a guide for businesses who aim to deepen their capacity to build new partnerships, identify, and incorporate new information on climate risk into their operations and develop practices, sequences and procedures oriented toward the sustainable development goals and disaster resilience.

Mediating Knowledge Co-Production for Inclusive Governance and Delivery of Food, Water and Energy Services in African Cities

Rising rates of urbanisation in Africa, without attendant improvements in critical infrastructure, have occasioned gaps in the provision of basic services in cities across the continent. Different systems and scales of service delivery — decentralised and centralised, public and private — coexist and often compete in urban spaces but rarely connect in ways that ensure the needs of the poorest are met. Our paper interrogates the value of transdisciplinary research for bringing actors in these systems together to co-produce knowledge for inclusive and sustainable outcomes. Drawing on empirical data from two complementary projects in four African cities, we demonstrate the possibilities for facilitating this kind of knowledge co-production among system actors in the food, water and energy domains. We show, through a comparative approach, elements of the co-production process that enable more responsive engagement by traditionally detached policy actors. From our findings, we generate a framework that local researchers serving as ‘knowledge intermediaries’ can use to stimulate research-policy-society interactions aimed at fostering sustainable and inclusive service delivery across Africa. By synthesising the findings from local case studies into a widely applicable framework, our analysis informs both the theory and practice of transdisciplinary sustainability research in the African context where the imperative to bridge gaps in methodological innovation and service delivery is high.

On which common ground to build? Transferable knowledge across cases in transdisciplinary sustainability research

To support societal problem solving, transdisciplinary research (TDR) uses knowledge co-production focusing on relevance and validity in a studied case and its particular social–ecological context. In the first instance, the resulting situated knowledge seems to be restricted to these single cases. However, if some of the knowledge generated in TDR could be used in other research projects, this would imply that there is a body of knowledge representing this special type of research. This study used a qualitative approach based on the methodology of grounded theory to empirically examine what knowledge is considered transferable to other cases, if any. 30 leaders of 12 Swiss-based TDR projects in the field of sustainable development were interviewed, representing both academia and practice. The transferable knowledge we found consists of the following: (1) Transdisciplinary principles, (2) transdisciplinary approaches, (3) systematic procedures, (4) product formats, (5) experiential know-how, (6) framings and (7) insights, data and information. The discussion of TDR has predominantly been focusing on transdisciplinary principles and approaches. In order to take knowledge co-production in TDR beyond an unmanageable field of case studies, more efforts in developing and critically discussing transferable knowledge of the other classes are needed, foremost systematic procedures, product formats and framings.

Collaborative design prototyping in transdisciplinary research: An approach to heterogeneity and unknowns

This paper provides insights into the practice of design-based interventions in transdisciplinary research and demonstrates how design prototyping can be made fruitful in processes of transformation and collaborative knowledge production. It shows how heterogeneous perspectives and stocks of knowledge can be related to each other and moments of integration generated by working with conceptual designs. Due to their open character, design methods are discussed as particularly promising when dealing with a high degree of complexity, uncertainties, and unknowns. After a characterization of design research and prototyping, common strategies of design research and transdisciplinary research for addressing heterogeneity and unknowns will be explored. This serves to frame the transfer of design practices to support integration processes in transdisciplinary teams. Using an example from a transdisciplinary case study in Transylvania, the implementation of design prototyping will be demonstrated and initial findings presented. Different integration dimensions from transdisciplinary sustainability research serve as a basis for investigating the epistemic, social-organizational, and communicative integration performance of design prototyping. For transdisciplinary research, design practices expand the methodical canon for working in heterogeneous teams and tackling uncertainty and unknowns in openness.

Transdisciplinary sustainability research in real-world labs: success factors and methods for change

The transdisciplinary research mode has gained prominence in the research on and for sustainability transformations. Yet, solution-oriented research addressing complex sustainability problems has become complex itself, with new transdisciplinary research formats being developed and tested for this purpose. Application of new formats offers learning potentials from experience. To this end, we accompanied fourteen research projects conceptualized as real-world labs (RwLs) from 2015 to 2018. RwLs were part of a funding program on ‘Science for Sustainability’ in the German federal state of Baden-Württemberg. Here, we combine conceptual and empirical work to a structured collection of experiences and provide a comprehensive account of RwLs. First, we outline characteristics of RwLs as transformation oriented, transdisciplinary research approach, using experiments, enabling learning and having a long-term orientation. Second, we outline eleven success factors and concrete design notes we gained through a survey of the 14 RwLs: (1) find the right balance between scientific and societal aims, (2) address the practitioners needs and restrictions, (3) make use of the experimentation concept, (4) actively communicate, (5) develop a ‘collaboration culture’, (6) be attached to concrete sites, (7) create lasting impact and transferability, (8) plan for sufficient time and financial means, (9) adaptability, (10) research-based learning, and (11) recognize dependency on external actors. Characteristics and success factors are combined to illustrate practical challenges in RwLs. Third, we show which methods could be used to cope with challenges in RwLs. We conclude discussing the state of debate on RwLs and outline future avenues of research.

Facilitating collaborative processes in transdisciplinary research using design prototyping

This article explores the application of design prototyping as a creative method to support collaborative processes within transdisciplinary sustainability research and to meet the challenges they ...

Transdisciplinary research for sustainability: scoping for project potential

AbstractIn response to the interconnected character of societal challenges, there is a growing interest in transdisciplinary sustainability research. However, for transdisciplinary research to be able to support the generation of new knowledge in a participatory and reflexive manner, a number of challenges have been identified in each stage of the transdisciplinary research process. In this paper, we respond specifically to the challenge of initiating transdisciplinary research projects, by proposing a process for performing transdisciplinary project scoping. Our group of early‐career researchers share experiences from scoping for transdisciplinary research potential, bridging local stakeholder needs with researchers’ interests across departments and national contexts. We present our methodological approach,which includes tools for stakeholder identification, systems thinking, and gap‐mapping. The approach was applied in the local context of the Navarino Environmental Observatory, Messinia, Greece. The findings identify regional sustainability concerns related to, for example, tourism, agriculture, and environmental management issues. The gap‐map highlights overlaps (e.g., in terms of existing research on the effects of agriculture on water resources), but also how previous research has been conducted on spatial and temporal scales not directly relevant to local actors. We believe that the approach can be used beyond this case study to identify the potential for problem‐oriented inter‐and transdisciplinary research.

Deconstructing a 2-year long transdisciplinary sustainability project in Northern universities: is rhetorical nobility obscuring procedural and political discords?

Transdisciplinary sustainability research (TSR) is essential to better understand and tackle wicked problems such as climate change and realisation of sustainable development goals (SDGs). However, despite the normative nobility, a significant share of these initiatives seems to remain merely rhetorical that fail to address both local level socio-environmental crises and global catastrophes such as rising emissions. To better understand structural and procedural barriers within a TSR project, this study conducted “research on (a transdisciplinary sustainability) research”. It locates two critical reasons why TSR is not able to deliver on its promises in offering effective guidance in addressing global sustainability crisis and discusses how it can be more equitable in knowledge generation in particular and science in general. Firstly, it necessitates TSR to challenge the neo-colonial regime and the hegemonic processes of a dominant Northern episteme around the concept of sustainability, as it otherwise threatens to reinforce and perpetuate the status quo that produces unsustainability from the top. Findings also reveal key procedural shortcomings (often connected to the hegemony itself) that include constricted temporal allowance, insecure scientists and nexus of techno-science markets, Northern academia, funding agencies and governments. This not only seems to affect universality and reflexivity of the TSR project, but also undermines justice and equity by reinforcing prevailing power orders. It seems essential to theoretically shift from domination to partnership, allying with multiple realities, legitimising diverse ontologies and validating epistemic plurality to help TSR gain greater credibility. Procedurally, reforms in institutional research and funding processes including extended temporal spaces and helping scientists to have better collaboration across scales seem critical to enable TSR projects realise their true potential.

Transdisciplinarity: science for and with society in light of the university\u2019s roles and functions

The idea that universities should become entrepreneurial, commercialized, private commodities or should serve politicians and governmental agencies has been promoted by the university–industry–government relationship-based Triple Helix approach and is reality in many places. In contrast, a reemphasis on universities serving the public good has been demanded by proponents of transdisciplinary sustainability research. To better understand the tensions between public-good–oriented approaches of transdisciplinarity and entrepreneurial, market-oriented Triple Helix and third-mission approaches of science—practice collaboration, this paper takes a closer look at the history of universities’ roles and functions. We then elucidate the practice of transdisciplinary processes and discuss the “science for and with society” approach of transdisciplinary sustainable transitioning. We argue that transdisciplinarity for producing groundbreaking sociotechnical solutions has to serve (a) the public good and (b) calls for independence, academic freedom, institutionalization, and proper funding schemes. Third-mission conceptions that follow the commercialization/capitalization of scientific knowledge are in conflict with the conception of science and of transdisciplinarity serving sustainable transitioning. The development of groundbreaking ideas for sustainable transitions must acknowledge the complexity and contextualization of real-world settings. Therefore, collaboration between practice and transdisciplinarity calls for the input and cooperation of authentic practitioners, i.e., the experts of practice and real wold complexity. The challenge of transdisciplinarity is to properly relate the fundamental expertise of practice to validated academic rigor. This implies that transdisciplinary research is a critical element of the university’s research mission.

Tracing power in transdisciplinary sustainability research: an exploration

Power is involved when researchers and practitioners work together in transdisciplinary sustainability research. Among other things, this has implications regarding who gets to decide which research questions are dealt with and which partners are involved, and may impede or foster joint knowledge production.We propose empirical questions that allow for the power dynamics to be rendered visible, thus providing a first step towards tackling them.While transdisciplinary (TD) sustainability research is closely tied to ideas of societal change, critical enquiries into power dynamics both within and stemming from these practices have been scant. In this article, we operationalise theories of power for an exploration of the multiple ways in which power relations pervade interactions between researchers and practitioners in these knowledge production processes. By combining theories of power over, power to and power with, we propose a set of empirical questions to systematically study both productive and repressive forms of power. Using empirical examples, we illustrate how the proposed approach makes it possible to trace power throughout TD processes: in 1. developing the project and framing the research problem, 2. co-producing knowledge, and 3. bringing results to fruition. The power perspective proposed here can guide the thinking of those actors involved in TD processes as well as meta-analyses by third parties. An enhanced understanding of the workings of power can help improve process design and facilitate reflexive TD practice.