An actor-specific guideline for quality assurance in transdisciplinary research

Abstract Transdisciplinarity has a long tradition – both in terms of academic discourse and research practice. The proliferation of transdisciplinary research (TDR) has, however, only progressed moderately up until now. The main reason for this is the lack of a generally accepted quality standard for TDR. In addition to meeting the quality standards of excellence of ‘normal science’, TDR is supposed to respond to a variety of societal demands. Establishing a quality standard that incorporates these requirements would only be possible in the long-term as it calls for far reaching changes on both an institutional level as well as that of science as a whole. Building up a practice of quality assurance in TDR today lays the necessary foundation to bring about such changes. The aim of this paper is to present a ready-to-use quality guideline which we intend will contribute to that foundation. The guideline is customized to such TDR that aims to bring specific knowledge to bear on policy issues relating to sustainable development. The guideline addresses three groups of actors: researchers, program mangers or donors and policymakers. It shows these actors what they can do specifically to assure the quality of the transdisciplinary research process.

[1]  Hans Kastenholz,et al.  Transdisciplinarity in sustainability research: Diffusion conditions of an institutional innovation , 2005 .

[2]  Matthias Bergmann,et al.  Methods for Transdisciplinary Research: A Primer for Practice , 2013 .

[3]  K. Arrow,et al.  Social-ecological systems as complex adaptive systems: modeling and policy implications , 2012, Environment and Development Economics.

[4]  Michael Smithson,et al.  Ignorance and Science , 1993 .

[5]  E. Ostrom.  A General Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems , 2009, Science.

[6]  Arnim Wiek,et al.  Challenges of transdisciplinary research as interactive knowledge generation experiences from transdisciplinary case study research , 2007 .

[7]  Anna L. Carew,et al.  The TD Wheel: A heuristic to shape, support and evaluate transdisciplinary research , 2010 .

[8]  C. Pohl,et al.  Implications of transdisciplinarity for sustainability research , 2006 .

[9]  Daniel J. Lang,et al.  Problem structuring for transitions: The case of Swiss waste management , 2009 .

[10]  Lisa V. Bardwell.  Problem-Framing: A perspective on environmental problem-solving , 1991 .

[11]  Scientific uncertainty in advising and advocacy , 2002 .

[12]  W. Clark,et al.  Sustainability science: The emerging research program , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[13]  Loet Leydesdorff,et al.  Quality control and validation boundaries in a triple helix of university-industry-government: “Mode 2” and the future of university research , 2000, ArXiv.

[14]  Michael Burek,et al.  Toward An Integrated History to Guide the Future , 2011 .

[15]  M. Gibbons,et al.  Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty , 2003 .

[16]  Sybille van den Hove,et al.  A Rationale for Science-Policy Interfaces , 2007 .

[17]  Philipp Späth.  Learning Ex-Post: Towards a Simple Method and Set of Questions for the Self-Evaluation of Transdisciplinary Research , 2008 .

[18]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  What is societal impact of research and how can it be assessed? a literature survey , 2013, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[19]  R. Scholz,et al.  Transdisciplinarity : joint problem solving among science, technology, and society : an effective way for managing complexity , 2001 .

[20]  F. Wickson,et al.  Transdisciplinary research: characteristics, quandaries and quality , 2006 .

[21]  K. Mäler,et al.  Modeling Complex Ecological Economic Systems: Toward an Evolutionary, Dynamic Understanding of People and Nature , 1993 .

[22]  Thaddeus R. Miller,et al.  Epistemological Pluralism: Reorganizing Interdisciplinary Research , 2008 .

[23]  J. Lubchenco.  Entering the Century of the Environment: A New Social Contract for Science , 1998 .

[24]  S. Salloch,et al.  Research across the disciplines: a road map for quality criteria in empirical ethics research , 2014, BMC Medical Ethics.

[25]  Ioan Fazey,et al.  Defining and evaluating the impact of cross-disciplinary conservation research , 2010, Environmental Conservation.

[26]  Philip Balsiger,et al.  Supradisciplinary research practices: history, objectives and rationale , 2004 .

[27]  Gunilla Öberg,et al.  Facilitating interdisciplinary work: using quality assessment to create common ground , 2009 .

[28]  Sabine Maasen,et al.  Transdisciplinarity: a new mode of governing science? , 2006 .

[29]  T. Jahn.  Wissenschaft für eine nachhaltige Entwicklung braucht eine kritische OrientierungSustainability Science Requires a Critical Orientation , 2013 .

[30]  R. Kasperson,et al.  Sustainability Science , 2019, Critical Skills for Environmental Professionals.

[31]  J. Klein.  Evaluation of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research: a literature review. , 2008, American journal of preventive medicine.

[32]  Matthias Bergmann,et al.  Methods for Transdisciplinary Research , 2012 .

[33]  Michael Guggenheim,et al.  Undisciplined research: the proceduralisation of quality control in transdisciplinary projects , 2006 .

[34]  D. Roux,et al.  Bridging the Science-Management Divide: Moving from Unidirectional Knowledge Transfer to Knowledge Interfacing and Sharing , 2006 .

[35]  R. L. Costanz,et al.  Modeling complex ecological economic systems , 1993 .

[36]  Beate M. W. Ratter,et al.  Human-Nature Interactions in the Anthropocene. Potential of Social-Ecological Systems Analysis , 2012 .

[37]  K. Ott,et al.  The quality of sustainability science: a philosophical perspective , 2011 .

[38]  Steven M. Manson,et al.  Does scale exist? An epistemological scale continuum for complex human–environment systems , 2008 .

[39]  Bronwyn L Horsey,et al.  Developing and applying a framework to evaluate participatory research for sustainability , 2007 .

[40]  L. Bettencourt,et al.  Evolution and structure of sustainability science , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[41]  Roland W. Scholz,et al.  How can transdisciplinary research contribute to knowledge democracy , 2010 .

[42]  S. Funtowicz,et al.  Science for the Post-Normal Age , 1993, Commonplace.

[43]  Egon Becker,et al.  Social-ecological Systems as Epistemic Objects , 2012 .

[44]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  How should the societal impact of research be generated and measured? A proposal for a simple and practicable approach to allow interdisciplinary comparisons , 2013, Scientometrics.

[45]  Robin Williams,et al.  Interdisciplinary integration in Europe: the case of the Fifth Framework programme , 2004 .

[46]  Matthias Bergmann,et al.  Transdisciplinarity: Between mainstreaming and marginalization , 2012 .

[47]  Silvio Funtowicz,et al.  ‘Democratising’ expertise, ‘expertising’ democracy: What does this mean, and why bother? , 2003 .

[48]  F. Chapin,et al.  Planetary boundaries: Exploring the safe operating space for humanity , 2009 .

[49]  Michael Pregernig.  Impact Assessment of Transdisciplinary Research: In Need of a More Distanced View Wirkungsmessung transdisziplinärer Forschung: Es fehlt der Blick aus der Distanz , 2007 .