From scientific authority to the court jester: Shedding light on epistemic pluralism within transdisciplinary research projects

Abstract

This paper aims to share and analyze the difficulties and discomfort that social scientists may face when conducting transdisciplinary research. Focusing on the case study of a research project that brought together farmers, farm advisors, social and biotechnical science teachers, and researchers interested in seed management and participatory plant breeding, it questions the use of science and the position of social scientists in processes of agroecological transformation. The paper provides an analytical insight into the knowledge ecology of stakeholders who want to move away from the hybrid maize varieties bought and grown by farmers in order to work with open-pollinated populations. The results shed light on discrepancies between different levels of interaction within the project, through an original method using video to intervene at the interface of farms, local groups, and meetings of the research project steering committee. The authors first explain how they used video recording and filmmaking to give voice to ways of doing that are often shifting and indeterminate in the face of evidence-based criteria. They then show how this methodological framework opened up an arena in which to scrutinize different ways of knowing and being, though only momentarily. They share their frustrations and the methodological questions they faced, drawing on the figure of the court jester to discuss the role that researchers might play within such configurations. The paper concludes with a critical perspective on the development of transdisciplinary research projects that truly reflect the principles of agroecology, pointing to the need to emphasize scientific pluralism by engaging participants in a collective exercise of epistemic clarification and dialogue.