Mobilizing transdisciplinary collaborations: collective reflections on <i>de</i>centering academia in knowledge production

Alonso-Yanez, Gabriela; House‐Peters, Lily; Bonelli, Sebastián; Lorenzo-Arana, Ignacio; Ohira, M.

doi:10.1017/sus.2019.2

Cited by 16 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Appreciating and practicing different roles is a key cultural habit for leaders of ITD organizations. In some circumstances, ITD leaders must act as facilitators, 'decentering' the role of academia to effectively prioritize the voices, concerns, and ideas of diverse stakeholders (Alonso-Yanez et al 2019). Shared leadership may mirror necessities within ITD centers.…”

Section: Collaborative Leadership and Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preparing interdisciplinary leadership for a sustainable future

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urgent sustainability challenges require effective leadership for inter-and trans-disciplinary (ITD) institutions. Based on the diverse experiences of 20 ITD institutional leaders and specific case studies, this article distills key lessons learned from multiple pathways to building successful programs. The lessons reflect both the successes and failures our group has experienced, to suggest how to cultivate appropriate and effective leadership, and generate the resources necessary for leading ITD programs. We present two contrasting pathways toward ITD organizations: one is to establish a new organization and the other is to merge existing organizations. We illustrate how both benefit from a real-world focus, with multiple examples of trajectories of ITD organizations. Our diverse international experiences demonstrate ways to cultivate appropriate leadership qualities and skills, especially the ability to create and foster vision beyond the status quo; collaborative leadership and partnerships; shared culture; communications to multiple audiences; appropriate monitoring and evaluation; and perseverance. We identified five kinds of resources for success: (1) intellectual resources; (2) institutional policies; (3) financial resources; (4) physical infrastructure; and (5) governing boards. We provide illustrations based on our extensive experience in supporting success and learning from failure, and provide a framework that articulates the major facets of leadership in inter-and trans-disciplinary organizations: learning, supporting, sharing, and training.

show abstract

Section: Collaborative Leadership and Partnershipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preparing interdisciplinary leadership for a sustainable future

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As we found out from the discussions during the two-year process, urban stakeholders prefer a more ‘reduced’ form of urban sustainability goals in which some of the SDG key issues are highlighted and directly translated into urban policies. Here we argue, continuing the process we started, that research based on co-design principles and an equitable positioning of the involved practitioners (Alonso-Yanez et al, 2019) can help to identify urging ‘real-world’ sustainability problems. This coincides with what Sachs et al (2019) proposed: to work on key transformations, with a modular action agenda and with a selection of stakeholders.…”

Section: Conclusion From the Co-design Process For Sdg Implementationmentioning

confidence: 91%

How to support German cities in implementing the SDGs: learning from and about co-design

Krellenberg

Koch

2021

Glob. Sustain.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientists often argue that today's efforts towards sustainability in cities call for a strong exchange on knowledge with non-scientific actors. But do urban practitioners think the same way? Do they see the need for scientific support in their work? In our research, we directly asked these questions to urban practitioners. This article evolves around their answers and describes the activities we conducted in order to start the necessary discussion with them.

show abstract

“…At the same time, TDR team members belong to different thought collectives (Fleck 1935 ), are socialised in varying (professional) cultures and languages with distinct epistemological paradigms (Hakkarainen et al 2020 ; Scholz and Steiner 2015 ). Furthermore, they pursue different intentions and objectives (Boon et al 2014 ; Hegger et al 2012 ), and/or operate within highly divergent timeframes and institutional logics (Alonso-Yanez et al 2019 ; Bergmann et al 2021 ; Scholz and Steiner 2015 ; Thompson et al 2017 ). The diverging expectations, experiences, skills, disciplines, and practices influence the collaboration in the team during the joint project.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Different perspectives on a common goal? The Q-method as a formative assessment to elucidate varying expectations towards transdisciplinary research collaborations

Radinger-Peer

Schauppenlehner-Kloyber

Penker

et al. 2022

Sustain Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transdisciplinary research (TDR) collaborations are considered effective when they yield relevant results for science and practice. In this context, the different expectations, experiences, skills, and disciplines of the team members involved determine TDR collaboration. Using the example of 13 team members involved in the 3-year TDR project ‘Römerland Carnuntum 2040’ (Austria), we aim to identify and compare diverse expectations regarding TDR collaboration. In doing so, we question the often emphasised dichotomy between science and practice as the main challenge of TDR collaboration and aim towards making individual expectations regarding TDR collaboration visible and tangible. The contribution of the present paper is twofold: on the one hand, we provide statements for a formative assessment to externalise implicit expectations, assumptions, and epistemologies of TDR project team members regarding TDR collaboration and results. On the other hand, we present the Q-methodology as a viable approach to uncover diverging viewpoints as visible, tangible, and enunciable differences that need to be acknowledged in early stages of TDR projects when allocating resources and planning further project steps. Our investigations result in two viewpoints: one emphasises learning, collective reflection, and knowledge exchange as the main TDR expectation. The second focuses on ‘changing practices’, assuming that the project supports the introduction of new practices for (sustainable) regional development. These diverging expectations reveal subconscious tensions, which have to be addressed when allocating resources and defining project success within the TDR project.

show abstract

Mobilizing transdisciplinary collaborations: collective reflections on decentering academia in knowledge production

Cited by 16 publications

References 35 publications

Preparing interdisciplinary leadership for a sustainable future

Preparing interdisciplinary leadership for a sustainable future

How to support German cities in implementing the SDGs: learning from and about co-design

Different perspectives on a common goal? The Q-method as a formative assessment to elucidate varying expectations towards transdisciplinary research collaborations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About