Scientists’ situated knowledge: Strong objectivity in transdisciplinarity

Abstract

Highlights 14• Empowerment is possible even when control is not fully ceded. 15• Engaging different stakeholders alone falls short of addressing power imbalances. 16• Transparently assuming positions should not be seen as hindrances, but as an asset. 17• "Strong objectivity" might generate less partial accounts of contested issues. proposed by transdisciplinarity, is to point to the fundamental aspect of reflexivity. But 25 reflexivity also includes being aware that power and control over the object is derived 26 from the social position of researchers, an issue not often explicitly discussed in 27 transdisciplinary research. Reflexivity thus represents an important but insufficient 28 principle for guaranteeing appropriate levels of self-reflection within a process of 29 knowledge coproduction. We therefore hypothesize that transdisciplinary research could 30 greatly benefit from feminist scientific tradition, in particular the insights of standpoint 31 theory and the concept of 'strong objectivity'. We analyse, and reflect upon, how a recent 32 transdisciplinary research initiative -conducted together with civil society organizations 33 in (CSOs) in six countries: Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Ecuador and India 34-has benefited from the use of 'strong objectivity'. We analyse how the social position 35 of all stakeholders, including ourselves as the scientific actors in this initiative, influence 36 the process and conditions of transdisciplinary knowledge co-production, and we discuss 37 how power and control by scientists affects the process and conditions of interaction. 38Thereby we argue for the necessity of explicitly assuming sides in contested contexts for 39 reaching objectivity in transdisciplinary research. -which lead to multiple and individual constellations of dominance and discrimination. 167The argument is that research starting off from marginal lives offers more enlightening background, which might be restricting or diverting the implementation of resource

Knowledge needs for the operationalisation of the concept of ecosystem services

“…For example, through interactions between science, policy and practitioner communities to frame knowledge as a problem oriented process or the coming together of people and practices from different social groups to work together to produce new knowledge for mutual benefit and to facilitate change , Van Kerkhoff and Lebel, 2015, Rosendahl et al, 2015. In this study we use this broader, processes based perspective of knowledge.…”

Climate change and transdisciplinary science: Problematizing the integration imperative

“…As Paul Nadasdy (2005) notes in reference to co-management boards in northern Canada, inviting indigenous people to participate in these governance arrangements may appear empowering, however the important question here is not how much people are empowered but rather what it is that they are empowered to do. The risk is that participants are constrained by (methodological, epistemological, and institutional) rules they have no power to change (Rosendalh et al, 2014). While not immune to the risks of tokenism, informal hierarchies, and disciplinary policing (Reich and Reich (2006), MEBA nevertheless tries to mitigate such risks by emphasizing that each way of knowing should be assessed with internal criteria and not just external referents.…”

Wanted: a Transdisciplinary Knowledge Domain for Urban Health

“…When actors and institutions are involved in concerted actions to tackle real-world challenges, the power of some participants to influence or control the actions of others will need to be addressed. The lack of attention to the hidden agendas of participants in collaborative projects about sustainability needs correcting [13].…”