The Elusive Pursuit of Interdisciplinarity at the Human--Environment Interface

Roy, Eric D.; Morzillo, Anita T.; Seijo, Francisco; Reddy, Shravanti; Rhemtulla, Jeanine M.; Milder, Jeffrey C.; Kuemmerle, Tobias; Martin, S. L.

doi:10.1093/bioscience/63.9.745

Cited by 71 publications

(85 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Conservation researchers with expertise in or familiarity with social sciences will have more traction in the social, economic, and political worlds (Gibbs et al 2008). Even though criticism exists that multiple disciplinary work lowers productivity in career paths (Brewer 1999;Roy et al 2013), we argue that the benefits of multiple disciplinary approaches to an individual problem promote ongoing learning outside one's own area of expertise (see Kurland et al 2010, for example); therefore, diversifying and enhancing one's own perspective, knowledge, and career satisfaction (Demerouti et al 2001;Amey and Brown 2005;Miller et al 2008).…”

Section: Because Conservation Involves Compromisementioning

confidence: 99%

Necessary but challenging: Multiple disciplinary approaches to solving conservation problems

Dick

Rous

Nguyen

et al. 2017

FACETS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contemporary conservation problems are typically positioned at the interface of complex ecological and human systems. Traditional approaches aiming to compartmentalize a phenomenon within the confines of a single discipline and failing to engage non-science partners are outmoded and cannot identify solutions that have traction in the social, economic, and political arenas in which conservation actions must operate. As a result, conservation science teams must adopt multiple disciplinary approaches that bridge not only academic disciplines but also the political and social realms and engage relevant partners. Five reasons are presented that outline why conservation problems demand multiple disciplinary approaches in order to move forward because: (i) socio-ecological systems are complex, (ii) multiple perspectives are better than one, (iii) the results of research must influence practice, (iv) the heterogeneity of scale necessitates it, and (v) conservation involves compromise. Presenting reasons that support multiple disciplinarity demands a review of the barriers that impede this process, as we are far from attaining a model or framework that is applicable in all contexts. Two challenges that impede multiple disciplinarity are discussed, in addition to pragmatic solutions that conservation scientists and practitioners can adopt in their work. Overall, conservation researchers and practitioners are encouraged to explore the multiple disciplinary dimensions of their respective realms to more effectively solve problems in biodiversity and sustainability.

show abstract

Section: Because Conservation Involves Compromisementioning

confidence: 99%

Necessary but challenging: Multiple disciplinary approaches to solving conservation problems

Dick

Rous

Nguyen

et al. 2017

FACETS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, it is important to encourage dialogue about what factors lead to training of students to perform successful social-ecological research (Roy et al 2013). Considering the experiences of graduate students who conducted successful social-ecological research through many sites in the LTER Network provided a powerful new way to identify key factors leading to successful research.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Addressing these complex topics requires scientists to ask questions integrating the social and ecological sciences (Ewel 2001, Díaz et al 2011, Romero and Agrawal 2011, Kueffer et al 2012. Such research often demands a collaborative team of scientists, including individuals with the ability to integrate across disciplinary and cultural differences (Bammer 2005, Haapasaari et al 2012, Roy et al 2013). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Graduate students navigating social-ecological research: insights from the Long-Term Ecological Research Network

Record¹,

Ferguson²,

Benveniste³

et al. 2016

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. Interdisciplinary, collaborative research capable of capturing the feedbacks between biophysical and social systems can improve the capacity for sustainable environmental decision making. Networks of researchers provide unique opportunities to foster social-ecological inquiry. Although insights into interdisciplinary research have been discussed elsewhere, they rarely address the role of networks and often come from the perspectives of more senior scientists. We have provided graduate student perspectives on interdisciplinary degree paths from within the Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) Network. Focusing on data from a survey of graduate students in the LTER Network and four self-identified successful graduate student research experiences, we examined the importance of funding, pedagogy, research design and development, communication, networking, and culture and attitude to students pursuing social-ecological research. Through sharing insights from successful graduate student approaches to social-ecological research within the LTER Network, we hope to facilitate dialogue between students, faculty, and networks to improve training for interdisciplinary scientists.

show abstract

“…Interdisciplinary fields of research, institutions and training programs have evolved in diverse thematic fields [2], [3], and transdisciplinary research has been conceptualized, practiced and discussed for nearly five decades (for an overview on different discourse strands see: Osborn [4], Klein [5]). However, interdisciplinary research is still not mainstream in the academic system [6], [7] and remains an intellectual, cognitive, communicative, and institutional challenge, particularly in the context of practicing broad interdisciplinarity [8] and working in traditional academic institutions [9]. Transdisciplinarity is hardly consolidated and remains a marginal phenomenon so far, and, above all, it is highly contested.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Research In-between: The Constitutive Role of Cultural Differences in Transdisciplinarity

Vilsmaier

Brandner

Engbers

2017

ATLAS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T ransdisciplinary research can be considered an integrative practice that is grounded in difference. It emerges as in-between space established among societal domains, different ways of knowing, acting and being, and constitutes a new topos in the landscape of societal institutions. We argue that it is through difference that transdisciplinary research spaces are created and elaborate on the characteristics of these in-between spaces. We provide insights into theoretical considerations of the constitution of transdisciplinary research spaces and show how cultural differences, determined by existing power relations and hegemonies, can be brought into fruition. Our aim is to contribute to theoretical considerations of a concept of research that is not reduced to academic research only but considered a cultural practice of people at stake to better understand and transform situations or phenomena of shared interest.

show abstract

The Elusive Pursuit of Interdisciplinarity at the Human--Environment Interface

Cited by 71 publications

References 28 publications

Necessary but challenging: Multiple disciplinary approaches to solving conservation problems

Necessary but challenging: Multiple disciplinary approaches to solving conservation problems

Graduate students navigating social-ecological research: insights from the Long-Term Ecological Research Network

Research In-between: The Constitutive Role of Cultural Differences in Transdisciplinarity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About