The role of contestable concepts in transdisciplinary management of water in the landscape

Abstract

There is a growing recognition of the need for frameworks for environmental management which transcend disciplinary boundaries while building upon established approaches to applied research which have recognized legitimacy and utility. This paper investigates ways of thinking about practical transdisciplinarity in cases of integrated environmental and landscape management. A brief review is first presented of systemic conceptions which can inform our transdisciplinary practice, including ‘civic science’ and a recognition of contestable concepts. This is followed by a discussion of current approaches to inquiry and management of lived‐in environments and landscapes, particularly that of integrated catchment management (ICM). Three case studies at different scales are then described to highlight the importance of core ‘contestable concepts’ around which transdisciplinary dialogues can occur. The first case study is that of the question of ‘risk’ in relation to the Hawkesbury Water Reuse Scheme, on the Hawkesbury campus of the University of Western Sydney. The second case study is that of ‘investment’ in stormwater and wastewater management in the Hawkesbury–Nepean River Catchment, in Western Sydney. The third case study is of the question of ‘meta‐methodology’ when developing cases of ICM in China which build on both international experiences and the local context. The final section engages with transdisciplinarity as a contestable concept itself. The breadth of fields of inquiry engaging with this notion are briefly identified, along with some key examples of emerging concepts and language which may be broadly applicable to cases of environmental and landscape management. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Defining Terms for Integrated (Multi-Inter-Trans-Disciplinary) Sustainability Research

“…While researchers aim to share knowledge and compare results from the studies there is no attempt to cross boundaries or generate new integrative knowledge [43]. Each member is able to contribute a professional perspective on the issue [45]. Thus the advantage of this approach is that, while the research approaches are disciplinary, the different perspectives on the issue can be gathered into one report for assessment [46].…”

“…Interdisciplinary studies focus on addressing specific 'real world' system problems and, as a result, the research process forces participants (from a variety of unrelated disciplines) to cross boundaries to create new knowledge [29,43]. Essentially the major difference from multidisciplinarity lies in the level of integration and cooperation as these projects seek to bridge disciplinary viewpoints [1,45,53] and potentially enable the examination of existing accumulated knowledge from the perspective of a neighboring discipline [54]. Huutoniemi et al [55] provide a relatively comprehensive typology of interdisciplinarity along with specific indicators for research teams to grasp on to.…”

“…In addition, Tress et al [66] note that, despite the best intentions, "Transdisciplinary landscape research is an exception, even interdisciplinarity is seldom reached." Such studies seek a transcendence of disciplinary perspectives (in some cases "redrawing the disciplinary map" [1]) into a broader framework in "true systemic fashion" that involves practical engagement with "local and regional issues of concern" [45]. In this sense transdisciplinarity is the highest form of integrated project, involving not only multiple disciplines, but also multiple non-academic participants (e.g., land managers, user groups, the general public) in a manner that combines interdisciplinarity with participatory approaches [28].…”

“…The variety included in many transdisciplinary frameworks is largely the result of the strong problem solving objectives of the research [48,67] and the need for flexible methodologies in transdisciplinary research is driven by this problem solving approach as "methodologies employed in transdisciplinary research needs to correspond to and reflect the problem and context under investigation". To ensure that all relevant disciplines are represented within transdisciplinary projects, a pluralistic (rather than unitary) approach to methodology is standard [45].…”

“…Many of the features that distinguish transdisciplinarity from interdisciplinarity are highly subjective. For example, the key requirement for transdisciplinary research that it involves transcendence of disciplines [45,69] is made incredibly difficult to evaluate as disciplines themselves are in a state of flux-constantly adopting new ideas from other areas while abandoning others. Another key defining feature-that transdisciplinarity takes a holistic perspective [46] can, essentially, not be evaluated without knowing the boundaries of holism which are, axiomatically, non-existent.…”