Whose knowledge, whose values? An empirical analysis of power in transdisciplinary sustainability research

Abstract

The participation of practitioners in transdisciplinary sustainability research has been heralded as a promising tool for producing 'robust' knowledge and engendering societal transformations. Although transdisciplinary approaches have been advanced as an effective avenue for generating knowledge positioned to question and transform an unsustainable status quo, the political and power dimensions inherent to such research have hardly been discussed. In this article, we scrutinise the constitution of participation in transdisciplinary research through a power lens. Guided by social theories of power and a relational understanding of participation, we analyse how diverse actors equipped with a variety of material and ideational sources wield power over the subjects, objects, and procedures of participation. We applied a qualitative meta-analysis of five transdisciplinary projects from a major German research funding programme in the field of sustainability to unveil the ways in which the funding body, researchers, and practitioners exercise instrumental, structural, and discursive power over (i) actor selection and (re-)positioning, (ii) agenda setting, and (iii) rule setting. We found that researchers primarily exert instrumental power over these three elements of participation, whereas practitioners as well as the funding body wield primarily structural and discursive power. By elucidating tacit and hidden power dynamics shaping participation in transdisciplinary research, this article provides a basis for improving process design and implementation as well as developing targeted funding instruments. The conclusions also provide insights into barriers of participatory agenda setting in research practice and governance.

Limits and benefits of participatory agenda setting for research and innovation

“…Furthermore, the transference of a dominant actor's power onto the process may lead to reproduction of an already dominant societal discourse or one that is politically desirable. To some extent, such settings emerge from conditions prescribed by the funding body of the PASE activity, resulting in limited accountability of the dominant groups [83]. This argument is in line with Bora and Hausendorf [41] who critiqued participatory science governance, and Stilgoe et al [31] who observed that outcomes may "not sufficiently challenge, and so serve to reinforce, incumbent power structures".…”

“…Fritz and Binder [83] discuss the dimensions of politics and power inherent to transdisciplinary sustainability research. Differentiating between instrumental, structural, and discursive power, the authors uncover how funding bodies, researchers, and practitioners exert power over participatory processes, and how this limits participation in STI governance.…”

“…Organisers of PASE processes, who are often researchers, bear great responsibility when selecting the appropriate tools and methods applied in the respective exercise [85], and agency may influence these decisions. Here, Fritz and Binder [83] describe how the preselection of issues and rules governing the processes has an effect on the inclusion of values and knowledge, and call for increased reflexivity and transparency concerning mechanisms which may have been omitted. Additionally, Schroth et al [82] reflect on PASE organisers' non-neutrality in exercising agency when they are translating and transferring issues into respective networks and agendas.…”

“…Focusing on power relations within PASE, Fritz and Binder [83] find that the ascription of roles within processes was shaped by the exercise of discursive power, which, in their cases, led to preserving traditional roles of users and producers of knowledge, then to knowledge co-creation. In relation, Abma [53] examines how the involvement of patients can "redress power imbalances in health research agenda setting".…”

Making Research Collaborations: Learning from Processes of Transdisciplinary Engagement in Agricultural Research

“…Successful transdisciplinary endeavours are those that foster reciprocal relations among disciplines and nondisciplinary participants, through accounting for and balancing power relations (Toomey et al, 2015). A meta-analysis study (Fritz & Binder, 2020) in five transdisciplinary projects in Germany found that the researchers commonly exercise instrumental power over the elements of participation, while practitioners and donor agencies exert structural and discursive power.…”