The ISC’s discussion paper Looking at the Future of Transdisciplinary
Research by Matthias Kaiser and Peter Gluckman is a necessary provocation
to a research establishment that, in the aggregate, is not sufficiently meeting the
challenges of the Anthropocene and the needs of a post-carbon transition.
In his response to the discussion paper,
Paul Shrivastava noted that the term ‘transdisciplinary’, by centering on the disciplinary, “may inadvertently be devaluing action, agency and impacts”. Generally speaking, the prevailing organisational structures of many research institutions limit their capability to embrace the realities of societal challenge-driven knowledge production. Non-academic communities must have an equal part (at least) to play in the framing and execution of research agendas, though this is not yet possible at the scale required for national, regional and international impact.
The structures of research
institutions generally reflect the disciplinary logics of national academies, international scholarly associations and scientific organisations promoting knowledge advancement through elite programmatic structures bound by common epistemological assumptions and traditions (e.g. traditional faculties and colleges). These structures not only separate scientists and humanities scholars from teachers and telegram database users list learners through power asymmetries that are both symbolic and functional
Institutionalisation of these
asymmetries assume linear processes of knowledge production what is dns? How to set up domain name servers? and top-down solutions-brokering in which the academic community are the providers (and gate-keepers) of knowledge and societal stakeholders are the users. This model of bulk data scientific production is incommensurate with the dynamic realities of complex socio-ecological systems that require increased feedback capacities, greater reflexivity, and more efficient knowledge exchange in the co-production process. These conditions require a dramatic mainstreaming of transdisciplinary knowledge co-production.
The distributed agencies
and capacities for learning and action throughout our societies as we move
into the mid 21st century call for models of knowledge production that move
beyond those of the late 20th century,
especially as the nations of the world continue, year after year,
to fall short of their own targets and obligations in intergovernmental treaties
and resolutions such as the Paris Agreement and Agenda 2030. Paul Shrivastava notes the many
different terms have shown up in place of ‘transdisciplinary
science’ in his own research on the topic. Whatever we call it, transdisciplinarity will be central to any model by which the global community may hope to alter this trend and live up to the vision of “peace and prosperity for people and the planet, now and into the future” envisaged in the Sustainable Development Goals.