Science with society: Evidence-based guidance for best practices in environmental transdisciplinary work |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Graduate Degree Program in Ecology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1499, USA;2. Resource Ecology Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1499, USA;3. Department of Ecosystem Science & Sustainability, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1476, USA;4. aboratoire d’Ecologie Alpine, CNRS - Université Grenoble Alpes - Université Savoie Mont Blanc, 38000 Grenoble, France;5. Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA;6. Human-Environment Systems, Boise State University, Boise, ID 83725, USA;7. York Institute of Tropical Ecosystems, University of York, Department of Environment and Geography, Wentworth Way, Heslington, York, North Yorkshire YO10 5NG, UK;8. Department of Human Dimensions of Natural Resources, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1480, USA;9. Institute of Tibetan Plateau Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences Nongke Road No.6, Lhasa 850000, Tibet Autonomouse Region, China;10. Mountain Research Initiative, Geography Department, University of Bern, Switzerland;11. Agricultural Economics and Policy, Swiss Federal Institutes of Technology Zurich ETHZ, Sonneggstrasse 33, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland;12. Department of Natural Resources and the Environment & the American Indian and Indigenous Studies Program, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853-3001, USA;13. Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Permoserstr. 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany;14. Department of Geography, University of Nevada, Reno, NV 89557, USA;15. Global Green Growth Institute, Green Growth Planning and Implementation, Myanmar;p. Department of Statistics, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1844, USA;q. Anton Melik Geographical Institute, Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts - ZRC SAZU, Novi trg 2, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia;r. African Climate and Development Initiative (ACDI), University of Cape Town, Upper Campus, Geological Sciences Building Level 6, 13 Library Road, Rondebosch 7700, Cape Town, South Africa;s. Pacific Northwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 3200 Jefferson Way, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA;t. Interdisciplinary Association for Development and the Environment (Targa-AIDE), Rabat, Morocco;u. Independent consultant, Siquatepeque, Honduras;v. Department of Geography, Geo-informatics & Climatic Sciences, Makerere University, P. O. Box 7062, Kampala Uganda |
| |
| Abstract: | Transdisciplinary research is a promising approach to address sustainability challenges arising from global environmental change, as it is characterized by an iterative process that brings together actors from multiple academic fields and diverse sectors of society to engage in mutual learning with the intent to co-produce new knowledge. We present a conceptual model to guide the implementation of environmental transdisciplinary work, which we consider a “science with society” (SWS) approach, providing suggested activities to conduct throughout a seven-step process. We used a survey with 168 respondents involved in environmental transdisciplinary work worldwide to evaluate the relative importance of these activities and the skills and characteristics required to implement them successfully, with attention to how responses differed according to the gender, geographic location, and positionality of the respondents. Flexibility and collaborative spirit were the most frequently valued skills in SWS, though non-researchers tended to prioritize attributes like humility, trust, and patience over flexibility. We also explored the relative significance of barriers to successful SWS, finding insufficient time and unequal power dynamics were the two most significant barriers to successful SWS. Together with case studies of respondents’ most successful SWS projects, we create a toolbox of 20 best practices that can be used to overcome barriers and increase the societal and scientific impacts of SWS projects. Project success was perceived to be significantly higher where there was medium to high policy impact, and projects initiated by practitioners/other stakeholders had a larger proportion of high policy impact compared to projects initiated by researchers only. Communicating project results to academic audiences occurred more frequently than communicating results to practitioners or the public, despite this being ranked less important overall. We discuss how these results point to three recommendations for future SWS: 1) balancing diverse perspectives through careful partnership formation and design; 2) promoting communication, learning, and reflexivity (i.e., questioning assumptions, beliefs, and practices) to overcome conflict and power asymmetries; and 3) increasing policy impact for joint science and society benefits. Our study highlights the benefits of diversity in SWS - both in the types of people and knowledge included as well as the methods used - and the potential benefits of this approach for addressing the increasingly complex challenges arising from global environmental change. |
| |
| Keywords: | Social-ecological systems Collaborative environmental management Knowledge co-production Social learning Sustainability Science policy interface Science to action |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
