Managing a World Heritage Site: Potentials and limitations of transdisciplinary approaches

Balancing the frequently conflicting priorities of conservation and economic development poses a challenge to management of the Swiss Alps Jungfrau- Aletsch World Heritage Site (WHS). This is a complex societal problem that calls for a knowledge-based solution. This in turn requires a transdisciplinary research framework in which problems are defined and solved cooperatively by actors from the scientific community and the life-world. In this article we re-examine studies carried out in the region of the Swiss Alps Jungfrau-Aletsch WHS, covering three key issues prevalent in transdisciplinary settings: integration of stakeholders into participatory processes; perceptions and positions; and negotiability and implementation. In the case of the Swiss Alps Jungfrau-Aletsch WHS the transdisciplinary setting created a situation of mutual learning among stakeholders from different levels and backgrounds. However, the studies showed that the benefits of such processes of mutual learning are continuously at risk of being diminished by the power play inherent in participatory approaches.

Partnership Actions for Mitigating Syndromes (PAMS): Experience with a transdisciplinary tool in the NCCR North-South programme

Partnership Actions for Mitigating Syndromes (PAMS) are small transdisciplinary projects which bring scientific research insights from the NCCR North-South into policy and practice. They are implemented by researchers from different disciplines in collaboration with non-scientific actors. PAMS aim to implement and test approaches, methods and tools developed in research, in order to identify promising strategies and potentials for sustainable development. In this sense, they are solution-oriented. This paper will provide insights into our experience with PAMS, with a special focus on the implementation of transdisciplinarity and its outcomes. From 2001 to 2010, 77 PAMS were implemented in Africa, Asia and Latin America. An internal evaluation of the first 55 projects was conducted in 2006. Results of this evaluation led to a refinement and improvement of the tool. A second internal evaluation is currently underway in the NCCR North-South. This evaluation will provide an overview of 22 new PAMS. We will look at partners involved, project beneficiaries, activities implemented, outcomes achieved, and lessons learnt. In the first evaluation, transdisciplinarity was considered as “a form of collaboration within scientific fields … and as a form of continuous dialogue between research and society” (Messerli et al., 2007). The evaluation report concluded that this understanding of transdisciplinarity was not satisfactorily applied in the 55 projects. Only about half of the PAMS addressed mutual exchange between researchers and society. Some involved only one specific field of research and clearly lacked interdisciplinary co-operation, and most often knowledge was transferred mainly unilaterally from the scientific community to society, without society having any effect on science. It was therefore recommended to address transdisciplinarity more carefully in Phase 2 PAMS. The second evaluation, which is currently under way, is analysing whether and how this recommendation has been met, based on criteria defined in the NCCR North-South’s Outcome Monitoring Strategy. The analysis is focusing on partners with whom researchers interact and investigating whether practices have changed both in research and society. We are also exploring the role of researchers in PAMS. Preliminary results show that researchers can assume different roles, from direct implementation, mediation, and promotion of social learning between different actors, to giving advice as neutral outsiders.

Peer Review Processes for Transdisciplinary Articles: A Reflection on Journal's Practices

Publishing is an essential means of validation and communication of research. This is no different in transdisciplinary research, where publishing also aims at contributing to the development of society through sharing of knowledge. In the scientific world, authors need to disseminate and validate results, reflect on issues, and participate in debates. On the other hand, institutions and individuals are assessed according to their publication record – as probably the most influential of all current evaluation criteria. Occupying the space between article production and counting impact factors, journal editors and reviewers play an important role in defining and using rules to assess and improve the work submitted to them. Publishing transdisciplinary research poses specific challenges, in particular with regard to peer-review processes, as it addresses different knowledge communities with different value systems and purposes.

Approaching water stress in the Alps: Transdisciplinary co-production of systems, target and transformation knowledge

There is increasing recognition that transdisciplinary approaches are needed to create suitable knowledge for sustainable water management. However, there is no common understanding of what transdisciplinary research may be and there is very limited debate on potentials and challenges regarding its implementation. Against this background, this paper presents a conceptual framework for transdisciplinary co-production of knowledge in water management projects oriented towards more sustainable use of water. Moreover, first experiences with its implementation are discussed. In so doing, the focus lies on potentials and challenges related to the co-production of systems, target and transformation knowledge by researchers and local stakeholders.