Abstract
To address complex issues, knowledge and experts of different fields have to be brought together. Experts come with expectations and assumptions, for instance, about the knowledge that other fields might provide, how trustworthy this knowledge will be, or how important it might be for the issue at stake. Td-net’s toolbox for coproducing knowledge provides tools that help uncover these expectations and assumptions. We consider the disclosure of expectations and assumptions a key precondition for successful collaboration.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Anonymous. New job for psychiatry. Sci News. 1966;89(22):426.
Apostel L. Interdisciplinarity; problems of teaching and research in universities. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; 1972.
Bergmann M, Jahn T, Knobloch T, Krohn W, Pohl C, Schramm E. Methods for transdisciplinary research: a primer for practice. Frankfurt/Main: Campus Verlag; 2012.
Elkana Y. Science as a cultural system: an anthropological approach. In: Bonetti N, editor. Scientific culture in the contemporary world, Special Volume published in Collaboration with UNESCO. Milano: SCIENTIA – International Review of Scientific Synthesis; 1979. p. 269–90.
Falk-Krzesinski HJ, Contractor N, Fiore SM, Hall KL, Kane C, Keyton J, Klein JT, Spring B, Stokols D, Trochim W. Mapping a research agenda for the science of team science. Res Eval. 2011;20(2):145–58.
Fleck L. Genesis and development of a scientific fact. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 1979.
Frodeman R, Thompson Klein J, Mitcham C, editors. The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010.
Hirsch Hadorn G, Hoffmann-Riem H, Biber-Klemm S, Grossenbacher-Mansuy W, Joye D, Pohl C, Wiesmann U, Zemp E, editors. Handbook of transdisciplinary research. Dordrecht: Springer; 2008.
Jantsch E. Inter- and transdisciplinary university: a systems approach to education and innovation. Policy Sci. 1970;1(4):403–28.
Klein JT. Crossing boundaries. Knowledge, disciplinarities, and interdisciplinarities. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia; 1996.
Klein JT, Grossenbacher-Mansuy W, Häberli R, Bill A, Scholz RW, Welti M, editors. Transdisciplinarity: joint problem solving among science, technology, and society. Basel: Birkhäuser Verlag; 2001.
Lemos MC, Morehouse BJ. The co-production of science and policy in integrated climate assessments. Glob Environ Change. 2005;15(1):57–68.
McDonald D, Bammer G, Dean P. Research integration using dialogue methods. Canberra: ANU E Press, The Australian National University; 2009.
NAS/NAE/IOM. Facilitating interdisciplinary research. Washington: National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, Institute of Medicine, The National Academies Press; 2005.
National Research Council. Enhancing the effectiveness of team science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2015.
Pielke RA Jr. The honest broker making sense of science in policy and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2007.
Pohl C. What is progress in transdisciplinary research? Futures. 2011;43(6):618–26.
Pohl C, Wuelser G, Bebi P, Bugmann H, Buttler A, Elkin C, Grêt-Regamey A, Hirschi C, Le QB, Peringer A, Rigling A, Seidl R, Huber R. How to successfully publish interdisciplinary research: learning from an ecology and society special feature. Ecol Soc. 2015;20(2):23.
Polk M. Transdisciplinary co-production: designing and testing a transdisciplinary research framework for societal problem solving. Futures. 2015;65:110–22.
Rittel HWJ. Second-generation design methods. In: Cross N, editor. Developments in design methodology. Chichester: Wiley; 1984. p. 317–27.
Robinson J, Tansey J. Co-production, emergent properties and strong interactive social research: the Georgia Basin futures project. Sci Public Policy. 2006;33(2):151–60.
Smit A. The facilitator’s toolkit, vol. 45. Stellenbosch: Centre for Business in Society, University of Stellenbosch; 2005.
Stokols D, Hall KL, Taylor BK, Moser RP. The science of team science: overview of the field and introduction to the supplement. Am J Prev Med. 2008;35(2 Suppl):S77–89.
Stokols D, Hall KL, Vogel AL. Defining transdisciplinary research and education. In: Haire-Joshu D, McBride TD, editors. Transdisciplinary public health: research, education, and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2013. p. 3–30.
Vogel AL, Hall KL, Fiore SM, Klein JT, Michelle Bennett L, Gadlin H, Stokols D, Nebeling LC, Wuchty S, Patrick K, Spotts EL, Pohl C, Riley WT, Falk-Krzesinski HJ. The team science toolkit: enhancing research collaboration through online knowledge sharing. Am J Prev Med. 2013;45(6):787–9.
Winch RF. Heuristic and empirical typologies: a job for factor analysis. Am Sociol Rev. 1947;12(1):68–75.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pohl, C., Wuelser, G. (2019). Methods for Coproduction of Knowledge Among Diverse Disciplines and Stakeholders. In: Hall, K., Vogel, A., Croyle, R. (eds) Strategies for Team Science Success. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20992-6_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20992-6_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-20990-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-20992-6
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyBehavioral Science and Psychology (R0)