IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jenvss/v6y2016i2d10.1007_s13412-015-0335-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The EMBeRS project: employing model-based reasoning in socio-environmental synthesis

Author

Listed:
  • Deana Pennington

    (University of Texas at El Paso)

  • Gabriele Bammer

    (The Australian National University)

  • Antje Danielson

    (Tufts University)

  • David Gosselin

    (University of Nebraska–Lincoln)

  • Julia Gouvea

    (Tufts University)

  • Geoffrey Habron

    (Warren Wilson College)

  • Dave Hawthorne

    (National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center)

  • Roderic Parnell

    (Northern Arizona University)

  • Kate Thompson

    (University of Sydney)

  • Shirley Vincent

    (National Council for Science and the Environment)

  • Cynthia Wei

    (National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center)

Abstract

In inter- and transdisciplinary teams, diverse perspectives on a particular problem must be integrated into shared models of the problem. This process has been identified as a core challenge for socio-environmental synthesis research and education. There is little understanding of how to facilitate knowledge integration across perspectives. We generated new understanding of the process of knowledge integration in socio-environmental synthesis through two intersecting processes. First, we reviewed well-established literature in the cognitive, social, and learning sciences that connects material artifacts, boundary objects, and model-based reasoning. Second, we conducted an organized reflection (our own model-based reasoning) on the literature. Key findings include identifying the importance of combining a collective negotiation process with iterative individual external representations of the problem. The external representations are partial, temporary constructs that function as boundary negotiating objects, and enable the scaffolding of cognitive interactions between participants, an essential part of generating shared, integrative problem models between interdisciplinary team members. We hypothesize that facilitating the co-creation of boundary negotiating objects may provide a path forward for enabling more effective interdisciplinary work and the development of a set of knowledge synthesis skills and competencies for students and researchers. This article provides a first report regarding our research on this topic, with additional research papers forthcoming.

Suggested Citation

  • Deana Pennington & Gabriele Bammer & Antje Danielson & David Gosselin & Julia Gouvea & Geoffrey Habron & Dave Hawthorne & Roderic Parnell & Kate Thompson & Shirley Vincent & Cynthia Wei, 2016. "The EMBeRS project: employing model-based reasoning in socio-environmental synthesis," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 6(2), pages 278-286, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jenvss:v:6:y:2016:i:2:d:10.1007_s13412-015-0335-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s13412-015-0335-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13412-015-0335-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13412-015-0335-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bridie McGreavy & Karen Hutchins & Hollie Smith & Laura Lindenfeld & Linda Silka, 2013. "Addressing the Complexities of Boundary Work in Sustainability Science through Communication," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(10), pages 1-27, September.
    2. Keshkamat, S.S. & Kooiman, A. & van Maarseveen, M.F.A.M. & der Veen, A. van & Zuidgeest, M.H.P., 2012. "A boundary object for scale selection — Moderating differences and synergising understanding," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 15-24.
    3. Ann Majchrzak & Philip H. B. More & Samer Faraj, 2012. "Transcending Knowledge Differences in Cross-Functional Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 951-970, August.
    4. Bammer, Gabriele, 2008. "Enhancing research collaborations: Three key management challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 875-887, June.
    5. Davide Nicolini & Jeanne Mengis & Jacky Swan, 2012. "Understanding the Role of Objects in Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 612-629, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cynthia A. Wei & Michael L. Deaton & Teresa J. Shume & Ramiro Berardo & William R. Burnside, 2020. "A framework for teaching socio-environmental problem-solving," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 10(4), pages 467-477, December.
    2. Jakob Lundgren, 2021. "The Grand Concepts of Environmental Studies Boundary objects between disciplines and policymakers," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 11(1), pages 93-100, March.
    3. David C. Gosselin & Kate Thompson & Deana Pennington & Shirley Vincent, 2020. "Learning to be an interdisciplinary researcher: incorporating training about dispositional and epistemological differences into graduate student environmental science teams," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 10(3), pages 310-326, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Caccamo, Marta & Pittino, Daniel & Tell, Fredrik, 2023. "Boundary objects, knowledge integration, and innovation management: A systematic review of the literature," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    2. Claudio Biscaro & Anna Comacchio, 2018. "Knowledge Creation Across Worldviews: How Metaphors Impact and Orient Group Creativity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 289(1), pages 58-79, February.
    3. Sylvain Lenfle & Jonas Söderlund, 2019. "Large-Scale Innovative Projects as Temporary Trading Zones: Toward an Interlanguage Theory," Post-Print hal-02390158, HAL.
    4. Pershina, Raissa & Soppe, Birthe & Thune, Taran Mari, 2019. "Bridging analog and digital expertise: Cross-domain collaboration and boundary-spanning tools in the creation of digital innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    5. Virginie Fernandez & Yvonne Giordano & Sabrina Loufrani-Fedida, 2017. "Enacting resilience in extreme action teams: The case of French mountain rescue organizing," Post-Print hal-02046087, HAL.
    6. Paul M. Leonardi & Diane E. Bailey & Casey S. Pierce, 2019. "The Coevolution of Objects and Boundaries over Time: Materiality, Affordances, and Boundary Salience," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 665-686, June.
    7. Jakob Lundgren, 2021. "The Grand Concepts of Environmental Studies Boundary objects between disciplines and policymakers," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 11(1), pages 93-100, March.
    8. Adrian Yeow & Siew Kien Sia & Christina Soh & Cecil Chua, 2018. "Boundary Organization Practices for Collaboration in Enterprise Integration," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 29(1), pages 149-168, March.
    9. Roberto Iorio & Sandrine Labory & Francesco Rentocchini, 2014. "Academics’ Motivations and Depth and Breadth of Knowledge Transfer Activities," Working Papers 1401, c.MET-05 - Centro Interuniversitario di Economia Applicata alle Politiche per L'industria, lo Sviluppo locale e l'Internazionalizzazione.
    10. Carolin Haeussler & Henry Sauermann, 2016. "The Division of Labor in Teams: A Conceptual Framework and Application to Collaborations in Science," NBER Working Papers 22241, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Jens Koehrsen, 2017. "Boundary Bridging Arrangements: A Boundary Work Approach to Local Energy Transitions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-23, March.
    12. Barry Bozeman & Monica Gaughan & Jan Youtie & Catherine P. Slade & Heather Rimes, 2016. "Research collaboration experiences, good and bad: Dispatches from the front lines," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 226-244.
    13. Armisen, Albert & Majchrzak, Ann, 2015. "Tapping the innovative business potential of innovation contests," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 389-399.
    14. Jianxiu Gu, 2024. "Insufficient Academic Experience or Excessive Family Responsibility: Why do Female Faculty in Chinese Research Universities Publish Less than Male Faculty?," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 65(6), pages 1340-1366, September.
    15. Smita Prashant Chattopadhyay & Madhuchhanda Das Aundhe, 2021. "Vendor boundary spanning in Indian Information Technology (IT) companies," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 1139-1177, September.
    16. Hilda Bø Lyng & Eric Christian Brun, 2018. "Knowledge Transition: A Conceptual Model of Knowledge Transfer for Cross-Industry Innovation," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(05), pages 1-23, October.
    17. Johann Piet Hausberg & Peter S. H. Leeflang, 2019. "Absorbing Integration: Empirical Evidence On The Mediating Role Of Absorptive Capacity Between Functional-/Cross-Functional Integration And Innovation Performance," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(06), pages 1-37, August.
    18. Yixuan Wang & Bowen Jiang, 2018. "Modular and Integral Knowledge Integration: From the Case of a Chinese IT Enterprise," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(01), pages 1-16, March.
    19. Gerlak, Andrea K. & Guido, Zack & Owen, Gigi & McGoffin, Mariana Sofia Rodriguez & Louder, Elena & Davies, Julia & Smith, Kelly Jay & Zimmer, Andy & Murveit, Anna M. & Meadow, Alison & Shrestha, Padme, 2023. "Stakeholder engagement in the co-production of knowledge for environmental decision-making," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    20. Pinho, Celso R.A. & Pinho, Maria Luiza C.A. & Deligonul, Seyda Z. & Tamer Cavusgil, S., 2022. "The agility construct in the literature: Conceptualization and bibliometric assessment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 517-532.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jenvss:v:6:y:2016:i:2:d:10.1007_s13412-015-0335-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.