IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sru/ssewps/2020-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Capabilities for Transdisciplinary Research. An Evaluation Framework and Lessons from the ESRC Nexus Network +

Author

Listed:
  • Cian O’Donovan

    (Department of Science and Technology Studies, University College London, Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU), University of Sussex.)

  • Aleksandra (Ola) Michalec

    (Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU), University of Sussex.)

  • Joshua R. Moon

    (Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU), University of Sussex.)

Abstract

Research framed to address global, grand and societal challenges has brought fresh impetus to calls by funding agencies for transdisciplinary research. Yet the urgency of such calls is not matched by sufficient knowledge of how to foster and maintain the capabilities to do transdisciplinary work. Significant gaps exist in how to cultivate and maintain transdisciplinary methods, practices and the underlying capabilities required to support them. This paper employs a capability approach to construct a realist evaluative framework with which to assess such capabilities. The framework is operationalised through a novel three-stage mixed method procedure which seeks to evaluate transdisciplinary capabilities as they are valued and experienced by researchers themselves. The procedure is tested on a portfolio of five ‘pump-priming’ projects funded by the ESRC Nexus Network +. The paper reports a set of transdisciplinary capabilities valued by nexus research participants and found to varying degrees within each of the research projects. We find that pump-priming investments are sites of research capability development in three ways; through convening cognitive capabilities; cultivating transgressive capabilities; and maintaining backstage capabilities over durations that extend beyond the beginning and end of individual projects. Furthermore, for researchers, it is the transgressive quality of these capabilities that is most salient. Directing greater attention to these different modes of capability development in pump-priming research programmes may be useful in growing and steering research system capacity towards contemporary and future societal needs.

Suggested Citation

  • Cian O’Donovan & Aleksandra (Ola) Michalec & Joshua R. Moon, 2020. "Capabilities for Transdisciplinary Research. An Evaluation Framework and Lessons from the ESRC Nexus Network +," SPRU Working Paper Series 2020-12, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    • Handle: RePEc:sru:ssewps:2020-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.sussex.ac.uk/webteam/gateway/file.php?name=2020-12-swps-odonovan-et-al.pdf&site=25
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Loet Leydesdorff & Stephen Carley & Ismael Rafols, 2013. "Global maps of science based on the new Web-of-Science categories," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(2), pages 589-593, February.
    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. Ola Michalec & Cian O’Donovan & Mehdi Sobhani, 2021. "What is robotics made of? The interdisciplinary politics of robotics research," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-15, December.

    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. Shiji Chen & Clément Arsenault & Yves Gingras & Vincent Larivière, 2015. "Exploring the interdisciplinary evolution of a discipline: the case of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(2), pages 1307-1323, February.
    2. Hyejin Park & Han Woo Park, 2018. "Two-side face of knowledge building using scientometric analysis," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(6), pages 2815-2836, November.
    3. Juan Miguel Campanario, 2018. "Are leaders really leading? Journals that are first in Web of Science subject categories in the context of their groups," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 111-130, April.
    4. Gibson, Elizabeth & Daim, Tugrul U. & Dabic, Marina, 2019. "Evaluating university industry collaborative research centers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 181-202.
    5. Katia A. Figueroa-Rodríguez & Francisco Hernández-Rosas & Benjamín Figueroa-Sandoval & Joel Velasco-Velasco & Noé Aguilar Rivera, 2019. "What Has Been the Focus of Sugarcane Research? A Bibliometric Overview," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-15, September.
    6. Jielan Ding & Per Ahlgren & Liying Yang & Ting Yue, 2018. "Disciplinary structures in Nature, Science and PNAS: journal and country levels," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1817-1852, September.
    7. Thorsten Lammers & Dilek Cetindamar & Maren Borkert, 2021. "A Digital Tale of Two Cities—Observing the Dynamics of the Artificial Intelligence Ecosystems in Berlin and Sydney," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-19, September.
    8. Nieminen, Paavo & Pölönen, Ilkka & Sipola, Tuomo, 2013. "Research literature clustering using diffusion maps," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 874-886.
    9. Yuxian Liu & Ewelina Biskup & Yueqian Wang & Fengfeng Cai & Xiaoyan Zhang, 2020. "A new territory and its pioneer: opening up a dominant research stream for a translational research area," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(2), pages 1213-1228, November.
    10. Jiancheng Guan & Yan Yan & Jingjing Zhang, 2015. "How do collaborative features affect scientific output? Evidences from wind power field," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 333-355, January.
    11. Kosztyán, Zsolt T. & Csizmadia, Tibor & Katona, Attila I., 2021. "SIMILAR – Systematic iterative multilayer literature review method," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1).
    12. Wenceslao Arroyo-Machado & Daniel Torres-Salinas & Nicolas Robinson-Garcia, 2021. "Identifying and characterizing social media communities: a socio-semantic network approach to altmetrics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(11), pages 9267-9289, November.
    13. Weishu Liu & Mengdi Gu & Guangyuan Hu & Chao Li & Huchang Liao & Li Tang & Philip Shapira, 2014. "Profile of developments in biomass-based bioenergy research: a 20-year perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(2), pages 507-521, May.
    14. Rahman, A.I.M. Jakaria & Guns, Raf & Rousseau, Ronald & Engels, Tim C.E., 2015. "Is the expertise of evaluation panels congruent with the research interests of the research groups: A quantitative approach based on barycenters," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 704-721.
    15. Wolfram, Dietmar & Zhao, Yuehua, 2014. "A comparison of journal similarity across six disciplines using citing discipline analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 840-853.
    16. Yi Bu & Mengyang Li & Weiye Gu & Win‐bin Huang, 2021. "Topic diversity: A discipline scheme‐free diversity measurement for journals," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(5), pages 523-539, May.
    17. Stephen F. Carley & Seokbeom Kwon & Alan L. Porter & Jan L. Youtie, 2019. "The relationship between forward and backward diversity in CORE datasets," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(3), pages 961-974, September.
    18. Ricardo Arencibia-Jorge & Rosa Lidia Vega-Almeida & José Luis Jiménez-Andrade & Humberto Carrillo-Calvet, 2022. "Evolutionary stages and multidisciplinary nature of artificial intelligence research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5139-5158, September.
    19. Xiaozan Lyu & Ping Zhou & Loet Leydesdorff, 2020. "Eco-system mapping of techno-science linkages at the level of scholarly journals and fields," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(3), pages 2037-2055, September.
    20. Guan, Jiancheng & Yan, Yan & Zhang, Jing Jing, 2017. "The impact of collaboration and knowledge networks on citations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 407-422.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Transdisciplinary research; research evaluation; grand challenges; sustainability; capability approach; bibliometrics;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sru:ssewps:2020-12. 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: University of Sussex Business School Communications Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/spessuk.html .

    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.