How can transdisciplinary transformative change initiatives (TTCIs) be adapted to better address the global polycrisis of biodiversity loss, climate change, and intensifying social inequality? We suggest operationalizing critical social theory and centering Indigenous understandings of relationality and responsibility in co-productive collaborations aimed to (re)visibilize human interdependencies with each other and the rest of nature. We are a team of Indigenous stewardship specialists, academics, and Swiss nature conservation practitioners working on the coproduction of a novel adaptive transformative change approach that combines sustainability science, political ecology theory, and Indigenous and practitioner knowledge.

Although designed to initiate a “fundamental, system-wide reorganization across” society, “including paradigms, goals and values” (IPBES, 2019, p. XVIII), TTCIs rarely achieve the paradigmatic effects needed to address the polycrisis and two major critiques have been leveraged at practitioners and academics to explain why. The former are accused of creating apolitical solutions without incorporating theoretical lessons on the core causes of the polycrisis (Abson et al., 2017; Turnhout and Lahsen, 2022), while the latter are criticized for failing to translate theoretical knowledge into practical solutions (Chambers et al., 2022; Deutsch et al., 2023). Additionally, while some TTCIs have had success with redefining human-nature relations, the focus is usually on ‘reconnecting’ with (an external) nature (West et al., 2020), rather than on (re)visibilizing the inherent interdependencies emphasized by holistic worldviews. Finally, other TTCIs have engaged Indigenous perspectives, but often without an understanding of ontological politics, within the confines of conventional Western funding schemes, and/or too late in the process, resulting in problematic knowledge extraction or ancillary positioning of such perspectives (Lam et al., 2020; Latulippe and Klenk, 2020).

In our project, we counteract potential shortcomings of TTCIs by employing a project design that is groundbreaking in at least 3 ways: it (1) pairs the experiences and knowledge of Indigenous and non-Indigenous academics and practitioners from the outset to co-design practical solutions that address the polycrisis; (2) invites the intervention of Indigenous peoples in Western lands and practices, rather than the other way around (‘flip it’); and (3) aims to center holistic understandings of the world in dichotomous contexts (e.g. nature/culture) in order to reverse both the colonial flow of power/knowledge and the (imagined) disconnection among humans and the rest of nature (‘reverse it’). The project is carried out in three phases (Lang et al., 2012):

A) Problem framing and team building

B) Coproduction of generalized methods, practices, and protocols (MPPs) for (re)visibilizing socioecological connections, and a contextually adaptable prototype and assessment methods based on these MPPs for testing in a Swiss context in a follow-up stage

C) Analysis and (re)integration and application of created knowledge

In this (ITD24) workshop, we present our initial findings from our first project workshop held in Switzerland in May 2024. We will explain our progress towards creating MPPs for (re)visibilizing socioecological connections, as well as our process of ‘flipping’ the intervenor/intervened relationship, and ‘reversing’ the colonial flow of knowledge and the disconnection of humans and the rest of nature. We will then work with participants to apply our lessons-learned to specific cases brought to us by participants.

Additionally, for sessions, workshops and trainings

Workshop objectives

• Testing methods, practices, and protocols (MPPs) for (re)visibilizing socioecological connections

• Exploring what it means to decolonize ITD research in different contexts, using specific cases

• Thinking through what it means to ‘(re)visibilize’ humans’ connections among each other and the rest of nature, and how this might change approaches to ‘reconnecting’ with nature

Proposed schedule

1. (0’-15’)  Introduction to the project/concept

2. (15’-30’)  Group designations and project selection

3. (30’-60’)  Application of concepts to the selected project

4. (60’-85’)  Plenary and synthesis

5. (85’-90’)  Wrap-up

Detailed Description

1) Introduction to the project/concept. We will provide information on the background of the project and the concept of (re)visibilizing human interdependencies with each other and the rest of nature through decolonizing transdisciplinary transformative change initiatives (TTCIs). We will then introduce the MPPs we developed in our May 2024 project workshop.

2) Group designations and project selection. Participants will be asked to form groups of 4-5 and share their current projects with each other. Each small group will then decide on one of their projects to use as a case study for the rest of the workshop.

3) Application of concepts to the selected project. Each group will then be instructed to apply the MPPs to help them think about what practical steps would be needed to ‘decolonize’ the chosen project, as well as to shift from a goal of reconnecting with nature to one of (re)visibilizing inherent interdependencies among humans and the rest of nature.

4) Plenary and synthesis. We will bring everyone back together in a plenary to discuss their experiences with applying the MPPs/concepts. For this discussion, we will offer guided questions such as:

a. To what extent did you find the MPPs useful for your particular project? How could the MPPs be improved?

b. What was a key realization for you during the workshop?

c. To what extent do you think your plan to decolonize the project would be effective?

d. What do you think are the key differences in approaches to ‘reconnect’ vs '(re)visibilize’ human connections with each other and the rest of nature?

5) Wrap-up. We will summarize the main findings and thank participants for their participation and insights.

1–3 key readings (optional)

Smith, C., Diver, S., Reed, R., 2023. Advancing Indigenous futures with two-eyed seeing: Strategies for restoration and repair through collaborative research. Environ. Plan. F 26349825221142292. https://doi.org/10.1177/26349825221142292

Theriault, N., Leduc, T., Mitchell, A., Rubis, J.M., Jacobs Gaehowako, N., 2020. Living protocols: Remaking worlds in the face of extinction. Soc. Cult. Geogr. 21, 893–908. 10.1080/14649365.2019.1619821

Whyte, K.P., Brewer, J.P., Johnson, J.T., 2016. Weaving Indigenous science, protocols and sustainability science. Sustain. Sci. 11, 25–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0296-6

References cited

Abson, D.J., Fischer, J., Leventon, J., Newig, J., Schomerus, T., Vilsmaier, U., Von Wehrden, H., Abernethy, P., Ives, C.D., Jager, N.W., 2017. Leverage points for sustainability transformation. Ambio 46, 30–39. 10.1007/s13280-016-0800-y

Chambers, J.M., Wyborn, C., Klenk, N.L., Ryan, M., Serban, A., Bennett, N.J., Brennan, R., Charli-Joseph, L., Fernández-Giménez, M.E., Galvin, K.A., 2022. Co-productive agility and four collaborative pathways to sustainability transformations. Glob. Environ. Chang. 72, 102422. 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102422

Deutsch, S., Keller, R., Krug, C.B., Michel, A.H., 2023. Transdisciplinary transformative change: An analysis of some best practices and barriers, and the potential of critical social science in getting us there. Biodivers. Conserv. 1–26. 10.1007/s10531-023-02576-0

IPBES, 2019. UN Report: Nature’s Dangerous Decline ‘Unprecedented’; Species Extinction Rates ‘Accelerating.’ https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2019/05/nature-decline-unprecedented-report/ https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2019/05/nature-decline-unprecedented-report/

Lam, D.P.M., Hinz, E., Lang, D., Tengö, M., Wehrden, H., Martín-López, B., 2020. Indigenous and local knowledge in sustainability transformations research: A literature review. Ecol. Soc. 25. 10.5751/ES-11305-250103

Lang, D.J., Wiek, A., Bergmann, M., Stauffacher, M., Martens, P., Moll, P., Swilling, M., Thomas, C.J., 2012. Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: Practice, principles, and challenges. Sustain. Sci. 7, 25–43. 10.1007/s11625-011-0149-x

Latulippe, N., Klenk, N., 2020. Making room and moving over: Knowledge co-production, Indigenous knowledge sovereignty and the politics of global environmental change decision-making. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 42, 7–14. 10.1016/j.cosust.2019.10.010

Turnhout, E., Lahsen, M., 2022. Transforming environmental research to avoid tragedy. Clim. Dev. 1–5. 10.1080/17565529.2022.2062287

West, S., Haider, L.J., Stålhammar, S., Woroniecki, S., 2020. A relational turn for sustainability science? Relational thinking, leverage points and transformations. Ecosyst. People 16, 304–325. 10.1080/26395916.2020.1814417