Transdisciplinary research (TDR) is ideally designed to not only have societal effects but also to benefit science (Jahn et al. 2012). However, recent literature on the evaluation of TDR has focused almost entirely on the societal effects of TDR (e.g. Hansson and Polk 2018; Lux et al. 2019; Schäfer, Bergmann and Theiler 2021; Pärli 2023). In comparison, the scientific effects of transdisciplinary research has been studied far less (for exceptions, see Hegger and Dieperink 2015; Belcher et al. 2019; Newig et al. 2019; Jahn et al. 2022), although we believe this topic is crucial to do justice to the potential of this research mode.

In an exploratory study, we addressed this gap empirically by investigating the effects of transdisciplinary research on science. We define scientific effects broadly as changes in research practice or scientific results. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 22 scientists who have experience in transdisciplinary research and are anchored in one of the following sub-disciplines: Environmental Sociology, Sustainable Chemistry and Participatory Health Research. In this way, our findings are based on various different contexts in which transdisciplinary research is conducted.

We identify three main effects:

1) TDR changes the understanding of scientific problems: The integration of different bodies of knowledge from practitioners and scientific disciplines in transdisciplinary research processes has the effect of extending the research subject and correcting and sharpening the definition of the problem.

2) TDR changes the quality of scientific insights: Working on a research subject over an extended period of time and in close proximity to practice leads to methodological innovations, broad data, and up-to-date findings.

3) TDR promotes a reflexive turn in science: Confrontation with other disciplines and the perspectives of practice partners promotes the reflexivity of researchers at a personal level, with regard to their disciplines and with regard to the responsibility and power of science.

We also draw attention to open issues and challenges related to the processing of scientific insights from TDR.

Key reading:

Oskar Marg, Lena Theiler (2023): Effects of transdisciplinary research on scientific knowledge and reflexivity. Research Evaluation, Volume 32, Issue 4, Pages 635–647. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvad033

The Theory of Change is a recognised approach in transdisciplinarity, known for its ability to facilitate transformative learning processes. Recognizing serious games as effective tools for navigating transitions toward sustainability, the Theory of Change Game applies its principles to transdisciplinary projects dedicated to sustainable development. The game combines elements of both board and card games and is centred around collaborative discussions.

Acknowledging the game's potential, we have customised its application in a real-world situation. In this context, 22 participants utilised the game to plan the future of Tertúlias do Montado—a long term and permanent problem framing platform that aims to contribute to the sustainability of the Montado silvo-pastoral system.

To discern any variances, we implemented an experimental approach, where the participants rotated between the Theory of Change Game and two other tools, all addressing a common overarching question. Consequently, all three tools aimed to foster discussions about the future actions of Tertúlias do Montado.

The results show that the three tools made it possible to achieve the objective proposed. However, despite some similarities in the topics discussed, each tool led to different approaches regarding the future of the Tertúlias.

The Theory of Change Game tool prompted a more comprehensive discussion regarding both the societal problem to be addressed—the decline of the Montado—and the primary objective of the initiative, which is to serve as a dialogue platform in tackling this challenge. Proposals for the future are strongly associated with the creation and transfer of knowledge, either as an expected result that the initiative intends to achieve, or as a way to strengthen the capacity of those involved to solve problems related to the Montado.

In the case of the other two tools, one induced a reflection in operational terms and very specific actions were suggested. Most actions focus on improving the management and information sharing. Meanwhile, in the other tool, the discussion focused almost exclusively on the proposal of themes that should be tackled in the Tertúlias.

Although the participants evaluation of all tools was positive, the Game Theory of Change, in particular, drew interest for introducing a novel concept and facilitating visual exploration of diverse perspectives. Nevertheless, it faced criticisms about the perceived ambiguity in the rules and a sense of monotony.

From our experience in implementing these tools and the outcomes achieved we conclude that the circular dynamics embedded in the Theory of Change Game will have contributed to an in-depth discussion and a constant review of the fundamental objective of the initiative, and helped to counteract a common tendency to seek simplistic and immediate solutions to complex problems. Ultimately, the Theory of Change Game elicited a collaborative approach to co-construction of solutions, which can encompass the measures identified in the other tools.

Future empirical studies using a similar design should consider the cognitive burden of participants and decrease the number of tools used or plan the engagement on different days, since participants show some tiredness related to the engagement using three different tools.

Since the discussions on choice of methods, epistemology and rigour that took place in the workshop "Methods of knowledge integration in inter- and transdisciplinary research – what about epistemology and rigour?" at ITD21, the working group "toolkits&methods" of the ITD Alliance has been advancing its Rigour Project on addressing the criteria, indicators and dimensions for assessing the appropriateness, robustness, scientific rigour, and effectiveness of (combinations of) tools and methods. In 2022, 2023 and 2024 a set of discussion sessions took place to present and discuss single methods, and several workshops took place to collect, compare, and document experiences and perspectives from the ITD community. The time has come to reflect upon the developments and learnings and discuss how the question about epistemology and rigour could be advanced such as to benefit the entire TD community. To expand the group of people and perspectives included, we propose an innovative asynchronous discussion throughout the duration of the ITD 2024 conference. Knowledge, experiences, and contributions will be added to a living document, accessible via a QR code provided on a poster during the conference or through the link provided on the working group's website: https://itd-alliance.org/working-groups/toolkits_methods/rigour-project/

In this presentation, we will frame the contents and aim of the poster to open up the discussion and invite all contributors. This invitation is extended to all working group members and any ITD24 participant interested in the topic. The results will be documented and distributed after the conference.

Since the early 1990s, Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA) has been applied to diverse projects across contexts that include development, conservation and agriculture. PRA has many inherent characteristics of a transdisciplinary method, including the way it treats rural people as co-producers of knowledge and the opportunities it offers for researchers and rural community members to practice reflexivity. However, PRA can be undertaken within disciplinary silos where expertise from diverse disciplinary backgrounds is not included. It has also attracted criticism for preferencing some local perspectives over others and lacking the rigour found in other qualitative and quantitative approaches to social research.

In this paper, we reflect on more than 15 years of applying PRA in collaborative teams across multiple rural research projects. The insights generated through this process offer guidance to researchers seeking to make their own approaches to PRA more transdisciplinary and have been used to refine how we educate emerging researchers at our universities. Key factors include the deliberate selection of a diverse researcher team, inclusive approaches to ensure that marginalised voices are heard, and carefully-designed reflexive processes to unpack assumptions, values and worldviews informed by different disciplinary backgrounds and life experiences.

Aside from offering practical advice to researchers seeking to apply PRA, we also identify ways in which the methods and strategies that are typically employed in PRA may provide value for transdisciplinary research in other contexts. These include the pairing of outside researchers with local stakeholders when conducting interviews, workshop formats that enable co-reflexivity between researchers and community members, and opportunities for sensemaking in the ‘third spaces’ created by travel. While some of these approaches have emerged from the unique characteristics of rural environments, they can be applied or adapted to transdisciplinary research in urban and other contexts. Accordingly, we have begun to consider how they can be used to educate emerging researchers in transdisciplinary practice at our institutions.