Radical interdisciplinarity in scientific practice: Placing social networks in marine and fisheries sciences (original) (raw)
Related papers
ICES Journal of Marine Science, 2021
Understanding the nature of collaboration underpinning scientific work in fisheries is critical to building the social foundations for effective scientific progress in addressing complex socio-ecological systems. We examine the nature of interdisciplinary work in fisheries through an analysis of nearly three decades of peer-reviewed papers authored by researchers affiliated with NOAA Fisheries’ Northeast Fisheries Science Center in the United States. Using social network analysis, and approaches novel to scientometrics such as grounded theory building, we map and analyse the relationships between authors of different disciplinary backgrounds, visualize these changing networks over time, and evaluate the nature of collaboration with a particular emphasis given to the integration of the social sciences. Our analysis suggests that areas of research such as ecosystem-based management and climate change have helped create synergies between the natural and social sciences, pointing to the...
Sustainability Science, 2020
In sustainability science, interdisciplinarity, i.e. the integration of perspectives from different disciplines, is built collectively from interactions among researchers of various disciplines ("collective interdisciplinarity") but also results from the fact that researchers have backgrounds in multiple disciplines ("individual interdisciplinarity"). We applied social network analysis tools to analyze how individual interdisciplinarity influences collective interdisciplinarity, using the case of a forest sustainability science group. We hypothesized that researchers with higher individual interdisciplinarity had more interdisciplinary interactions and were interdisciplinary brokers within the group. We first analyzed individual interdisciplinarity using a bipartite network of researchers and disciplines. We then analyzed networks of management, research, and publication interactions among researchers in the research group. This showed how disciplines influenced interactions and how researchers contributed to interdisciplinary interactions and brokerage. Results of the first analysis identified large disciplinary communities in the center of the bipartite network, whereas smaller ones were more distant. The second analysis highlighted disciplinary homophily in interaction networks, as two researchers interacted more if they were from the same disciplinary community. Results also showed that the interactions among researchers were not only structured by disciplinary homophily, but also by other forms of homophily related to location or region of work. The key brokers of interactions across disciplinary communities were distributed across several communities, showing that brokerage was not controlled by the large, dominant communities. Analysis of correlations between individual interdisciplinarity and contributions to collective interdisciplinarity did not support our hypothesis but rather hinted at the alternative hypothesis that researchers with high individual interdisciplinarity interacted less with other disciplinary communities.
Ecology and …, 2012
It has been acknowledged that natural sciences alone cannot provide an adequate basis for the management of complex environmental problems. The scientific knowledge base has to be expanded in a more holistic direction by incorporating social and economic issues. As well, the multifaceted knowledge has to be summarized in a form that can support science-based decision making. This is, however, difficult. Interdisciplinary skills, practices, and methodologies are needed that enable the integration of knowledge from conceptually different disciplines. Through a focus on our research process, we analyzed how and what kind of interdisciplinarity between natural scientists, environmental economists, and social scientists grew from the need to better understand the complexity and uncertainty inherent to the Baltic salmon fisheries, and how divergent knowledge was integrated in a form that can support science-based decision making. The empirical findings suggest that interdisciplinarity is an extensive learning process that takes place on three levels: between individuals, between disciplines, and between types of knowledge. Such a learning process is facilitated by agreeing to a methodological epochè and by formulating a global question at the outset of a process.
Interdisciplinarity in the environmental sciences: barriers and frontiers
Environmental Conservation, 2010
Global environmental changes present unprecedented challenges to humans and the ecosystems upon which they depend. The need for interdisciplinary approaches to solve such multidimensional challenges is clear, however less clear is whether current attempts to cross disciplinary boundaries are succeeding. Indeed, efforts to further interdisciplinary approaches remain hampered by failures in assessing their scope and success. Here a set of measures examined the interdisciplinarity of the environmental sciences and tested two literature-based hypotheses: (1) newer and larger disciplines are more interdisciplinary; and (2) interdisciplinary research has lower impact factors than its counterparts. In addition, network analysis was used to map interdisciplinarity and determine the relative extent to which environmental science disciplines draw on alternative disciplinary perspectives. Contrary to expectations, age and size of a discipline had no effect on measures of interdisciplinarity for papers published in 2006, though metrics indicated larger articles and journals were more interdisciplinary. In addition, interdisciplinary research had a greater impact factor than its more strictly disciplinary peers. Network analysis revealed disciplines acting as 'interdisciplinary frontiers', bridging critical gaps between otherwise disparate subject areas. Whilst interdisciplinarity is complex, a combination of diversity metrics and network analysis provides valuable preliminary insights for interdisciplinary environmental research policy. The successful promotion of interdisciplinarity is needed to help dispel commonly perceived barriers to interdisciplinarity and create opportunities for such work by increasing the space available for different disciplines to encounter each other. In particular, the networks presented highlight the importance of considering disciplinary functioning within the wider context, to ensure maximum benefit to the scientific community as a whole.
Fisheries Science Collaborations: the Critical Role of the Community
The present paper is based on a collation of information, through both a literature review and an internet search, on North American programs that involve some kind of scientific collaboration between fishers and fisheries scientists. It identifies four basic models of such collaboration and offers examples of collaborative activities that seem to fit into each of them. The first model defers to the expertise of the scientist for all major decisions and creates a strong programmatic distinction between what is science, and shall be done by scientists, and what are other, related activities that can be carried out by others. Various kinds of tagging programs, fisher advisory boards, at-sea research collaboration and many other activities fit this model. The second model, traditional ecological knowledge, recognizes that fishers have available to them a unique, local knowledge of the resource that can make a supplementary contribution to fisheries science. Several government, community and environmental groups are engaged in finding, recording and using this knowledge. The third model, competing constructions, sees collaborations on science as part of an ongoing contestation about the nature and condition of the resource that cannot help but be a part of and expresses the political and legal aspects of management. This is the model that most accurately describes the day-to-day activities of the various stakeholder groups that work with scientists. The fourth model, community science, is beginning to emerge through efforts at fisheries co-management. These programs involve aspects of the three other kinds of programs. They recognize and seek to incorporate the leadership of scientists, the importance of fisher’s knowledge, and the inherently political nature of management-related fisheries science.
Knowledge Production at the Science-Policy Interface: Lessons from Fisheries Scientists
Science and Public Policy, 2020
While fisheries science in the USA has in the past been dominated by mode 1 knowledge production that is discipline-specific and focused on basic research, it has increasingly opened up to concerns with relevance, participation, and interdisciplinary inquiry. We consider how this transition has been experienced through the analysis of oral histories conducted with marine scientists, looking at the changes they have seen to their role as scientists and to the practice of doing science at the interface of knowledge production and policy. In particular, we examine scientists' ideas about and experiences of collaboration, public responsibility, freedom and politics in science, diversity and outreach, involvement, and relevance to society. In so doing, we explore the implications of the coproduction of science and policy as traditional domain boundaries are increasingly problematized.
Frontiers in Marine Science, 2021
Successful management and mitigation of marine challenges depends on cooperation and knowledge sharing which often occurs across culturally diverse geographic regions. Global ocean science collaboration is therefore essential for developing global solutions. Building effective global research networks that can enable collaboration also need to ensure inter- and transdisciplinary research approaches to tackle complex marine socio-ecological challenges. To understand the contribution of interdisciplinary global research networks to solving these complex challenges, we use the Integrated Marine Biosphere Research (IMBeR) project as a case study. We investigated the diversity and characteristics of 1,827 scientists from 11 global regions who were attendees at different IMBeR global science engagement opportunities since 2009. We also determined the role of social science engagement in natural science based regional programmes (using key informants) and identified the potential for enhan...
Frontiers in Marine Science
Knowledge co-production involving researchers and non-academic actors is becoming increasingly important for tackling sustainability issues. Coastal and marine social-ecological systems are one example where knowledge co-production is important, yet also particularly challenging due to their unique characteristics. Early-Career Researchers (ECRs) often face specific obstacles when engaging in the process of knowledge co-production. In this perspective paper, we shed light on the particular characteristics of knowledge co-production in marine social-ecological systems and the obstacles ECRs in the marine sciences face. Based on these obstacles, we discuss actions that can be taken at various organizational levels (institutional, community, supervisor, and individual) in order to leverage change towards a more inclusive environment for ECRs engaging in knowledge co-production. We conclude that both bottom-up (individual to institutions) and top-down (institutions to individual) action...
Marine Policy, 2014
Collaboration across sectors and disciplines is widely identified as essential for the implementation of ecosystem-based management (EBM) in both marine and terrestrial settings. However, relatively little research has examined the inner workings of collaborative marine EBM processes. Social network analysis (SNA) is a suite of methods for systematically analyzing and mapping relations between individuals or organizations, and can be used as a means of understanding the inner workings of collaboration. The authors applied SNA methods to cases of collaborative marine EBM planning in Rhode Island and New York, U.S.A., focusing on network structure and the role and influence of individual actors within their respective planning networks. Results highlighted the importance of diverse, decentralized networks of moderate density as well as the influence that bridging ties, or "brokers," can wield in such processes. Research also found that non-governmental actors, such as university outreach specialists and scientists affiliated with environmental organizations, can be especially influential in collaborative marine EBM planning. This paper presents the results of this analysis, discusses the utility of this method for the analysis of collaborative marine EBM planning, and offers recommendations for future research and practice.