Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Disentangling Interdisciplinarity and Transdisciplinarity: The Beauty of Differing Definitions

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Theory and Practice in the Interdisciplinary Production and Reproduction of Scientific Knowledge

Part of the book series: Logic, Argumentation & Reasoning ((LARI,volume 31))

Abstract

The academic literature on interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity shows no agreement over definitions. It shows plurality, heterogeneity and overlapping terms, even contested and contrasting discourses. Diverse definitions of inter- and transdisciplinarity coexist within the literature and are reproduced by researchers and practitioners. Lack of connections between different communities results in the bottleneck acting as an obstacle to further integration in inter- and trans-disciplinary research. In this chapter, I argue that the heterogeneity and multiplicity of understandings in interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity constitute an asset rather than a hindering factor to the theoretical and methodological development of interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity. I propose three related actions to take stock of the plurality of understandings. This chapter presents the results of a literature review developed in the project “Shaping interdisciplinary practices in Europe” (SHAPE-ID). The project studies how to better support the integration of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences (AHSS) perspectives into interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research with Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM), particularly in the context of addressing societal challenges.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This research is framed in the project Shaping interdisciplinary practices in Europe (SHAPE_ID), which has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 822705. More details on the project: shapeid.eu

  2. 2.

    Website: shapeid.eu

References

  • Aboelela, S. W., Larson, E., Bakken, S., Carrasquillo, O., Formicola, A., Glied, S. A., et al. (2007). Defining interdisciplinary research: Conclusions from a critical review of the literature. Health Services Research, 42(1), 329–346. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00621.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, J., Loach, T., & Szomszor, M. (2016). Interdisciplinary research: Methodologies for identification and assessment. Digital Science, Research Council UK. Retrieved from: https://mrc.ukri.org/documents/pdf/interdisciplinarity-research-commentary/

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, A., & Born, G. (2013). Interdisciplinarity: Reconfigurations of the social and natural sciences. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, A., Born, G., & Weszkalnys, G. (2008). Logics of interdisciplinarity. Economy and Society, 37(1), 20–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085140701760841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boix Mansilla, V., Lamont, M., & Sato, K. (2016). Shared cognitive–emotional–interactional platforms: Markers and conditions for successful interdisciplinary collaborations. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 41(4), 571–612. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243915614103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruce, A., Lyall, C., Tait, J., & Williams, R. (2004). Interdisciplinary integration in Europe: The case of the Fifth Framework program. Futures, 36(2004), 457–470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2003.10.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buanes, A., & Jentoft, S. (2009). Building bridges: Institutional perspectives on interdisciplinarity. Futures, 41(7), 446–454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2009.01.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callard, F., & Fitzgerald, D. (2015). Rethinking interdisciplinarity across the social sciences and neurosciences. Palgrave Macmillan UK.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Callard, F., Fitzgerald, D., & Woods, A. (2015). Interdisciplinary collaboration in action: Tracking the signal, tracing the noise. Palgrave Communications, 1, 15019. https://doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2015.19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castán Broto, V., Gislason, M., & Ehlers, M.-H. (2009). Practising interdisciplinarity in the interplay between disciplines: Experiences of established researchers. Environmental Science & Policy, 12(7), 922–933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2009.04.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. L. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. L. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, M. (1986). How institutions think. Syracuse University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eigenbrode, S. D., O’Rourke, M., Wulfhorst, J. D., Althoff, D. M., Goldberg, C. S., Merrill, K., et al. (2007). Employing philosophical dialogue in collaborative science. Bioscience, 57(1), 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1641/b570109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Felt, U. (2009). Knowing and living in academic research: Convergences and heterogeneity in research cultures in the European context. Institute of Sociology of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, D., Brunner, E., Koellinger, P., & Navarro, A. (2013). ‘The good, the bad and the ugly’ – Understanding collaboration between the social sciences and the life sciences. Strategic Workshop Report. Retrieved from Strasbourg: http://www.esf.org/index.php?id=9388

  • Fletcher, I., & Lyall, C. (2019). Stem cells and serendipity: Defying powerful forces to frustrate feelings of failure (under review). In D. Fam & M. O’Rourke (Eds.), Interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary ‘Failures’ as lessons learned: A cautionary. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flick, U. (2014). The SAGE handbook of qualitative data analysis. SAGE.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • France, E. F., Ring, N., Thomas, R., Noyes, J., Maxwell, M., & Jepson, R. (2014). A methodological systematic review of what’s wrong with meta-ethnography reporting. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 14(1), 119. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-14-119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • France, E. F., Cunningham, M., Ring, N., Uny, I., Duncan, E. A. S., Jepson, R. G., et al. (2019). Improving reporting of meta-ethnography: The eMERGe reporting guidance. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 19(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0600-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, M. (2017). Modes of thinking for qualitative data analysis: New York. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frickel, S., Ilhan, A. O., & Nowotny, H. (2017). Disciplinary and interdisciplinary change in six social sciences – A longitudinal comparison. In S. Frickel, M. Albert, & B. Prainsack (Eds.), Investigating interdisciplinary collaboration (pp. 148–170). Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frodeman, R. (2017). The future of interdisciplinarity: An Introduction to the 2nd Edition. In Frodeman, R., Klein, J.T. and Pacheco, R. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity (2nd Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 3–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graf, J. (2019). Bringing concepts together: Interdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity, and SSH integration. Fteval Journal for Research and Technology Policy Evaluation, 48, 33–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guimarães, M. H., Pohl, C., Bina, O., & Varanda, M. (2019). Who is doing inter- and transdisciplinary research, and why? An empirical study of motivations, attitudes, skills, and behaviours. Futures, 112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2019.102441

  • Hirsch Hadorn, G., Kueffer, C., Bammer, G., van Kerkhoff, L., & Pohl, C. (2007). Towards a publication culture in transdisciplinary research. Gaia, 16(1), 22–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch Hadorn, G., Hoffman-Riem, H., Biber-Klemm, S., Grossenbacher-Mansuy, W., Joye, D., Pohl, C., et al. (2008). Handbook of transdisciplinary research. Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann, M. H. G., Schmidt, J. C., & Nersessian, N. J. (2012). Philosophy of and as interdisciplinarity. Synthese, 190(11), 1857–1975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann, S., Pohl, C., & Hering, J. G. (2017). Methods and procedures of transdisciplinary knowledge integration – Empirical insights from four thematic synthesis processes. Ecology and Society, 22(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Huutoniemi, K., Thompson Klein, J., Bruun, H., et al. (2010). ‘Analyzing Interdisciplinarity: Typology and Indicators’, Research Policy, 39: 79–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jahan, N., Naveed, S., Zeshan, M., & Tahir, M. A. (2016). How to conduct a systematic review: A narrative literature review. Cureus, 8(11), e864–e864. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jasanoff, S. (2013). Fields and fallows: A political history of STS. In A. Barry & G. Born (Eds.), Interdisciplinarity: Reconfigurations of the social and natural sciences (pp. 99–118). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J. T. (1990). Interdisciplinarity: History, theory, and practice. Wayne State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J. T. (1996). Crossing boundaries: Knowledge, disciplinarities, and interdisciplinarities. University Press of Virginia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J. T. (2004). Prospects for transdisciplinarity. Futures, 36(4), 515–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2003.10.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J. T. (2005). Humanities, culture, and interdisciplinarity: The changing American academy. State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J. T. (2010). Creating interdisciplinary campus cultures: A model for strength and sustainability. Jossey Bass and Association of American Colleges and Universities. Klein, J. T. (2019, Sep. 6). [personal interview].

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J. T. (2014). ‘Prospects for Transdisciplinarity’, Futures, 36: 515–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J. T. (2017). A taxonomy of Interdisciplinarity. In The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (2nd ed., pp. 15–30). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lang, D. J., Wiek, A., Bergmann, M., Stauffacher, M., Martens, P., Moll, P., et al. (2012). Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: Practice, principles, and challenges. Sustainability Science, 7(1), 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-011-0149-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowe, P., Phillipson, J., & Wilkinson, K. (2013). Why social scientists should engage with natural scientists. Contemporary Social Science, 8(3), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/21582041.2013.769617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lury, C. (2018). The Routledge handbook of interdisciplinary research methods. Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lyall, C. (2019). Being an interdisciplinary academic. How institutions shape university careers. Palgrave Pivot.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lyall, C., Bruce, A., Tait, J., & Meagher, L. (2011). Interdisciplinary research journeys: Practical strategies for capturing creativity. Bloomsbury Academic.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lyall, C., Bruce, A., Marsden, W., & Meagher, L. (2013). The role of funding agencies in creating interdisciplinary knowledge. Science and Public Policy, 40(2013), 62–71. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyall, C., Meagher, L., & Bruce, A. (2015). A rose by any other name? Futures, 65, 150–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2014.08.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacMynowski, D. P. (2007). Pausing at the brink of interdisciplinarity: Power and knowledge at the meeting of social and biophysical science. Ecology and Society, 12(1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mäki, U. (2016). Philosophy of interdisciplinarity. What? Why? How? European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 6(3), 327–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-016-0162-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis. 1(2). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-1.2.1089.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, T. R., Baird, T. D., Littlefield, C. M., Kofinas, G., Chapin, F. S., & Redman, C. L. (2008). Epistemological pluralism: Reorganizing interdisciplinary research. Ecology and Society, 13(2), 46. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-02671-130246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Academy of Sciences, N. A. o. E., Institute of Medicine. (2005). Facilitating interdisciplinary research. The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicolescu, B. (1996). La transdisciplinarité. éditions du Rocher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicolescu, B. (2000). Transdisciplinarity and complexity: Levels of reality as source of indeterminacy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noblit, G. W., & Hare, R. D. (1988). In R. D. Hare (Ed.), Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies (Vol. 11). Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (1972). Interdisciplinarity: Problems of teaching and research. Retrieved from Paris: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED061895

  • Osborne, T. (2013). Inter that discipline! In A. Barry & G. Born (Eds.), Interdisciplinarity: Reconfigurations of the social and natural sciences (pp. 82–98). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, P. (2015). Problematizing disciplinarity, transdisciplinary problematics. Theory, Culture & Society, 32(5–6), 3–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276415592245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pohl, C. (2008). From science to policy through transdisciplinary research. Environmental Science & Policy, 11(1), 46–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2007.06.00145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pohl, C. (2011). What is progress in transdisciplinary research? Futures, 43(6), 618–626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2011.03.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pohl, C., & Hirsch Hadorn, G. (2007). Principles for designing transdisciplinary research: Proposed by the Swiss academies of arts and sciences. Oekom Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rabinow, P., & Bennett, G. (2012). Designing human practices: An experiment with synthetic biology. The University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, F., Buser, T., Keller, R., Tribaldos, T., & Rist, S. (2019). Research funding programs aiming for societal transformations: Ten key stages. Science and Public Policy, 46(3), 463–478. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scy074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schreier, M. (2014). Ways of doing qualitative content analysis: Disentangling terms and terminologies. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-15.1.2043

  • Spaapen, J., Dijstelbloem, H., & Wamelink, F. (2007). Evaluating research in context. A method for comprehensive research assessment (2nd ed.). Consultative Committee of Sector Councils for Research and Development (COS), the Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spaapen, J., Vienni Baptista, B., Buchner, A., et al. (2020). Report on Survey among Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary Researchers and Post-survey Interviews with Policy Stakeholders. H2020 Project “Shaping interdisciplinary practices in Europe”.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stamm, J. (2019). Chapter 19: Interdisciplinarity put to test: Science policy rhetoric vs scientific practice – The case of integrating the social sciences and humanities in Horizon 2020. In D. Simon, S. Kuhlmann, J. Stamm, & W. Canzler (Eds.), Handbook of science and public policy (pp. 376–399). Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Td_net. (2011). Questions to evaluate inter- and transdisciplinary research proposals. Retrieved from Berne, Switzerland:td-net. (2019). td-net. Retrieved from http://www.transdisciplinarity.ch/en/td-net/Aktuell/td-net-News.html

  • Tuana, N. (2013). Embedding philosophers in the practices of science: Bringing humanities to the sciences. Synthese, 190(11), 1955–1973. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-012-0171-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Drooge, L., van den Besselaar, P., Elsen, G. M. F., de Haas, M., van den Heuvel, J. J., Maassen van den Brink, H., … Westenbrink, R. (2010). Evaluating the societal relevance of academic research: A guide. Retrieved from Den Haag: https://pure.knaw.nl/portal/en/publications/evaluating-the-societal-relevance-of-academic-research-a-guide(9f9cf3f1-4066-4410-bb03-ddc9e093023b)/export.html

    Google Scholar 

  • Vienni Baptista, B., Maryl, M., Wciślik, P., Fletcher, I., Buchner, A., Wallace, D., & Pohl, C. (2019). Preliminary Report on Literature Review on Understandings on interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research. Shaping interdisciplinary practices in Europe (SHAPE-ID). Retrieved from: https://www.shapeid.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/SHAPE-ID-822705-D2.1-Preliminary-Report-on-Literature-Review.pdf

  • Vienni Baptista, B., Maryl, M., Wciślik, P., Fletcher, I., Buchner, A., & Pohl, C. (2020). Final report on understandings of interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary research and factors of success or failure. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3760417

  • Vienni-Baptista, B., Fletcher, I., Lyall C. & Pohl C. (2022). Embracing Heterogeneity: Why plural understandings strengthen inter- and transdisciplinarity. Science and Public Policy, scac034, https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scac034

  • von Wehrden, H., Guimarães, M. H., Bina, O., Varanda, M., Lang, D. J., John, B., et al. (2017). Interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research: Finding the common ground of multi- faceted concepts. Sustainability Science, 14(3), 875–888. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0594-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, C. S., Roessner, J. D., Bobb, K., Klein, J. T., Boyack, K. W., Keyton, J., et al. (2011). Approaches to understanding and measuring interdisciplinary scientific research (IDR): A review of the literature. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.06.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author gratefully acknowledge the support from SHAPE-ID partners: Trinity Long Room Hub Arts and Humanities Research Institute (TLRH), Institute of Studies for the Integration of Systems (ISSINOVA), School of Social and Political Science of the University of Edinburgh, Institute of Literary Research of the Polish Academy of Sciences (IBL PAN) and Dr. Jack Spaapen. I specially thank Dr. Christian Pohl and Prof. Dr. Julie Thompson Klein for their comments, time and generosity to discuss these topics with me.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Transdisciplinarity Lab, Department of Environmental Systems Science, ETH Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland

    Bianca Vienni-Baptista

Authors
  1. Bianca Vienni-Baptista
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bianca Vienni-Baptista .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Sciences & Center for Philosophy of Science of the University of Lisbon (CFCUL), University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

    Olga Pombo

  2. Departamento de História e Filosofia das Ciências & Centro de Filosofia das Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa (CFCUL), Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal

    Klaus Gärtner

  3. Centre for Philosophy of Sciences of the University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

    Jorge Jesuíno

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Vienni-Baptista, B. (2023). Disentangling Interdisciplinarity and Transdisciplinarity: The Beauty of Differing Definitions. In: Pombo, O., Gärtner, K., Jesuíno, J. (eds) Theory and Practice in the Interdisciplinary Production and Reproduction of Scientific Knowledge. Logic, Argumentation & Reasoning, vol 31. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-20405-0_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation