Skip to main content

Essential tensions in interdisciplinary scholarship: navigating challenges in affect, epistemologies, and structure in environment–society research centers

Higher Education volume 70, pages 649–665 (2015)Cite this article

Abstract

Scholars have enumerated unique challenges to collaborative interdisciplinary research, many of which evade prescriptive solutions. Some of these challenges can be understood as “essential tensions,” necessary and persistent contradictory imperatives in the scientific process. Drawing from interviews with internationally renowned interdisciplinary environment–society research center leaders primarily located in United States academic institutions, we identified three hierarchical tensions in collaborative interdisciplinary research: (1) an epistemic tension between knowledge generation processes that blend multiple approaches into one unified intellectual perspective versus pluralistic processes that maintain multiple, discrete intellectual perspectives, (2) a structural tension between organizations that provide stability to persist and build unified knowledge, while maintaining the flexibility to experiment with novel organizational arrangements that foster innovation, and (3) “affective” tensions for individual researchers between the security of working within cohesive research communities versus attraction to the creative challenges in new intellectual communities. Our results indicate that these tensions are interdependent, similar to previous observations that disciplinary and interdisciplinary knowledge productions are linked. Rather than attempt to resolve tensions between dueling directives, leaders of interdisciplinary research centers can manage essential tensions with purpose through process-oriented and self-reflective management of the unique epistemic culture of the research centers they lead.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

£ 29.95

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

References

  • Abbott, A. (2001). The chaos of disciplines. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, H. (2013). The second essential tension: On tradition and innovation in interdisciplinary research. Topoi, 32(1), 3–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bainbridge, W. S. (Ed.). (2012). Leadership in science and technology: A reference handbook. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleiklie, I., & Byrkjeflot, H. (2002). Changing knowledge regimes: Universities in a new research environment. Higher Education, 44, 519–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blieklie, I. (2005). Organizing higher education in a knowledge society. Higher Education, 49, 31–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bozeman, C., & Boardman, B. (2007). Role strain in university research centers. Journal of Higher Education, 78(4), 430–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bracken, L. J., & Oughton, E. A. (2006). ‘What do you mean?’ The importance of language in developing interdisciplinary research. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 31, 371–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, L. M. (2005). Overcoming obstacles to interdisciplinary research. Conservation Biology, 19(2), 574–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cash, D. W., Clark, W. C., Alcock, F., Dickson, N. M., Eckley, N., Guston, D. H., & Mitchell, R. B. (2003). Knowledge systems for sustainable development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100(14), 8086–8091.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, B. R. (1996). Substantive growth and innovative organization: New categories for higher education research. Higher Education, 32(4), 417–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daily, G. C., & Ehrlich, P. R. (1999). Managing earth’s ecosystems: An interdisciplinary challenge. Ecosystems, 2(4), 277–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Felt, U., Igelsböck, J., Schikowitz, A., & Völker, T. (2012). Growing into what? The (un-) disciplined socialisation of early stage researchers in transdisciplinary research. Higher Education, 65(4), 511–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, J. D., & Gabler, J. (2006). Reconstructing the university: Worldwide shifts in academia in the 20th Century. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frickel, S., & Gross, B. (2005). A general theory of scientific/intellectual movements. American Sociological Review, 70(2), 204–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gewin, V. (2014). Interdisciplinary research: Break out. Nature, 511, 371–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graybill, J. K., Dooling, S., Shandas, V., Withey, J., Freve, A., & Simon, G. L. (2005). A rough guide to interdisciplinarity: Graduate student perspectives. BioScience, 56(9), 757–763.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffith, B. C., & Mullins, N. C. (1972). Coherent social groups in scientific change. Science, 177(4053), 959–964.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guston, D. (2001). Boundary organizations in environmental policy and science: An introduction. Science, Technology and Human Values, 26(4), 399–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hackett, E. J. (2005). Essential tensions: Identity, control, and risk in research. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 787–926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hackett, E. J., & Rhoten, D. R. (2009). The snowbird charrette: Integrative interdisciplinary collaboration in environmental research design. Minerva, 47, 401–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holley, K. A. (2009). Interdisciplinary strategies as transformative change in higher education. Innovation in Higher Education, 34, 331–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ICSU (International Council for Science). (2014). Future earth, “About”. Retrieved June 6, 2014, from http://www.icsu.org/future-earth/who.

  • Jacobs, J., & Frickel, S. (2009). Interdisciplinarity: A critical assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 35(1), 43–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kates, R. W., Clark, W. C., Corell, R., Hall, J. M., Jaeger, C. C., Lowe, I., et al. (2001). Sustainability science. Science, 292(5517), 641–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J. T. (2000). A conceptual vocabulary of interdisciplinary science. In P. Weingart & N. Stehr (Eds.), Practicing interdisciplinarity (pp. 3–24). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J. T. (2010). Creating interdisciplinary campus cultures: A model for strength and sustainability. San Francisco, CA: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knorr-Cetina, K. (2007). Culture in global knowledge societies: Knowledge cultures and epistemic cultures. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 32(4), 361–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S. (1977). The essential tension: Selected studies in scientific tradition and change. Chicago: University of Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lubchenco, J. (1998). Entering the century of the environment: A new social contract for science. Science, 279, 491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. (1973). The sociology of science. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, C. (2001). Hybrid management: Boundary organizations, science policy, and environmental governance in the climate regime. Science, Technology and Human Values, 26(4), 278–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, T. R., Baird, T. D., Littlefield, C. M., Kofinas, G., Chapin, F. S, I. I. I., & Redman, C. L. (2008). Epistemological pluralism: Reorganizing interdisciplinary research. Ecology and Society, 13(2), 46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Science Foundation, (NSF), National Academy of Engineering, & Institute of Medicine. (2004). Facilitating interdisciplinary research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newswander, L. K., & Borrego, M. (2009). Engagement in two interdisciplinary graduate programs. Higher Education, 58(4), 551–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nistor, N., Daxecker, I., Stanciu, D., & Diekamp, O. (2014). Sense of community in academic communities of practice: Predictors and effects. Higher Education,. doi:10.1007/s10734-014-9773-6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowotny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2003). Introduction: ‘Mode 2 revisited’: The new production of knowledge. Minerva: A Review of Science Learning and Policy, 41(3), 179–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NVivo qualitative data analysis software. (2011). QSR International Pty Ltd. Version 10.

  • Parker, J., & Crona, B. (2012). On being all things to all people: Boundary organizations and the contemporary research university. Social Studies of Science, 42(5), 263–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, J. N., & Hackett, E. J. (2012). Hot spots and hot moments in scientific collaborations and social movements. American Sociological Review, 77(1), 21–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrie, H. G. (1976). Do you see what I see? The epistemology of interdisciplinary inquiry. Educational Researcher, 5(2), 9–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petts, J., Owens, S., & Bulkeley, H. (2008). Crossing boundaries: Interdisciplinarity in the context of urban environments. Geoforum, 39(2), 598–601.

  • Redman, C. L., Grove, J. M., & Kuby, L. H. (2006). Integrating social science into the long-term ecological research (LTER) network: Social dimensions of ecological change and ecological dimensions of social change. Ecosystems, 7, 161–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhoten, D. (2005). Interdisciplinary research: Trend or transition. Items and Issues, 5(1–2), 6–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sá, C. M. (2008). “Interdisciplinary strategies” in US research universities. Higher Education, 55(5), 537–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sievanen, L., Campbell, L. M., & Leslie, H. M. (2012). Challenges to interdisciplinary research in ecosystem-based management. Conservation Biology, 26(2), 315–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Star, S., & Griesemer, J. (1989). Institutional ecology, ‘translations’, and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stensaker, B., & Norgård, J. D. (2001). Innovation and isomorphism: A case-study of university identity struggle 1969–1999. Higher Education, 42(4), 473–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stichweh, R. (1992). The sociology of scientific disciplines: On the genesis and stability of the disciplinary structure of modern science. Science in Context, 5, 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woelert, P., & Millar, V. (2013). The ‘paradox of interdisciplinarity’ in Australian research governance. Higher Education, 66(6), 755–767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Support for this research was provided by the Graduates in Integrative Society and Environment Research (GISER) Research Grant administered by the Interdisciplinary Graduate Education and Research Training (IGERT) Urban Ecology program at Arizona State University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geography, Kent State University, 413 McGilvrey Hall, Kent, OH, 44240, USA

    V. Kelly Turner

  2. School of Geographical Sciences and Urban Planning, Arizona State University, Coor Hall, 975 S Myrtle Ave., Fifth Floor, P.O. Box 875302, Tempe, AZ, 85287, USA

    Karina Benessaiah & Scott Warren

  3. Global Institute of Sustainability, Arizona State University, 800 S. Cady Mall, P.O. Box 857402, Tempe, AZ, 85287, USA

    David Iwaniec

Authors
  1. V. Kelly Turner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Karina Benessaiah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Scott Warren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. David Iwaniec
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. Kelly Turner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Turner, V.K., Benessaiah, K., Warren, S. et al. Essential tensions in interdisciplinary scholarship: navigating challenges in affect, epistemologies, and structure in environment–society research centers. High Educ 70, 649–665 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9859-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9859-9

Keywords

  • Research centers
  • Sustainability science
  • Resilience
  • Boundary organizations
  • Affective science
  • Epistemic cultures