Abstract
The paper introduces a heuristic framework for conducting joint problem framing (JPF) processes in transdisciplinary research (TD). JPF is an essential element in confronting real-world problems, especially in the realm of sustainability (Hirsch Hadorn et al. in Ecol Econ 60(1):119–128, 2006; Pohl and Hirsch Hadorn in Principles for designing transdisciplinary research, Oekomm, München, 2007; Rossini in Technikfolgenabschätzung Theor Prax 18(1):117–119, 2009). It is the process of clarifying and prioritizing aspects of a problem situation to ensure its relevance for a diverse collection of stakeholders involved (Kønig et al. in Futures 91:12–24, 2017; Schneider and Buser in Sustain Sci 13(1):129–142, 2017; Stindt et al. in J Bus Log 37(2):113–131, 2016). The goal of this paper is twofold. First, we identify the documented challenges in conducting a joint problem framing process and through personal experience with case studies. Second, we introduce a means to address these challenges in the form of a heuristic framework. This framework is a series of questions which first asks for a description and explanation of the JPF process, based on researcher observations. Then, the framework leads its user to probe for the assumptions behind these observations. Finally, the framework helps its user to derive insights and lessons for conducting future JPF processes based on these responses. This framework is geared primarily towards helping transdisciplinary researchers with varying levels of experience, but can also be used by practitioners.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
(Adapted from Jonassen and Hung 2008)
(Adapted from Newell and Simon 1972)
(Further adapted from Fig. 1)
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Though we recognize that complex problems are never likely to be completely “solved”, we use the verb as shorthand for describing a process of engaging with a problem situation such that the there is an improvement of the status quo. This process may never reach an endpoint in which everything is perfectly resolved. It is more likely to be an iterative process where problems are defined and redefined by those involved (Ison and Ampt 1992). Peter Checkland refers to problem solving as “purposeful activity” in situations regarded as problematical and a learning cycle that can be used to structure and debate future change (1985, 2000). This would be akin to our use of the term as well.
References
Alexander C (1977) A pattern language: towns, buildings, construction. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Alford J, Head BW (2017) Wicked and less wicked problems: a typology and a contingency framework. Policy Soc. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2017.1361634
Bardwell LV (1991) Problem-framing: a perspective on environmental problem-solving. Environ Manage 15(5):603–612
Binder CR, Absenger-Helmli I, Schilling T (2015) The reality of transdisciplinarity: a framework-based self-reflection from science and practice leaders. Sustain Sci 10(4):545–562. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0328-2
Bourdieu P (1998) Practical reason: on the theory of action. Polity Press, Cambridge
Brandt Patric, Ernst Anna, Gralla Fabienne, Luederitz Christopher, Lang Daniel J, Newig Jens, Reinert Florian, Abson David J, Von Wehrden Henrik, Von Wehrden Henrik (2013) A review of transdisciplinary research in sustainability science. Ecol Econ 92:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.04.008
Checkland P (2000) Soft systems methodology: a 30 year retrospective. Syst Res Behav Sci 17:11–58
Chow SJ (2015) Many Meanings of “Heuristic”. Br J Philos Sci 66(4):977–1016. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axu028
Clark RN, Stankey GH (2006) Integrated research in natural resources: the key role of problem framing. General technical report PNW-GTR-678. USDA Forest Service, pp 1–63
Collins HM (2001) What is tacit knowledge? In: Schatzki TR, Cetina KK, von Savigny E (eds) The practice turn in contemporary theory. Routledge, London
Cornell S, Berkhout F, Tuinstra W, Tàbara JD, Jäger J, Chabay I et al (2013) Opening up knowledge systems for better responses to global environmental change. Environ Sci Policy 28:60–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2012.11.008
Davidson JE (2009) Insights about insightful problem solving. In: Davidson JE, Sternberg RJ (eds) The psychology of problem solving. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 149–175
de Jong SPL, Wardenaar T, Horlings E (2016) Exploring the promises of transdisciplinary research: a quantitative study of two climate research programmes. Res Policy 45(7):1397–1409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.04.008
DeYoung CG, Flanders JL, Peterson JB (2008) Cognitive abilities involved in insight problem solving: an individual differences model. Creat Res J 20(3):278–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400410802278719
Dijk M, de Kraker J, van Zeijl-Rozema A, Van Lente H, Beumer C, Beemsterboer S, Valkering P (2017) Sustainability assessment as problem structuring: three typical ways. Sustain Sci 12(2):305–317
Dörner D (1996) The Logic Of Failure (English translation). Metropolitan Books, New York
Dörner D, Funke J (2017) Complex problem solving: what it is and what it is not. Front Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01153
Ejderyan O (2014) Quels aménagements pour quelle nature? Hydrologie, patrimoine et biodiversité dans le projet de renaturation de la Haute-Seymaz à Genève. In: Bradel V (ed) Urbanités et biodiversité. Entre villes fertiles et campagnes urbaines, quelle place pour la biodiversité?. Presses de l’Université de Saint-Etienne, Saint-Etienne, pp 262–275
Environment UN (2019) Global environment outlook—GEO-6: healthy planet. Nairobi, Healthy People. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108627146
Felt U, Igelsböck J, Schikowitz A, Völker T (2016) Transdisciplinary sustainability research in practice: between imaginaries of collective experimentation and entrenched academic value orders. Sci Technol Human Values 41(4):732–761. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243915626989
Fischer J, Sherren K, Hanspach J (2014) Place, case and process: applying ecology to sustainable development. Basic Appl Ecol 15(3):187–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.baae.2013.12.002
Foley RW, Wiek A, Kay B, Rushforth R (2016) Ideal and reality of multi-stakeholder collaboration on sustainability problems: a case study on a large-scale industrial contamination in Phoenix, Arizona. Sustain Sci 12(1):123–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-016-0393-1
Galway L, Parkes M, Allen D, Takaro T (2016) Building interdisciplinary research capacity: a key challenge for ecological approaches in public health. AIMS Public Health 3(2):389–406. https://doi.org/10.3934/publichealth.2016.2.389
Getzels JW (1975) Problem finding and the inventiveness of solutions. J Creat Behav 9:12–18
Giddens A (1984) The constitution of society. Outline of a theory of structuration. Polity Press, Cambridge
Guimarães MH, Guiomar N, Surová D, Godinho S, Correia TP, Sandberg A et al (2018) Structuring wicked problems in transdisciplinary research using the social-ecological systems framework: an application to the montado system, Alentejo, Portugal. J Clean Prod 191:417–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.04.200
Hadorn GH, Biber-Klemm S, Grossenbacher-Mansuy W, Hoffman-Riem H, Joye D, Pohl C, Wiesmann U, Zemp E (2008) The emergence of transdisciplinarity as a form of research. Chapter 2. In: Hadorn GH, Hoffman-Riem H, Biber-Klemm S, Grossenbacher-Mansuy W, Joye D, Pohl C (eds) Handbook of transdisciplinary research. Springer, Berlin, pp 19–42
Hirsch Hadorn G, Bradley D, Pohl C, Rist S, Wiesmann U (2006) Implications of transdisciplinarity for sustainability research. Ecol Econ 60(1):119–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.12.002
Hoffmann S, Pohl C, Hering JG (2017) Exploring transdisciplinary integration within a large research program: empirical lessons from four thematic synthesis processes. Res Policy 46(3):678–692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.01.004
Howes M, Wortley L, Potts R, Dedekorkut-Howes A, Serrao-Neumann S, Davidson J et al (2017) Environmental sustainability: a case of policy implementation failure? Sustainability 9(2):165–175. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9020165
Huber R, Rigling A (2014) Commitment to continuous research is a key factor in transdisciplinarity. Experiences from the Mountland project. GAIA Ecolo Perspect Sci Soc 23(3):256–262. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.23.3.10
Ison RL, Ampt PR (1992) Rapid rural appraisal—a participatory problem formulation method relevant to australian agriculture. Agric Syst 38(4):363–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/0308-521X(92)90029-N
Jackson MC (2017) Beyond problem structuring methods: reinventing the future of OR/MS. J Oper Res Soc 57(7):868–878. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602093
Jahn T, Bergmann M, Keil F (2012) Transdisciplinarity: between mainstreaming and marginalization. Ecol Econ 79:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.04.017
Johnson-Laird PN (1983) Mental models. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Jonassen DH (2000) Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educ Tech Res Dev 48(4):63–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02300500
Jonassen DH, Hung W (2008) All problems are not equal: implications for problem-based learning. Interdiscip J Probl Based Learn 2(2):1–24. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1080
Kaplan CA, Simon HA (1990) Search of insight. Cogn Psychol 22(3):374–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(90)90008-R
Keeney RL (1996) Value-focused thinking. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Kerkhoff L (2014) Developing integrative research for sustainability science through a complexity principles-based approach. Sustain Sci 9(2):143–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-013-0203-y
Klein GA (1998) Sources of power: how people make decisions. MIT press, Cambridge
Klein JT (2010) A taxonomy of interdisciplinarity. In: Frodeman R, Klein JT, Mitcham C, Holbrook JB (eds) The oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 15–30
Knauff M (2013) Space to reason. MIT Press, Cambridge
Kønig N, Børsen T, Emmeche C (2017) The ethos of post-normal science. Futures 91:12–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2016.12.004
Krueger T, Maynard C, Carr G, Bruns A, Mueller EN, Lane S (2016) A transdisciplinary account of water research. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Water 3(3):369–389. https://doi.org/10.1002/wat2.1132
Lam A (2000) Tacit knowledge, organizational learning and societal institutions: an integrated framework. Org Stud 21(3):487–513. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840600213001
Lang DJ, Wiek A, Bergmann M, Stauffacher M, Martens P, Moll P, Swilling M et al (2012) Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science: practice, principles, and challenges. Sustain Sci 7(Suppl. 1):25–43
Lee KE, Abdullah R, Hanafiah MM, Halim AA, Mokhtar M, Goh CT, Alam L (2018) An integrated approach for stakeholder participation in watershed management. In: Environmental risk analysis for asian-oriented, risk-based watershed management, vol 2003. Springer, Singapore, pp 135–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-8090-6_10
Leonard D, Sensiper S (1998) The role of tacit knowledge in group innovation. Calif Manag Rev 40(3):112–132. https://doi.org/10.2307/41165946
Mascitelli R (2000) From experience: harnessing tacit knowledge to achieve breakthrough innovation. J Prod Innov Manag 17(3):179–193. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5885.1730179
Midgley G (2000) Systemic intervention. Spring Science + Business Media, New York, pp 1–447
Mielke J, Vermaßen H, Ellenbeck S (2017) Ideals, practices, and future prospects of stakeholder involvement in sustainability science. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 114(50):E10648–E10657. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1706085114
Musvoto C, Mason N, Jovanovic N, Froebrich J, Tshovhote J, Nemakhavhani M, Khabe T (2015) Applying a transdisciplinary process to define a research agenda in a smallholder irrigated farming system in South Africa. Agric Syst 137(C):39–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2015.03.008
Newell A, Simon HA (1972) Human problem solving. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Payne TC, Gallagher K, Eck JE, Frank J (2013) Problem framing in problem solving: a case study. Polic Int J Police Strateg Manag 36(4):670–682
Pearce BJ (2015) Phosphorus recovery transition tool (PRTT): a transdisciplinary framework for implementing a regenerative urban phosphorus cycle. J Clean Prod 109(C):203–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.111
Pohl C (2011) What is progress in transdisciplinary research? Futures 43(6):618–626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2011.03.001
Pohl C, Hirsch Hadorn G (2007) Principles for designing transdisciplinary research. Oekom, München
Rittel HWJ, Webber MM (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4:155–169
Rogga S, Zscheischler J, Gaasch N (2018) How much of the real-world laboratory is hidden in current transdisciplinary research. Gaia 27(1):18–22. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.27.S1.6
Rosenhead J (1996) What’s the problem? An introduction to problem structuring methods. Interfaces 26(6):117–131. https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.26.6.117
Rosenhead J, Mingers J (2001) Rational analysis for a problematic world revisited, 2nd edn. Wiley, Chichester
Rossini M (2009) Was ist das problem? Problemstrukturierung in der inter-und transdisziplinären Forschung. Technikfolgenabschätzung Theor Prax 18(1):117–119
Roux DJ, Nel JL, Cundill G, O’Farrell P, Fabricius C (2017) Transdisciplinary research for systemic change: who to learn with, what to learn about and how to learn. Sustain Sci 12(5):711–726. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0446-0
Schäfer M, Kröger M (2016) Joint problem framing in sustainable land use research: experience with constellation analysis as a method for inter—and transdisciplinary knowledge integration. Land Policy 57:526–539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.06.013
Schauppenlehner-Kloyber E, Penker M (2015) Managing group processes in transdisciplinary future studies: how to facilitate social learning and capacity building for self-organised action towards sustainable urban development? Futures 65:57–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2014.08.012
Schirato T, Webb J (2002) Bourdieu’s notion of reflexive knowledge. Soc Semiot 12(3):255–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330216373
Schneider F, Buser T (2017) Promising degrees of stakeholder interaction in research for sustainable development. Sustain Sci 13(1):129–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0507-4
Schodl K, Leeb C, Winckler C (2015) Developing science–industry collaborations into a transdisciplinary process: a case study on improving sustainability of pork production. Sustain Sci 10(4):639–651. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0329-1
Schön DA (1984) The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action. Basic Books, New York
Silver HK, Hecker JA (1970) The pediatric nurse practitioner and the child health associate: new types of health professionals. Acad Med 45(3):171–176
Spangenberg JH, Görg C, Settele J (2015) Stakeholder involvement in ESS research and governance: between conceptual ambition and practical experiences—risks, challenges and tested tools. Ecosyst Serv 16(C):201–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.10.006
Steelman Toddi, Nichols Elizabeth Guthrie, James April, Bradford Lori, Ebersöhn Liesel, Scherman Vanessa, Omidire Funke, Bunn David N, Twine Wayne, McHale Melissa R (2015) Practicing the science of sustainability: the challenges of transdisciplinarity in a developing world context. Sustain Sci 10(4):581–599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-015-0334-4
Stindt D, Sahamie R, Nuss C, Tuma A (2016) How transdisciplinarity can help to improve operations research on sustainable supply chains—a transdisciplinary modeling framework. J Bus Logist 37(2):113–131. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12127
Stokols D, Hall KL, Moser RP, Feng AX, Misra S (2010) Cross-disciplinary team science initiatives: Research, training, and translation. In: Frodeman R, Klein JT, Mitcham C, Holbrook JB (eds) Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity, 1(edn). Oxford, pp. 471–493. http://doi.org/10.1214/ss/1177012273
Svihla V, Reeve R (2016) Facilitating problem framing in project-based learning. Interdiscip J Prob Based Learn Art Facil Prob Fram Proj Based Learn. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1603
td-net (2019) Plurality of definitions. Retrieved April 12, 2019, from http://www.transdisciplinarity.ch/en/td-net/Transdisziplinarit-t/Definitionen.html
Tobias S, Ströbele MF, Buser T (2018) How transdisciplinary projects influence participants’ ways of thinking: a case study on future landscape development. Sustain Sci 25(4):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0532-y
Tversky A, Kahneman D (1986) Rational choice and the framing of decisions. J Bus. https://doi.org/10.2307/2352759?refreqid=searchgateway:7ccb9066b95a8996e388dda0e571d13d
Vilsmaier U, Lang D (2015) Making a difference by marking the difference: constituting in-between spaces for sustainability learning. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 16(October):51–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COSUST.2015.07.019
Walzer C, Kowalczyk C, Alexander JM, Baur B, Bogliani G, Brun J-J, Füreder L, Guth M-O, Haller R, Holderegger R, Yann K, Kueffer C, Righetti A, Spaar R, Sutherland W, Ullrich-Schneider A, Vanpeene-Bruhier S, Scheurer T (2013) The 50 most important questions relating to the maintenance and restoration of an ecological continuum in the European Alps. PLoS One 8(1):e53139-12. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0053139
Wiek A, Scheringer M, Pohl C, Hadorn GH (2007) Joint problem identification and structuring in environmental research. Gaia Ecol Perspect Sci Soc 1:72–74
Wuelser G, Pohl C (2016) How researchers frame scientific contributions to sustainable development: a typology based on grounded theory. Sustain Sci 11(5):789–800. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-016-0363-7
Yates KK, Turley C, Hopkinson BM, Todgham AE, Cross JN, Greening H, Williamson P, Van Hooidonk R, Deheyen D, Johnson Z (2015) Transdisciplinary science a path to understanding the interactions among ocean acidification, ecosystem, and society. Oceanography 28(2):212–225. https://doi.org/10.5670/oceanog.2015.43
Zscheischler J, Rogga S, Busse M (2017) The adoption and implementation of transdisciplinary research in the field of land-use science-A comparative case study. Sustainability (Switzerland) 9(11):1926. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9111926
Acknowledgements
Thanks to Dr. Christian Pohl, Prof. Dr. Michael Stauffacher, and Dr. Jenny Lieu for their helpful comments and feedback during the writing of this paper. Thanks also to the reviewers of the paper who have provided valuable suggestions for improving the clarity of the ideas developed here.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Handled by David J. Abson, Leuphana Universitat Luneburg, Germany.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pearce, B.J., Ejderyan, O. Joint problem framing as reflexive practice: honing a transdisciplinary skill. Sustain Sci 15, 683–698 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-019-00744-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-019-00744-2