Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Distinguishing collaboration from contribution in environmental research

  • Published:
Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, we distinguish contributory from collaborative approaches to interdisciplinary environmental research. A characteristic feature of the collaborative approach is that emphasis is placed on the process of collaborative problem formulation. Rather than responding to a pre-described problem by supplementing disciplinary perspectives and methodologies as needed, a collaborative research process entails attending to the characterization of the problem itself as a necessary object of interdisciplinary research. We suggest that clearly distinguishing collaborative from contributory models of interdisciplinary environmental research, and explicitly practicing collaborative research, will help foster a culture of robust interdisciplinary engagement well suited to addressing many of today’s complex environmental problems.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This research was performed under the project, Understanding and overcoming barriers to communication in complex socio-ecological systems: an integrative approach to interdisciplinary research, policy translation, and educational application (4/1/2014-3/31/2015), funded through a SUNY Research Foundation program: developing Networks of Excellence in Energy, Economy, Environment, and Education; Primary PI: Paul Hirsch, SUNY-College of Environmental Science and Forestry. The project was focused on an examination of interdisciplinary environmental research across the State University of New York (SUNY) system. As part of this project, a member of our research team, Steve Turowiecki, interviewed 15 people across seven exemplary interdisciplinary research teams to capture the untold narratives of collaboration on interdisciplinary research projects. Collectively, these case studies illustrate the range of interdisciplinary engagement in subject groups and to capture the contrast between contribution and collaboration as expressed in those groups.

  2. We recognize that these definitions may deviate from standard usage to some extent. However, our purpose in this paper is to use these terms, in this slightly formal and perhaps marginally nonstandard sense, to draw out a distinction between two complementary forms of interdisciplinary research. We would like to thank an anonymous reviewer for this point.

  3. We based our characterization of barriers to interdisciplinary research collaboration on the existing breadth of literature published on the epistemic (Eigenbrode et al. 2007; Miller et al. 2008; Khagram et al. 2010) and cultural (Sá 2008; Hicks et al. 2010; Roy et al. 2013) barriers to interdisciplinary research, which hinder collaboration at the scale of the research team.

  4. Results based on 651 respondents from eight SUNY institutions, a 28 % response rate in fields of energy, environment, economics, and education.

  5. As per the confidentiality agreements of our research protocols, in discussing specific interviews, we will not provide identifying characteristics of the larger research initiative. For research projects in which publicly available data and/or the direct knowledge of members of our research team were drawn on to develop case study material (but for which no interviews were conducted), the larger research initiative will be identified. In case of the groundwater restoration example (see note 6), co-author [removed for review] serves as co-PI and provided details of that project within that project’s confidentiality restrictions. In the case of the Great Lakes Futures Project, co-author [removed for review] serves as co-PI and provided details of that project within that project’s confidentiality restrictions.

  6. INSPIRE grant (Integrated NSF Support Promoting Interdisciplinary Research and Education); (NSF Award Number: 1344238), Advancing groundwater restoration through qualitative analysis: What participants and stakeholders care about and why it matters. PI: Alan Rabideau. Co-author [removed for blind review] remains a co-PI on this project.

  7. One consequence of this approach is that it turns many artificially simple problems into “wicked problems”; that is, problems where the very nature of the problem evolves as possible solutions are considered or implemented (Norton, 2005, 2015; see Rittel and Webber 1973, for their seminal discussion of wicked problems).

References

  • Acevedo MF (2011) Interdisciplinary progress in food production, food security and environment research. Environ Conserv 28(2):151–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Augsburg T (2014) Becoming transdisciplinary: The emergence of the transdisciplinary individual. World Futures 70(3–4):233–247

  • Bäckstrand K (2003) Civic science for sustainability: reframing the role of experts, policy-makers and citizens in environmental governance. Global Environmental Politics 3(4):24–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bardwell LV (1991) Problem-framing: a perspective on environmental problem-solving. Environ Manag 15(5):603–612

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer HH (1990) Barriers against interdisciplinarity: implications for studies of science, technology, and society (STS). Sci Technol Hum Values 15(1):105–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benson MH, Lippitt CD, Morrison R, Cosens B, Boll J, Chaffin BC et al (2015) Five ways to support interdisciplinary work before tenure. J Environ Stud Sci. doi: 10.1007/s13412-015-0326-9.

  • Buanes A, Jentoft S (2009) Building bridges: institutional perspectives on interdisciplinarity. Futures 41:446–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell LM (2005) Overcoming obstacles to interdisciplinary research. Conserv Biol 19(2):574–577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clewell AF & Aronson J (2013) Ecological restoration: principles, values, and structure of an emerging profession. 2nd edn. Washington, Island Press

  • Collins JP (2002) May you live in interesting times: using multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary programs to cope with change in the life sciences. Bioscience 52(1):75–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins H, Evans R, Gorman M (2007) Trading zones and interactional expertise. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 38(4):657–666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooke NJ and Hilton ML (eds) (2015) Enhancing the effectiveness of team science. Washington, National Academies Press

  • Creed IF, Taylor WD, Sibley P, Gaden M, Luzadis V, Bunting-Howarth K (2015) The Great Lakes futures project: Using scenario analysis to develop a sustainable socio-ecologic vision for the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River Basin. J Great Lakes Res 41(Supp.1):1–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniel JR, Pinel SL, Brooks J (2013) Overcoming barriers to collaborative transboundary water governance. Mt Res Dev 33(3):215–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiCastri F, Hadley M (1986) Enhancing the credibility of ecology: is interdisciplinary research for land use planning useful? GeoJournal 13(4):299–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eigenbrode SD, O’Rourke M, Wulfhorst JD, Althoff DM, Goldberg CS, Merrill K, Morse W et al (2007) Employing philosophical dialogue in collaborative science. Bioscience 57(1):55–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewel KC (2001) Natural resource management: the need for interdisciplinary collaboration. Ecosystems 4(8):716–722

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Future Earth. 2015. “Unpacking the Black Box: the need for Integrated Environmental Humanities (IEH)” Future Earth Blog http://www.futureearth.org/blog/2015-jun-3/unpacking-black-box-need-integrated-environmental-humanities-ieh, accessed 2 July 2015.

  • Gorman M E (2002) Levels of expertise and trading zones: a framework for multidisciplinary collaboration. Soc Stud Sci 32(5–6):933–938.

  • Gorman M E (2010). Trading zones and interactional expertise: creating new kinds of collaboration. Cambridge, MIT Press

  • Guston DH (2001) Boundary organizations in environmental policy and science: an introduction. Science, technology, and human values 26(4):399–408

  • Hicks CC, Fitzsimmons C, Polunin NVC (2010) Interdisciplinarity in the environmental sciences: barriers and frontiers. Environ Conserv 37(4):464–477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgs E (2003). Nature by design MIT Press.

  • Hinrichs CC (2008) Interdisciplinarity and boundary work: challenges and opportunities for agrifood studies. Agric Hum Values 25:209–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch PD, Luzadis VA (2013) Scientific concepts and their policy affordances: how a focus on compatibility can improve science-policy interaction and outcomes. Nature and Culture 8(1):97–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch PD, Brosius JP, O’Connor S, Zia A, Welch-Devine M, Dammert JL, Songorwa A, Trung TC, Rice JL, Anderson ZR, Hitchner S, Schelhas J, McShane TO (2013) Navigating complex trade-offs in conservation and development : an integrative framework. Issues in Interdisciplinary Studies 31:99–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann MH, Schmidt JC, Nersessian NJ (2013) Philosophy of and as interdisciplinarity. Synthese 190(11):1857–1864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hooks B (1992) Black looks: race and representation. South End Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Hulme M (2011) Meet the humanities. Nat Clim Chang 1(4):177–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2014) In: Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga R, Sokona Y (eds) Climate Change 2014: mitigation of climate change. Working Group III Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Jordan WR (2000) Restoration, community, and wilderness. In: Gobster PH, Hull B (eds) Restoring nature: culture from the social sciences and humanities, 2nd edn. Island Press, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Kates RW, Clark WC, Corell R, Hall JM, Jaeger CC et al (2001) Sustainability science. Science 292(5517):641–642

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Khagram S, Nicholas KA, MacMynowski Bever D, Warren J, Richards EH, Oleson K et al (2010) Thinking about knowing: conceptual foundations for interdisciplinary environmental research. Environ Conserv 37(4):388–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein JT (1990) The interdisciplinary process. In: Birnbaum-More PH, Rossini FA, Baldwin DR (eds) International research management: studies in interdisciplinary methods from business, government, and academia. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 20–30

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Klein JT (2004a) Prospects for transdisciplinarity. Futures 36:515–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein JT (2004b) Interdisciplinarity and complexity: an evolving relationship. E:CO Special Double Issue 6(1-2):2–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Layzer J (2011) The environmental case: translating values into policy, 3rd ed. CQ Press.

  • Lélé S, Norgaard RB (2005) Practicing interdisciplinarity. Bioscience 55(11):967–975

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Light A (2000) Ecological restoration and the culture of nature: a pragmatic perspective. In: Gobster P, Hull R (eds) Restoring nature. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Light A (2002) Restoring ecological citizenship. In: Minteer BA, Taylor BP (eds) Democracy and the claims of nature: critical perspectives for a new century. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham

    Google Scholar 

  • McEvoy J (1972) Multi- and interdisciplinary research: problems of initiation, control, integration and reward. Policy Sci 3(2):201–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller TR, Baird TD, Littlefield CM, Kofinas G, Chapin FS III (2008) Epistemological pluralism: reorganizing interdisciplinary research. Ecol Soc 13(2):46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milman A, Marston JM, Godsey SE, Bolson J, Jones HP, and Weiler CS (2015) Scholarly motivations to conduct interdisciplinary climate change research. J Environ Stud Sci. doi: 10.1007/s13412-015-0307-z.

  • Moore CG (2008) Interdisciplinary research in the ecology of vector-borne diseases: opportunities and needs. Journal of Vector Ecology 33(2):218–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morse WC, Nielsen-Pincus M, Force JE, Wulfhorst JD (2007) Bridges and barriers to developing and conducting interdisciplinary graduate-student team research. Ecol Soc 12(2):8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nersessian NJ (2006) The cognitive-cultural systems of the research laboratory. Organization Studies 27(1):125–145

  • Nissani M (1997) Ten cheers for interdisciplinarity: the case for interdisciplinary knowledge and research. Soc Sci J 24(2):201–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norton B (2005) Sustainability: a philosophy of adaptive ecosystem management. Chicago, University of Chicago Press

  • Norton B (2015) Sustainable values, sustainable change: a guide to environmental decision making. Chicago, University of Chicago Press

  • Peterson RB, Russell D, West P, Brosius JP (2010) Seeing (and doing) conservation through cultural lenses. Environ Manag 45(1):5–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petts J, Owens S, Bulkeley H (2008) Crossing boundaries: interdisciplinarity in the context of urban environments. Geoforum 39:593–601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickett STA, Burch WR, Grove JM (1999) Interdisciplinary research: maintaining the constructive impulse in a culture of criticism. Ecosystems 2(4):302–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pohl C (2005) Transdisciplinary collaboration in environmental research. Futures 37(10):1159–1178. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2005.02.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poteete AR, Janssen MA, Ostrom E (eds) (2010) Learning from multiple methods in working together: collective action, the commons, and multiple methods in practice. Princeton University Press, New Jersey, pp 262–270

    Google Scholar 

  • Redclift M (1998) Dances with wolves? Interdisciplinary research on the global environment. Glob Environ Chang 8(3):177–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Repko AF (2008) Interdisciplinary research: process and theory. Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications

  • Rittel H, Webber M (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4:155–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy ED, Morzillo AT, Seijo F, Reddy SMW, Rhemtulla JM, Milder JC et al (2013) The elusive pursuit of interdisciplinarity at the human-environment interface. Bioscience 63(9):745–753

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sá CM (2008) ‘Interdisciplinary strategies’ in U.S. research universities. High Educ 55(5):537–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt JC (2011) What is a problem?: on problem-oriented interdisciplinarity. Poiesis Prax 7(4):249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneekloth LH and Shibley RG (1995) Placemaking: the art and practice of building communities. New York, John Wiley & Sons Inc.

  • Shockley K, Rudroff B, Rabideau A, Lambert D (2014) Rethinking the value of stakeholder participation in generating context sensitive baselines for groundwater restoration. Association for Environmental Studies and Sciences Annual Conference, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sievanen L, Campbell LM, Leslie HM (2011) Challenges to interdisciplinary research in ecosystem-based management. Conserv Biol 26(2):315–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Star SL (2010) This is not a boundary object: reflections on the origin of a concept. Sci Technol Hum Values 35(5):601–617

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Star SL, Greisemer JR (1989) Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907-39. Soc Stud Sci 19(3):387–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern MJ and Coleman KJ (2014) The multidimensionality of trust: applications in collaborative natural resource management. Society & natural resources: an international journal. doi: 10.1080/08941920.2014.945062

  • Stevens CJ, Fraser I, Mitchley J, Thomas MB (2007) Making ecological science policy-relevant: issues of scale and disciplinary integration. Landsc Ecol 22(6):799–809

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A, Kahneman D (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211(4481):453–458

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Weinstein J (1999) Coming of age: recognizing the importance of interdisciplinary education in law practice. Washington Law Review 74:320–366

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams KC (2015) Building bridges in the Great Lakes: how objects and organization facilitate collaboration across boundaries. J Great Lakes Res 41(Supp.1):180–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, Sustainability Academy, University at Buffalo, 135 Park Hall, Buffalo, NY, 14260, USA

    Kenneth Shockley

  2. SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, NY, USA

    Whitney G. Lash-Marshall & Paul D. Hirsch

  3. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, University at Buffalo and Regional Institute, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA

    Kathryn Bryk Friedman

Authors
  1. Kenneth Shockley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Whitney G. Lash-Marshall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kathryn Bryk Friedman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Paul D. Hirsch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kenneth Shockley.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shockley, K., Lash-Marshall, W.G., Friedman, K.B. et al. Distinguishing collaboration from contribution in environmental research. J Environ Stud Sci 7, 336–345 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-016-0400-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-016-0400-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation