Academics are increasingly required to balance the expectations of the ‘old’ academy with a future model of universities as interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary ‘problem solvers’. This paper highlights changing expectations of academics in producing alternative research outcomes in collaborative, practice‐based research. Through a series of workshops with 20 researchers, preferred research outcomes and tensions in achieving these outcomes were identified. The tensions identified are presented as three dichotomies comprising the tension between: (a) ‘I versus We’ ‐ individual versus team expectations & outcomes. (b) Disciplinary outcomes versus inter‐/transdisciplinary outcomes. (c) Learning versus research objectives for the students and academics involved. These tensions reflect the authors' experiences of working in three international sustainability projects, drawing on lessons learned from these projects, with recommendations for universities seeking to implement interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary doctoral and postdoctoral programmes. Recommendations include the need for formal and informal leadership models, strong communication skills, empathy and willingness to learn from each other. A need for more systemic changes within university administration to better reward and value the breadth and depth of collaborative work, while facilitating open learning cultures and practice‐oriented learning opportunities and curricula across faculties was also identified.

The idea of sustainability is intrinsically normative. Thus, understanding the role of normativity in sustainability discourses is crucial for further developing sustainability science. In this article, we analyze three important documents that aim to advance sustainability and explore how they organize norms in relation to sustainability. The three documents are: the Pope’s Encyclical Laudato Si’, the Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement. We show that understanding the role of different types of norms in the three documents can help understand normative features of both scientific and non-scientific sustainability discourses. We present the diverse system of norms in a model that interrelates three different levels: macro, meso, and micro. Our model highlights how several processes affect the normative orientation of nations and societies at the meso-level in different ways. For instance, individual ethical norms at the micro-level, such as personal responsibility, may help decelerate unsustainable consumerism at the aggregate meso-level. We also show that techno-scientific norms at the macro-level representing global indicators for sustainability may accelerate innovations. We suggest that our model can help better organize normative features of sustainability discourses and, therefore, to contribute to the further development of sustainability science.

Problems are a major focal point in transdisciplinary sustainability research (TSR). As a text analysis shows, the term “problem” is most commonly used in the context of analyzing research processes that are directed towards societal problem-solving. At the same time, these findings imply that TSR does not follow the idea that problems are solvable. Instead, TSR should transgress the general tension between the solution imperative and the insolvability of complex problems by rather tackling each problem as situated and specific.Problem orientation plays a significant role in emerging transdisciplinary sustainability research (TSR), where the assumption of solvability resonates with the term “problem” yet is not questioned from a sustainability perspective. This paper questions the meaning of “problems” in and for TSR from a discourse studies perspective. The results of a collocation and concordance analysis of the term “problem(s)” in GAIA articles show that sustainability-oriented problem-solving is explicated normatively as a key research goal. In the analyzed articles, emphasis is put on how to proceed towards this goal through research process analysis. This paper begins by analyzing the meaning of “problems” before seeking to orientate TSR in terms of how knowledge could be conceptualized. This is supported by the epistemological concept of the problematic, which originates from 20th century French philosophy. It proves helpful to discuss how TSR can be epistemologically grasped, and thereby strengthened in its transformative potential.

No abstract

The dissemination of sustainability has worldwide increased significantly in discourses and politics since the UN-resolution of the ‘Sustainable Development Goals’ in 2015. Nevertheless, the meanings of the concept vary in different linguistic communities and cultures. The present article comprises a meta-analytic revision of discourse-analytic work and a own discourse analysis of sustainability concepts in an intercultural orientation. The results show hegemonic discourses of economistic conceptualizations as well as alternatives, which are constituted in different linguistic communities. The article wants to contribute to an exchange and a profound discussion between the linguistic groups as well as to a methodological reflection on discourse analysis from an intercultural perspective.