Both citizen science and transdisciplinary sustainability research involve nonacademic actors in the production of knowledge while seeking to contribute to sustainability transitions, albeit in different ways. From citizen science, transdisciplinary researchers can learn about the multiple ways of engaging knowledge holders, and producing and sharing knowledge.

This paper investigates the involvement of the stratigraphic community in the endeavour of defining the Anthropocene. Although much of the debate about the Anthropocene takes place outside of stratigraphy, the concept of the Anthropocene derives its distinctiveness and popularity from its geological dimension. In this context, the epistemic authority of stratigraphy is extended from ratifying geological epochs to verifying the Anthropocene more generally. The paper conceptualises this authority and examines the published stratigraphic literature to determine to what extent the stratigraphic community is able and willing to assume it. In doing so, the paper demonstrates how stratigraphy co‐produces its epistemic authority in regards to the Anthropocene.

This article investigates the internal dynamics of the Anthropocene Working Group (AWG), an expert body tasked with evaluating the stratigraphic case of the Anthropocene. The investigation focuses on the role of interdisciplinarity and disciplinarity in the AWG. The article draws on surveys and interviews with AWG members to characterize interdisciplinary collaboration in the AWG and discusses the relationship of the AWG to the stratigraphic community. The results reveal that the exchanges between disciplines in the AWG are 'multidisciplinary' and of limited scope. While social scientists in the group take a non-scientific role, the involvement of natural scientists in research activities is guided by the objectives of stratigraphy. Moreover, a lack of communication and trust had shaped the relationship between the AWG and the stratigraphic community until they devised pragmatic working arrangements that led the AWG to adapt its research practice and rationale. Despite calls to reform stratigraphic practice, the disciplinarity of the AWG prevails over innovative research practices inspired by interdisciplinary exchanges. In terms of theory, the study confirms that disciplines continue to provide the context in which interdisciplinary endeavors need to position themselves. Notwithstanding the pull of interdisciplinarity, the AWG's main point of reference remains the stratigraphic community. ARTICLE HISTORY

No abstract

No abstract