The Normative Dimension in Transdisciplinarity, Transition Management, and Transformation Sciences: New Roles of Science and Universities in Sustainable Transitioning

Abstract

This paper discusses the role normative aspects play in different approaches of science-practice collaboration, in particular as action research, (Mode 2) Transdisciplinarity (Td), Transition Management (TM), and Transformative Science (TSc). We elaborate on the different roles that scientists in these processes play. They work as facilitators (or contribute to a facilitated Td process), as activists (i.e., activist researchers) in TM projects, and as catalysts in TSc. Td processes develop socially robust solutions for sustainable transitioning and impacts on the science system through mutual learning and by integrating epistemics (i.e., ways of knowing) from science and practice and focusing on the empowerment of stakeholders. Science is viewed as a public good aiming to serve all key stakeholders. Researchers involved in TM projects strive to influence ongoing transition processes by actively engaging and participating in them, including lobbying for and empowering transformative changes toward sustainability based upon the researchers' own analyses and world views. The TSc approach takes a catalyst perspective of the scientist's role in inducing processes of strategic (societal) transition when including certain stakeholder groups. The paper focuses on what roles normative aspects play in the different approaches and new societal demands imposed on science and universities. Based on this, we conclude that a new order of universities, public knowledge institutions, and boundary institutions is forthcoming.

Transforming Well-Being in Wuppertal—Conditions and Constraints

“…Different from pure transdisciplinary research, transformative researchers are often biased in the selection of stakeholders and the inclusion of their interests, as the (normative) research goal usually is provided and not negotiated. In this regard, they lean to a certain degree towards action research, e.g., transition management, without necessarily buying into its constructivist premises ( [25] pp. 14-15).…”

“…In its familiar version 'participatory action research' (PAR), a largely constructivist and democratic approach is employed. Here, action researchers understand knowledge as being influenced by power relations and thus aim to empower marginalised groups [25,34,43,45]. Argyris and Schön stress the challenge of overcoming the trade-off between practical relevance and scientific rigour in PAR [46].…”

“…Accompanying and supporting processes of sustainability transformation, transformative science makes explicitly normative demands by promoting the goal of sustainable development [18,25]. Furthermore, it aims to generate different forms of knowledge: systems knowledge, target knowledge and transformation knowledge.…”

“…Another important framework condition that can enable or hamper transformative and transdisciplinary research projects is the institutional context in which the research is carried out [11,18]. Finally, in transformative and action-oriented research activities, the normativity of the approach must be considered [18,25,30,34,45].…”

Unintended Side Effects of Digital Transition: Perspectives of Japanese Experts

“…In this article, we apply the definition developed by a study that included 21 leaders of the Alliance for Global Sustainability projects of Chalmers University, ETH Zurich, MIT, and the University of Tokyo on technology innovation [26]. Sustainable development is seen as an (i) ongoing inquiry on (ii) system-limit management in the frame of (iii) inter-and intragenerational justice [27]. We argue that the impacts of change can be assessed using the Sustainable Development Goals [28]; however, the roundtable focuses on science-based resilience assessment (see Figure 1).…”