Unraveling the politics of ‘doing inclusion’ in transdisciplinarity for sustainable transformation

Abstract

Transdisciplinary research and innovation (R&I) efforts have emerged as a means to address challenges to sustainable transformation. One of the main elements of transdisciplinary efforts is the ‘inclusion’ of different stakeholders, values and perspectives in participatory R&I processes. In practice, however, ‘doing inclusion’ raises a number of challenges. In this article, we aim to contribute to re-politicizing inclusion in transdisciplinarity for transformation, by (1) empirically unraveling four key challenges that emerge in the political practice of ‘doing inclusion’, (2) illustrating how facilitators of inclusion processes perform balancing acts when confronted with these challenges, and (3) reflecting on what the unfolding dynamics suggests about the politics of stakeholder inclusion for societal transformation. In doing so, we analyze the transdisciplinary FIT4FOOD2030 project (2017–2020)—an EU-funded project that aimed to contribute to fostering EU R&I systems’ ability to catalyze food system transformation through stakeholder engagement in 25 Living Labs. Based on 3 years of action-research (including interviews, workshops and field observations), we identified four inherent political challenges to ‘doing inclusion’ in FIT4FOOD2030: (1) the challenge to meaningfully bring together powerful and marginalized stakeholders; (2) combining representation and deliberation of different stakeholder groups; (3) balancing diversities of inclusion with directionalities implied by transformative efforts; and (4) navigating the complexities of establishing boundaries of inclusion processes. We argue that by understanding ‘doing inclusion’ as a political practice, necessitating specificity about the (normative) ambitions in different inclusion settings, facilitators may better grasp and address challenges in transdisciplinarity for transformation.

Knowledge co-production reveals nuanced societal dynamics and sectoral connections in mapping sustainable human-natural systems

“…As a modelling community, the merits of stakeholder participation have been known for some years (e.g., Kok et al, 2021;Voinov et al, 2014). Planners and local authorities have been utilising participatory methods for decades (Andrews and Turner, 2006;Bodorkós and Pataki, 2009;Brody et al, 2003;Burby, 2003;Reed, 2008).…”

Citizen energy lost in sustainability transitions: Knowledge co-production in a complex governance context

“…Furthermore, to ensure trans-disciplinarity of knowledge co-production processes, Norström et al illustrated context-based, pluralistic, goal-oriented and interactive as four core principles which have to be considered in research design [56]. The primary aim of such transdisciplinary processes is to enhance the conditions for change in empirical contexts and between different actor perspectives [57]. These transdisciplinary knowledge coproduction approaches provide researchers with reflexive tools to implement research interventions with increasing policy relevance, as their own positions are connected to knowledge co-production in social sciences and realms.…”

“…Our second contribution is epistemic and is connected to empirically bridging the knowledge co-production literature and energy transitions studies. Here, the case of the policy-oriented transition arena process distinguishes a pathway from system knowledge through target knowledge to transformative knowledge [54][55][56][57]64]. In the transition management process, this also relates to raising the level of collective knowledge, as the individual views of systemic dynamics are navigated, negotiated and merged to form shared transition pathways and transformative actions.…”

The elephant in the room is really a cow: using consumption corridors to define sustainable meat consumption in the European Union

“…Cooke and Kothari (2001) describe this as the "tyranny" of participation. Achieving inclusion in this context is a balancing act in which both the powerful and the marginalized are brought together (Kok et al 2021). The established and well-connected actors (e.g., industry, policy-makers) are needed to ensure the impacts of the process, for instance, by providing credibility to the outcomes and linking them to policy measures.…”

“…The established and well-connected actors (e.g., industry, policy-makers) are needed to ensure the impacts of the process, for instance, by providing credibility to the outcomes and linking them to policy measures. The under-represented actors (e.g., citizens/consumer groups, small farmers, and NGOs) can contribute to this process by providing legitimacy, increasing societal support, and by broadening dominant perspectives (Kok et al 2021).…”