IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v45y2016i7p1397-1409.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring the promises of transdisciplinary research: A quantitative study of two climate research programmes

Author

Listed:
  • de Jong, Stefan P.L.
  • Wardenaar, Tjerk
  • Horlings, Edwin

Abstract

Scientists have long since become accustomed to explaining the future value of their work. Nowadays token statements are no longer sufficient. Societal impact must be embedded in the organisation of research. The call for societal impact is most explicitly expressed in and actively shaped by transdisciplinary research programmes. We have examined two questions related to compliance in the principal-agent relation between a programme and its projects. The first question concerns the risk of moral hazard: is societal actor involvement a token activity or a substantial component of the research process? The second question relates to possible adverse selection: does societal actor involvement produce the expected benefits and, if so, under which conditions? We surveyed members and project leaders of 178 projects in two transdisciplinary climate research programmes in The Netherlands. There is no reason to suspect large-scale moral hazard. Projects formally labelled as transdisciplinary have characteristics typically associated with transdisciplinarity but academic projects share those characteristics. Neither is there reason to suspect adverse selection. The archetypical properties of transdisciplinary research are associated with the expected societal benefits. An important finding is that there are different types of benefit, each of which requires its own approach. Benefit is achieved through informal involvement and a diversity of outputs, and much less by giving societal actors a prominent role or influence in the research process. Based on our conclusions we recommend customizing the design of climate research programmes and projects towards the needs of the specific societal benefits they aim to generate and reconsidering the emphasis on formal involvement of societal actors in funding procedures.

Suggested Citation

  • de Jong, Stefan P.L. & Wardenaar, Tjerk & Horlings, Edwin, 2016. "Exploring the promises of transdisciplinary research: A quantitative study of two climate research programmes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1397-1409.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:45:y:2016:i:7:p:1397-1409
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2016.04.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733316300543
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2016.04.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lam, Alice, 2011. "What motivates academic scientists to engage in research commercialization: ‘Gold’, ‘ribbon’ or ‘puzzle’?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(10), pages 1354-1368.
    2. Rosenfield, Patricia L., 1992. "The potential of transdisciplinary research for sustaining and extending linkages between the health and social sciences," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 1343-1357, December.
    3. Morris, Norma, 2002. "The developing role of departments," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 817-833, July.
    4. Mowery, David C. & Nelson, Richard R. & Sampat, Bhaven N. & Ziedonis, Arvids A., 2001. "The growth of patenting and licensing by U.S. universities: an assessment of the effects of the Bayh-Dole act of 1980," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 99-119, January.
    5. Siegel, Donald S. & Waldman, David & Link, Albert, 2003. "Assessing the impact of organizational practices on the relative productivity of university technology transfer offices: an exploratory study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 27-48, January.
    6. Laura Meagher & Catherine Lyall & Sandra Nutley, 2008. "Flows of knowledge, expertise and influence: a method for assessing policy and practice impacts from social science research," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(3), pages 163-173, September.
    7. Jensen, Michael C. & Meckling, William H., 1976. "Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs and ownership structure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 305-360, October.
    8. Sonia Talwar & Arnim Wiek & John Robinson, 2011. "User engagement in sustainability research," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 38(5), pages 379-390, June.
    9. Julia Olmos-Peñuela & Jordi Molas-Gallart & Elena Castro-Martínez, 2014. "Informal collaborations between social sciences and humanities researchers and non-academic partners," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(4), pages 493-506.
    10. Jordi Molas-Gallart & Puay Tang, 2011. "Tracing ‘productive interactions’ to identify social impacts: an example from the social sciences," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 219-226, September.
    11. van der Meulen, Barend & Rip, Arie, 1998. "Mediation in the Dutch science system," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 757-769, December.
    12. Elizabeth Shove, 2003. "Principals, agents and research programmes," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(5), pages 371-381, October.
    13. Olmos-Peñuela, Julia & Castro-Martínez, Elena & D’Este, Pablo, 2014. "Knowledge transfer activities in social sciences and humanities: Explaining the interactions of research groups with non-academic agents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 696-706.
    14. Stefan de Jong & Katharine Barker & Deborah Cox & Thordis Sveinsdottir & Peter Van den Besselaar, 2014. "Understanding societal impact through productive interactions: ICT research as a case," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(2), pages 89-102.
    15. Inge van der Weijden & Maaike Verbree & Peter van den Besselaar, 2012. "From bench to bedside: The societal orientation of research leaders: The case of biomedical and health research in the Netherlands," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(3), pages 285-303, May.
    16. Hewitt-Dundas, Nola, 2012. "Research intensity and knowledge transfer activity in UK universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 262-275.
    17. David H Guston, 1996. "Principal-agent theory and the structure of science policy," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(4), pages 229-240, August.
    18. Laurens K. Hessels & Tjerk Wardenaar & Wouter P. C. Boon & Matthias Ploeg, 2014. "The role of knowledge users in public–private research programs: An evaluation challenge," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(2), pages 103-116.
    19. Elizabeth Koier & Edwin Horlings, 2015. "How accurately does output reflect the nature and design of transdisciplinary research programmes?," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(1), pages 37-50.
    20. D'Este, P. & Patel, P., 2007. "University-industry linkages in the UK: What are the factors underlying the variety of interactions with industry?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1295-1313, November.
    21. Stefan P L de Jong & Pleun van Arensbergen & Floortje Daemen & Barend van der Meulen & Peter van den Besselaar, 2011. "Evaluation of research in context: an approach and two cases," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 61-72, March.
    22. Réjean Landry & Nabil Amara & Mathieu Ouimet, 2007. "Determinants of knowledge transfer: evidence from Canadian university researchers in natural sciences and engineering," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 32(6), pages 561-592, December.
    23. Voinov, Alexey & Gaddis, Erica J. Brown, 2008. "Lessons for successful participatory watershed modeling: A perspective from modeling practitioners," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 216(2), pages 197-207.
    24. Rebecca Clark & John Holmes, 2010. "Improving input from research to environmental policy: challenges of structure and culture," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 37(10), pages 751-764, December.
    25. Walter, Alexander I. & Helgenberger, Sebastian & Wiek, Arnim & Scholz, Roland W., 2007. "Measuring societal effects of transdisciplinary research projects: Design and application of an evaluation method," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 325-338, November.
    26. Rudi Bekkers & Bodas Freitas, 2008. "Analysing preferences for knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter?," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-01487467, HAL.
    27. Catherine Lyall & Isabel Fletcher, 2013. "Experiments in interdisciplinary capacity-building: The successes and challenges of large-scale interdisciplinary investments," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 1-7, January.
    28. Bekkers, Rudi & Bodas Freitas, Isabel Maria, 2008. "Analysing knowledge transfer channels between universities and industry: To what degree do sectors also matter?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1837-1853, December.
    29. Gulbrandsen, Magnus & Mowery, David & Feldman, Maryann, 2011. "Introduction to the special section: Heterogeneity and university-industry relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 1-5, February.
    30. Arie Rip & Barend J R van der Meulen, 1996. "The post-modern research system," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(6), pages 343-352, December.
    31. Jack Spaapen & Leonie van Drooge, 2011. "Introducing ‘productive interactions’ in social impact assessment," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 211-218, September.
    32. Tjerk Wardenaar & Stefan P. L. de Jong & Laurens K. Hessels, 2014. "Varieties of research coordination: A comparative analysis of two strategic research consortia," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(6), pages 780-792.
    33. Roelofsen, Anneloes & Boon, Wouter P.C. & Kloet, Roy R. & Broerse, Jacqueline E.W., 2011. "Stakeholder interaction within research consortia on emerging technologies: Learning how and what?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 341-354, April.
    34. Pius Krütli & Michael Stauffacher & Thomas Flüeler & Roland W. Scholz, 2010. "Functional-dynamic public participation in technological decision-making: site selection processes of nuclear waste repositories," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(7), pages 861-875, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Davies, Andrew & Manning, Stephan & Söderlund, Jonas, 2018. "When neighboring disciplines fail to learn from each other: The case of innovation and project management research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(5), pages 965-979.
    2. Ferreira, João J.M. & Fernandes, Cristina I. & Ferreira, Fernando A.F., 2020. "Technology transfer, climate change mitigation, and environmental patent impact on sustainability and economic growth: A comparison of European countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    3. Zhang, Hailing & Liu, Changxin & Wang, Can, 2021. "Extreme climate events and economic impacts in China: A CGE analysis with a new damage function in IAM," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    4. Yaqub, Ohid & Malkov, Dmitry & Siepel, Josh, 2022. "How unpredictable is research impact? Evidence from the UK’s Research Excellence Framework," SocArXiv qw873, Center for Open Science.
    5. Sabrina Auci & Nicolò Barbieri & Manuela Coromaldi & Donatella Vignani, 2021. "Innovation for climate change adaptation and technical efficiency: an empirical analysis in the European agricultural sector," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 38(2), pages 597-623, July.
    6. Jana Zscheischler & Sebastian Rogga & Maria Busse, 2017. "The Adoption and Implementation of Transdisciplinary Research in the Field of Land-Use Science—A Comparative Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-20, October.
    7. Hoffmann, Sabine & Pohl, Christian & Hering, Janet G., 2017. "Exploring transdisciplinary integration within a large research program: Empirical lessons from four thematic synthesis processes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 678-692.
    8. Iis Alviya & Tapan Sarker & Harsha Sarvaiya & Md Sayed Iftekhar, 2021. "Role of the Land-Based Private Sector in Low-Emission Development: An Indonesian Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-22, December.
    9. Phemelo Tamasiga & Helen Onyeaka & Adenike Akinsemolu & Malebogo Bakwena, 2023. "The Inter-Relationship between Climate Change, Inequality, Poverty and Food Security in Africa: A Bibliometric Review and Content Analysis Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-35, March.
    10. Maria Urbaniec & Justyna Tomala & Sergio Martinez, 2021. "Measurements and Trends in Technological Eco-Innovation: Evidence from Environment-Related Patents," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, June.
    11. Abid, Nabila & Ahmad, Fayyaz & Aftab, Junaid & Razzaq, Asif, 2023. "A blessing or a burden? Assessing the impact of Climate Change Mitigation efforts in Europe using Quantile Regression Models," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    12. Stina Hansson & Merritt Polk, 2019. "Comments to Belcher et al. 2018’s critique of Hansson and Polk 2018," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 202-205.
    13. Stina Hansson & Merritt Polk, 2018. "Assessing the impact of transdisciplinary research: The usefulness of relevance, credibility, and legitimacy for understanding the link between process and impact," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 132-144.
    14. Stephanie Jahn & Jens Newig & Daniel J. Lang & Judith Kahle & Matthias Bergmann, 2022. "Demarcating transdisciplinary research in sustainability science—Five clusters of research modes based on evidence from 59 research projects," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(2), pages 343-357, April.
    15. Su, Hsin-Ning & Moaniba, Igam M., 2017. "Does innovation respond to climate change? Empirical evidence from patents and greenhouse gas emissions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 49-62.
    16. Huang, Hung-Chun & Su, Hsin-Ning, 2019. "The innovative fulcrums of technological interdisciplinarity: An analysis of technology fields in patents," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 84, pages 59-70.
    17. Lv, Fei & Wu, Qiong & Ren, Hongbo & Zhou, Weisheng & Li, Qifen, 2024. "On the design and analysis of long-term low-carbon roadmaps: A review and evaluation of available energy-economy-environment models," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 189(PA).
    18. Laurens K. Hessels & Stefan P.L. De Jong & Stijn Brouwer, 2018. "Collaboration between Heterogeneous Practitioners in Sustainability Research: A Comparative Analysis of Three Transdisciplinary Programmes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.
    19. Rick Hölsgens & Eva Wascher & Carolin Bauer & Judith Boll & Stephanie Bund & Saskia Dankwart-Kammoun & Irina Heese & Katharina Schrot & Jürgen Schultze & Robert Tenambergen, 2023. "Transdisciplinary Research along the Logic of Empowerment : Perspectives from Four Urban and Regional Transformation Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-20, March.
    20. Brennan, Michael & Rondón-Sulbarán, Janeet, 2019. "Transdisciplinary research: Exploring impact, knowledge and quality in the early stages of a sustainable development project," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 481-491.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rossi, Federica & Sengupta, Abhijit, 2022. "Implementing strategic changes in universities’ knowledge exchange profiles: The role and nature of managerial interventions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 874-887.
    2. Stefan P L de Jong & Corina Balaban, 2022. "How universities influence societal impact practices: Academics’ sense-making of organizational impact strategies [Between Relevance and Excellence? Research Impact Agenda and the Production of Pol," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(4), pages 609-620.
    3. Roberto Iorio & Sandrine Labory & Francesco Rentocchini, 2014. "Academics’ Motivations and Depth and Breadth of Knowledge Transfer Activities," Working Papers 1401, c.MET-05 - Centro Interuniversitario di Economia Applicata alle Politiche per L'industria, lo Sviluppo locale e l'Internazionalizzazione.
    4. Alice Bertoletti & Geraint Johnes, 2021. "Efficiency in university-industry collaboration: an analysis of UK higher education institutions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7679-7714, September.
    5. Igors Skute & Kasia Zalewska-Kurek & Isabella Hatak & Petra Weerd-Nederhof, 2019. "Mapping the field: a bibliometric analysis of the literature on university–industry collaborations," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 916-947, June.
    6. Sengupta, Abhijit & Rossi, Federica, 2023. "The relationship between universities' funding portfolios and their knowledge exchange profiles: A dynamic capabilities view," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    7. Victoria Galan-Muros & Todd Davey, 2019. "The UBC ecosystem: putting together a comprehensive framework for university-business cooperation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 1311-1346, August.
    8. Iorio, Roberto & Labory, Sandrine & Rentocchini, Francesco, 2017. "The importance of pro-social behaviour for the breadth and depth of knowledge transfer activities: An analysis of Italian academic scientists," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 497-509.
    9. Crespi, Gustavo & D'Este, Pablo & Fontana, Roberto & Geuna, Aldo, 2011. "The impact of academic patenting on university research and its transfer," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 55-68, February.
    10. Freel, Mark & Persaud, Ajax & Chamberlin, Tyler, 2019. "Faculty ideals and universities' third mission," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 10-21.
    11. Maietta, Ornella Wanda, 2015. "Determinants of R&D University-Frim Collaboration and Its Impact on Innovation: a Perspective from the Italian Food and Drink Industry," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 225668, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Perkmann, Markus & Tartari, Valentina & McKelvey, Maureen & Autio, Erkko & Broström, Anders & D’Este, Pablo & Fini, Riccardo & Geuna, Aldo & Grimaldi, Rosa & Hughes, Alan & Krabel, Stefan & Kitson, Mi, 2013. "Academic engagement and commercialisation: A review of the literature on university–industry relations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 423-442.
    13. James A. Cunningham & Kristel Miller & Jose-Luis Perea-Vicente, 2024. "Academic entrepreneurship in the humanities and social sciences: a systematic literature review and research agenda," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(5), pages 1880-1913, October.
    14. Alessandra Scandura & Simona Iammarino, 2022. "Academic engagement with industry: the role of research quality and experience," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 1000-1036, August.
    15. Sengupta, Abhijit & Ray, Amit S., 2017. "University research and knowledge transfer: A dynamic view of ambidexterity in british universities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 881-897.
    16. Olmos-Peñuela, Julia & Castro-Martínez, Elena & D’Este, Pablo, 2014. "Knowledge transfer activities in social sciences and humanities: Explaining the interactions of research groups with non-academic agents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 696-706.
    17. Federica Rossi, 2014. "The efficiency of universities’ knowledge transfer activities: A multi-output approach beyond patenting and licensing," Working Papers 16, Birkbeck Centre for Innovation Management Research, revised Feb 2014.
    18. Thomas Wolfgang Thurner, 2017. "TRANSFER REVENUES OF RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ORGANIZATIONS (RTOs) IN TIMES OF ECONOMIC CRISIS," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(02), pages 1-24, February.
    19. Julia Olmos Peñuela & Paul Benneworth & Elena Castro-Martínez, 2018. "Does usable research face higher obstacles within the academy?," CHEPS Working Papers 201805, University of Twente, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS).
    20. Victoria Galán-Muros & Peter Sijde & Peter Groenewegen & Thomas Baaken, 2017. "Nurture over nature: How do European universities support their collaboration with business?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 184-205, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:45:y:2016:i:7:p:1397-1409. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.