The DOI matches its Crossref record; 103 of the 103 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A pragmatist approach to transdisciplinarity in sustainability research: From complex systems theory to reflexive science
Open accessAbstract
The importance of questioning the values, background assumptions, and normative orientations shaping sustainability research has been increasingly acknowledged, particularly in the context of transdisciplinary research, which aims to integrate knowledge from various scientific and societal bodies of knowledge. Nonetheless, the concept of reflexivity underlying transdisciplinary research is not sufficiently clarified and, as a result, is hardly able to support the development of social learning and social experimentation processes needed to support sustainability transitions. In particular, the concept of reflexivity is often restricted to building social legitimacy for the results of a new kind of ‘complex systems science’, with little consideration of the role of non-scientific expertise and social innovators in the design of the research practice itself. The key hypothesis of the paper is that transdisciplinary research would benefit from adopting a pragmatist approach to reflexivity. Such an approach relates reflexivity to collective processes of problem framing and problem solving through joint experimentation and social learning that directly involve the scientific and extra-scientific expertise. To test this hypothesis, the paper proposes a framework for analysing the different types of reflexive processes that play role in transdisciplinary research. The main conclusion of the analysis is the need to combine conventional consensus-oriented deliberative approaches to reflexivity with more open-ended, action-oriented transformative approaches.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action
Checkoway, B., & Schon, D. A. (1985) · Journal of Policy Analysis and Management · doi:10.2307/3324262 · Cited by 21,268
The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action
Stewart, C. J. (1984) · Patient Education and Counseling · doi:10.1016/0738-3991(84)90022-3 · Cited by 19,752
Foucault, M. (1970) · Social Science Information · doi:10.1177/053901847000900108 · Cited by 10,859
RESILIENCE: THE EMERGENCE OF A PERSPECTIVE FOR SOCIAL-ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS ANALYSES
Folke, C. (2006) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.04.002 · Cited by 7,749
Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect.
Higgins, E. T. (1987) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.94.3.319 · Cited by 7,219
Putnam, H. (1981) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511625398 · Cited by 5,521
Resilience Thinking: Integrating Resilience, Adaptability and Transformability
Folke, C., Carpenter, S. R., Walker, B., Scheffer, M., Chapin, T., & Rockström, J. (2010) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-03610-150420 · Cited by 4,764
Science for the post-normal age
Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. R. (1993) · Futures · doi:10.1016/0016-3287(93)90022-l · Cited by 4,255
Understanding Institutional Diversity
Ostrom, E. (2009) · doi:10.2307/j.ctt7s7wm · Cited by 4,229
Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological and social systems
Holling, C. S. (2001) · Ecosystems · doi:10.1007/s10021-001-0101-5 · Cited by 4,087
Cited by
Principles for knowledge co-production in sustainability research
Norström, A. V., Cvitanovic, C., Löf, M. F., West, S., Wyborn, C., Balvanera, P., Bednarek, A. T., Bennett, E. M., Biggs, R., de Bremond, A., et al. (2020) · Nature Sustainability · doi:10.1038/s41893-019-0448-2 · Cited by 1,620
A pluralistic and integrated approach to action-oriented knowledge for sustainability
Caniglia, G., Luederitz, C., von Wirth, T., Fazey, I., Martín-López, B., Hondrila, K., König, A., von Wehrden, H., Schäpke, N. A., Laubichler, M. D., et al. (2020) · Nature Sustainability · doi:10.1038/s41893-020-00616-z · Cited by 510
Systemic resilience: principles and processes for a science of change in contexts of adversity
Ungar, M. (2018) · Ecology and Society · doi:10.5751/es-10385-230434 · Cited by 441
Climate change and transdisciplinary science: Problematizing the integration imperative
Klenk, N., & Meehan, K. (2015) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2015.05.017 · Cited by 248
Futures literacy and the diversity of the future
Mangnus, A. C., Oomen, J., Vervoort, J. M., & Hajer, M. A. (2021) · Futures · doi:10.1016/j.futures.2021.102793 · Cited by 181
Metadata
- Authors
- Popa, F., Guillermin, M., & Dedeurwaerdere, T.
- Venue
- Futures
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-01
- Volume
- 65
- Pages
- 45-56
- ISSN
- 0016-3287 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2101691815
- Cited by
- 434
- References
- 103
- FWCI
- 33.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A pragmatist approach to transdisciplinarity in sustainability research: From complex systems theory to reflexive science. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.futures.2014.02.002
- The paper
- Popa, F., Guillermin, M., & Dedeurwaerdere, T. (2015). A pragmatist approach to transdisciplinarity in sustainability research: From complex systems theory to reflexive science. Futures. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2014.02.002
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.