Cited by 360Interdisciplinary Research and CollaborationSustainability and Climate Change GovernanceSustainability in Higher Education

Transdisciplinary case studies as a means of sustainability learning: Historical framework and theory

Scholz, Roland W., Lang, Daniel J., Wiek, Arnim, Walter, Alexander I., Stauffacher, Michael·2006·International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education

Abstract

Purpose: This paper aims at presenting the theoretical concepts of the transdisciplinary case study approach (TCS), which is a research and teaching approach developed and elaborated at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), as a means of transition support. Design/methodology/approach: The paper reveals the historical roots of case studies, transdisciplinarity and sustainable development as teaching and research paradigms. The TCS approach is presented, which has been developed at ETH for supporting transition management of regional, urban, and organizational systems. This approach is entrenched by an ontology that reveals the basic characteristics of ill‐defined transition problems, an epistemology that refers to Probabilistic Functionalism and distinguishes between multi‐layered systemic and normative epistemics, a methodology that includes a set of methods for case representation (including modelling and projection), assessment, and strategy building, and a project management model that refers to more than a dozen TCSs in the field of sustainable development. Problems of validity of TCSs as a research methodology are discussed. Findings: Three major strengths of the TCS approach presented in the paper are: that it is based on three sound paradigms, which focus on different, relevant characteristics of complex, human‐environment systems; i.e. the case study approach, transdisciplinarity and sustainable development, that it is strictly organized according to an elaborated and consistent theoretical framework that includes ontological, epistemological, methodological, and organizational considerations, and that it is itself subject to an ongoing inquiry and adaptation process. All theoretical considerations of the paper are clarified be elaborated examples from the more than 10 years experience with TCS of the authors. Practical implications: The paper gives a comprehensive overview of the theoretical foundation of TCS that might assist other scientists engaged in case study research and teaching to further develop their approaches. Additionally, relevant topics for further research in the field of TCS are presented which hopefully induce an inspiring discussion among case study researchers. Originality/value: As far we know, this paper is one of the first that presents a comprehensive and theoretically sound overview of applying transdisciplinary case studies as means of sustainability learning. Thus, it can be seen as a first, crucial step for establishing the new research field of TCS research and a sound research community of complex, transdisciplinary problem solving towards sustainability learning.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/14676370610677829

Cites

84 of 84 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Transdisciplinarity processes were viewed as a basic means of sustainability learning.

    “Transdisciplinarity processes were viewed as a basic means of sustainability learning (Scholz et al. 2006).”
  • Later, the operational problem-solving view of transdisciplinarity was replaced by the aim to develop socially robust orientations for undertaking actions designed to cope with complex, ill-defined, multilayered, and socially relevant systems and dynamics often contested by society.

    “Later, the (operational) problem-solving view was replaced by the aim to develop socially robust orientations for undertaking actions (Klein 2004;Scholz et al. 2006) designed to cope with complex, ill-defined, multilayered, and socially relevant systems and dynamics that are often contested by society.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Scholz, R. W., Lang, D. J., Wiek, A., Walter, A. I., & Stauffacher, M.
Affiliations
ETH Zurich (CH)
Venue
International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2006-07-01
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
226-251
ISSN
1467-6370 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1958907339
Cited by
360
References
84
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 25
FWCI
29.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Interdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
  • Social Sciences › Education › Sustainability in Higher Education
Keywords
sustainability learning, transition management, transdisciplinarity, case study method, sustainable development, epistemology, case representation, research validity, sustainability education

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