https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5997-4238
Figures
Citation: Diana ZT, Virdin J, Nowlin MB, Jayasundara N, Rittschof D (2024) Transdisciplinary doctoral training to address global sustainability challenges. PLOS Sustain Transform 3(1): e0000091. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pstr.0000091
Editor: Isabel Marques, University of Lisbon: Universidade de Lisboa, PORTUGAL
Published: January 18, 2024
Copyright: © 2024 Diana et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Funding: Research reported in this publication was supported by the Liber Ero Postdoctoral Fellowship (to ZTD) and the National Institute Of Environmental Health Sciences of the National Institutes of Health (Award Number T32ES021432 to ZTD). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. ZTD and DR would like to acknowledge the Oak Foundation for their support. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: ZTD is a Liber Ero Postdoctoral Fellow.
1 Introduction
Global sustainability challenges, such as climate change and the plastics crisis, converge across disciplines and involve diverse stakeholders. Given the magnitude and interconnected nature of sustainability challenges, problem-solvers must be trained across disciplines. The United Nations Brundtland Commission’s report “Our Common Future” articulated a definition of “sustainability” in the context of development: “…development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" [1]. Although interdisciplinary research teams are common, doctoral training traditionally focuses on gaining depth in a discipline, undermining the transdisciplinary nature of socio-ecological systems and environmental problems in the Anthropocene [2–4].
Sustainability science connotes a sole field with shared concepts and theories; however, the National Research Council and others employ “the science of sustainability” to describe the use of multiple disciplines to address a common question, which leads toward an established field [5]. In establishing sustainability science, the National Academy of Sciences notes that scientists must engage in dialogue and conduct research for environmental practitioners, from applied research to developing theory and concepts [6].
Sustainability science conflicts with traditional doctoral training, which cabins deep research in a narrow frame. Transdisciplinary research offers an alternative. Jean Piaget defined transdisciplinary scholarship in 1970 as research that “would not only cover interactions or reciprocities between specialized research projects but would place these relationships within a total system without any firm boundaries between disciplines” [7].
Here we propose a roadmap for transdisciplinary doctoral training in the sustainability sciences
Transdisciplinary doctoral training is necessary to produce solutions-driven sustainability research, especially given that a 2015 Elsevier report notes that sustainability science is less interdisciplinary than the global average [6,8]. While calls for transdisciplinary research have increased [9,10], few discuss a practical approach to transdisciplinary doctoral training. The roadmap proposed here may help trainees to better contribute to the community of practice (e.g., policymakers, nongovernmental organizations) while furthering sustainability science. We close by discussing the outcomes of transdisciplinary doctoral training on individuals, the academy, and society.
2 A roadmap for transdisciplinary doctoral training
The roadmap proposed highlights three pillars to structure Ph.D. training: research lenses, network, and quality control (Fig 1). These features are not unique to a transdisciplinary Ph.D., but the content varies significantly from a discipline-bound Ph.D. We refer to the research lenses as the disciplines that probe complex environmental challenges. The network includes the individuals with whom the trainee learns, formally and informally, within and outside the university. Quality control refers to the metrics used to ensure adequate training and fulfillment of Ph.D. requirements outside of those defined by the university.
3 Discussion
3.1. Research lenses
Defining the research lenses used during the Ph.D. contributes to delineating learning and research goals. The research lenses identified vary based on the environmental problem that is the dissertation’s focus. For example, at Duke, a Ph.D. focused on plastic pollution mitigation utilized research lenses in public policy to examine societal responses to plastic pollution and the fields of environmental toxicology and marine biology to evaluate the ecological effects of plastic pollution on marine animals. This experience led to the initiation of a sustainability science research program focused on marine plastic pollution. A similar approach can be used for other sustainability challenges. Fisheries management may involve fields ranging from economics to vertebrate biology, and migratory species management could utilize concepts from law as well as population ecology. Another example includes a Ph.D. focused on the use of unmanned aircraft systems in conservation research, which involves the fields of engineering, geospatial analysis, and marine biology.
Defining the research lenses early on during the Ph.D. enables trainees to select mentors, target coursework, and build skillsets. Initially, it may be helpful for trainees to produce a few disciplinary dissertation chapters. Synthesizing across disciplines takes fundamental knowledge and improves with experience. Including a synthesis dissertation chapter refines transdisciplinary learning and furthers sustainability science.
3.2. Network
A cross-disciplinary network is essential. The Ph.D. committee should include members to guide the trainee in each research lens. One of the greatest challenges for transdisciplinary research is communication and respect between disciplines [2]. We suggest ensuring committee-wide interest and respect for transdisciplinary research as much as possible.
Expertise outside the academic committee is needed to ensure real-world applicability. Doctoral training should include direct research experience with practitioners engaging with the environmental problem that is the dissertation’s focus. University centers, institutes, and clinics may provide an avenue for this, as was the case in the author’s experience, which enabled collaborations with local and international nongovernmental organizations. Research with development agencies, businesses, or local organizations expands perspectives, grows networks, and provides organizations with academically-rigorous research.
3.3. Quality control
Most academics have not undergone transdisciplinary training, so ensuring transdisciplinary Ph.D. quality can be challenging for a standard disciplinary committee [11,12]. Thus, the Ph.D. committee members must reflect the research lenses of the Ph.D. Quality control is the network’s purview, including the doctoral committee and outside experts, which is the same as in siloed Ph.D. training. The perceived differences are due to difficulties in communication and respect across disciplines.
Although scientific publications in discipline-specific journals would be suitable for disciplinary competence, limiting outcomes to journal publications is a narrow metric. Understanding and evaluating non-traditional products (e.g., policy reports, patents, transdisciplinary journal articles) is essential and may yield increased creativity in solutions-driven research [13,14]. A practical example of this includes preparing a report that undergoes peer review within an institution’s processes (e.g., World Bank, United Nations), co-authoring a study with community partners, or successfully filing a patent. Success metrics beyond scientific publications broaden academia’s reach and impact.
4 Outcomes
The Ph.D. is the beginning of the journey. Research has shown that interdisciplinary doctorates in the United States are more likely to be non-tenure-track academics (from 2004 to 2005), obtain a postdoc, publish more articles than peers (regardless of employment sector), and identify as women [10]. Due to the short-term nature of postdoctoral employment and low salary compared to the cost of living (in the U.S.) [15], those who self-identify as interdisciplinary researchers may be dissuaded from pursuing academia, [14] posing risks to academia by the loss of these researchers to other sectors. Further research showed that interdisciplinary scientists were more likely than disciplinary peers to create new firms, license or patent technology, co-produce research, and provide research services [13]. Incorporating non-traditional evaluation metrics (e.g., Rao-Stirling diversity index, patents, social media shares) into promotion and tenure packets would aid in institutionalizing transdisciplinary research [6,14].
Conclusion
New funding opportunities call for transdisciplinary sustainability research. Conservation postdoctoral fellowships, such as the David H. Smith Conservation Research Fellowship and the Liber Ero Postdoctoral Fellowship, provide research experiences with practitioners. Other broad funding calls, such as the National Science Foundation’s Convergence Research and Dear Colleague Letters, invite transdisciplinary research [14]. The South American Institute for Resilience and Sustainability and Accelerator at Stockholm University provide space for discipline-free encounters [6]. Transdisciplinary doctoral training equips scholars to creatively tackle urgent environmental problems [14] and will grow in necessity in the future.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge the Duke University Plastic Pollution Working Group.
References
- 1. Brundtland GH. Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. Geneva; 1987.
- 2. Milman A, Marston JM, Godsey SE, Bolson J, Jones HP, Weiler CS. Scholarly motivations to conduct interdisciplinary climate change research. J Environ Stud Sci. 2017;7: 239–250.
- 3. Folke C, Polasky S, Rockström J, Galaz V, Westley F, Lamont M, et al. Our future in the Anthropocene biosphere. Ambio. 2021;50: 834–869. pmid:33715097
- 4. Ostrom E. A General Framework for Analyzing Sustainability of Social-Ecological Systems. Science. 2009;325: 419–422. Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20536694. pmid:19628857
- 5. Clark WC, Dickson NM. Sustainability science: The emerging research program. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100: 8059–8061. pmid:12794187
- 6. Paasche Ø, Österblom H. Unsustainable Science. One Earth. 2019;1: 39–42.
- 7. Darian-Smith E, McCarty P. Beyond Interdisciplinarity: Developing a Global Transdisciplinary Framework *. Transcience Journal. 2016;7.
- 8.
SustainabilityScienceReport-Web.pdf. Available: https://www.elsevier.com/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/119061/SustainabilityScienceReport-Web.pdf.
- 9. Kiley M, Halliday DP. Candidate and supervisor experiences of doctoral study in a structured, interdisciplinary training environment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. 2019;56: 663–674.
- 10. Millar MM. Interdisciplinary research and the early career: The effect of interdisciplinary dissertation research on career placement and publication productivity of doctoral graduates in the sciences. Research Policy. 2013;42: 1152–1164.
- 11. Gardner SK, Jansujwicz JS, Hutchins K, Cline B, Levesque V. Socialization to interdisciplinarity: faculty and student perspectives. High Educ. 2014;67: 255–271.
- 12. Kovacic Z, Marcos-Valls A. Institutionalising interdisciplinarity in PhD training: challenging and redefining expertise in problem-oriented research. Environmental Education Research. 2023;29: 473–488.
- 13. D’Este P, Llopis O, Rentocchini F, Yegros A. The relationship between interdisciplinarity and distinct modes of university-industry interaction. Research Policy. 2019;48: 103799.
- 14. Hein CJ, Ten Hoeve JE, Gopalakrishnan S, Livneh B, Adams HD, Marino EK, et al. Overcoming early career barriers to interdisciplinary climate change research. WIREs Climate Change. 2018;9.
- 15. Sainburg T. American postdoctoral salaries do not account for growing disparities in cost of living. Research Policy. 2023;52: 104714.