Send message to Presenter

Presentation short abstract:

Increased interest in interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity has heightened calls for institutionalizing structures and strategies that cross boundaries of expertise within and beyond the academy. This paper draws lessons from new case studies across the world.

Presentation long abstract:

During 2020 and 2021 universities worldwide implemented rapid changes to adapt lectures and research projects to lockdown conditions and confinement. Different communities and governments underwent transformations that continue to be useful in the long term for institutionalizing interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity. Two overarching questions arise: How, then, should institutionalizing proceed in light of this and other challenges? And what do we expect from universities and research centers that aim to foster interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in current times? Across contexts, neoliberal and endemic pressures on the scientific system still act as hindrances to achieving the full potential of interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in research and teaching in higher education. Neoliberal policies have long limited and discouraged them by legitimizing individualism and shortening timelines for research and learning. This paper elaborates on fifteen case studies that depict successful and unsuccessful implementation in both universities and research centers in five different continents. Our aim is to take a step beyond to provide a common framework for tackling continuing and future challenges posed by different relations at the intersections of cultures, institutions, and communities in institutionalizing interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity.

Toward that end, we present a comparative framework for thinking and transforming institutional and cultural conditions for interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research and teaching in higher education. The framework is based on empirical evidence, pertinent literature, and insights from case studies. The theoretical background that emerges from the framework supports innovative practices which present future alternatives to dominant disciplinary academic culture and individual professional commitments.