Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T20:14:00.752Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Embodied interdisciplinarity: what is the role of polymaths in environmental research?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 July 2010

JULIETTE C. YOUNG  and
MARIELLA MARZANO
JULIETTE C. YOUNG*
Affiliation:
NERC Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, Bush Estate, Penicuik EH26 0QB, UK
MARIELLA MARZANO
Affiliation:
Forest Research, Centre for Human and Ecological Sciences, Forest Research Northern Research Station, Roslin, Midlothian EH25 9SY, UK
*
*Correspondence: Dr Juliette C. Young Tel: +44 131 445 8522 Fax: +44 131 445 3943 e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Interdisciplinarity can be interpreted broadly as an active, multi-faceted learning process between researchers from different disciplines to create a common ground for a special purpose. Interdisciplinary approaches are regarded as necessary in environmental research, especially in view of global environmental change. However, some argue there is a lack of genuine interdisciplinarity in environmental research. Polymaths can play a potentially important role in environmental research. Environmental polymaths can enhance the effectiveness of interdisciplinarity through their knowledge and understanding of different disciplinary languages, epistemologies and methodologies, and as such, should be acknowledged more explicitly in interdisciplinary discussions.

Type
THEMATIC ISSUE: Interdisciplinary Progress in Environmental Science & Management
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 37 , Issue 4: Thematic section. Interdisciplinary Progress in Environmental Science and Management , December 2010 , pp. 373 - 375
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anbar, M. (1973) The ‘bridge scientist’ and his role. Research/Development 24: 30–34.Google Scholar
Baumann, H. (2009) Don't fence me in . . . In: The Social Embeddedness of Industrial Ecology, ed. Boons, F. & Howard-Grenville, J., pp. 48–64. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Bell, S., Carss, D.N. & Marzano, M. (2005) Calming troubled waters: making interdisciplinarity work. Final report to RELU (Project No. ESRC: RES-224–25–0110) [www document]. URL http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/Marzano-RES-224-25-0110.pdf/$FILE/Marzano-RES-224-25-0110.pdfGoogle Scholar
Bradshaw, G.A. & Bekoff, M. (2001) Ecology and social responsibility: the re-embodiment of science. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 16: 460–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruce, A., Lyall, C., Tait, J. & Williams, R. (2004) Interdisciplinary integration in Europe: the case of the Fifth Framework programme. Futures 36 (4): 457–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, S.R., De Vries, R., Dietz, T., Mooney, H.A., Polasky, S., Reid, R.V. & Scholes, R.J. (2006) Millennium Ecosystem Assessment: research needs. Science 314: 257–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Daily, G.C. & Ehrlich, P.R. (1999) Managing Earth's ecosystems: an interdisciplinary challenge. Ecosystems 2: 277–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ewel, K.C. (2001) Natural resource management: the need for interdisciplinary collaboration. Ecosystems 4: 716–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fazey, I., Fischer, J. & Lindenmayer, D.B. (2005) What do conservation biologists publish? Biological Conservation 124: 63–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Funtowicz, S.O. & Ravetz, J.R. (1993) Science for the post-normal age. Futures 25 (7): 739–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibbons, M. (2000) Mode 2 society and the emergence of context-sensitive science. Science and Public Policy 27 (3): 159–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janssen, W. & Goldsworthy, P. (1996) Multidisciplinary research for natural resource management: conceptual and practical implications. Agricultural Systems 51: 259–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karlqvist, A. (1999) Going beyond disciplines: the meanings of interdisciplinarity. Policy Sciences 32 (4): 379–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kinzig, A.P. (2001) Bridging disciplinary divides to address environmental and intellectual challenges. Ecosystems 4: 709–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, J.T. & Porter, A.L. (1990) Preconditions for interdisciplinary research. In: Studies in Interdisciplinary Methods from Business, Government and Academia, ed. Birnbaum-More, P.H., Rossini, F.A. & Baldwin, D.R., pp. 11–19. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
MacLachlan, M. (2009) Rethinking global health research: towards integrative expertise. Globalization and Health 5: 6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marzano, M., Carss, D.N. & Bell, S. (2006) Working to make interdisciplinarity work: investing in communication and interpersonal relationships. Journal of Agricultural Economics 57 (2): 185–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nissani, M. (1997) Ten cheers for interdisciplinarity. Social Science Journal 32 (2): 201–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qin, J., Lancaster, F.W. & Allen, B. (1997) Types and levels of collaboration in interdisciplinary research in the sciences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 24 (10): 893–916.3.0.CO;2-X>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rhoten, D. & Parker, A. (2004) Risks and rewards of an interdisciplinary research path. Science 306: 2046.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robinson, A. (2005) A polymath's dilemma. Nature 438: 291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sillitoe, P. (2004) Interdisciplinary experiences: working with indigenous knowledge in development. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 29 (1): 6–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, C.J., Fraser, I., Mitchley, J. & Thomas, M.B. (2007) Making ecological science policy-relevant: issues of scale and disciplinary integration. Landscape Ecology 22 (6): 799–809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vedeld, P.O. (1994) The environment and interdisciplinarity: Ecological and neoclassical economical approaches to the use of natural resources. Ecological Economics 10: 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wear, D.N. (1999) Challenges to interdisciplinary discourse. Ecosystems 2: 299–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winnacker, E.-L. (2003) Interdisciplinary sciences in the 21st century. Current Opinion in Biotechnology 14 (3): 328–331.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Young supplementary abstract

Young supplementary abstract

Download Young supplementary abstract(File)
File 26.6 KB