Collaborative research on sustainability: Myths and conundrums of interdisciplinary departments

Journal of Research Practice

Volumn 5, Issue 1, 2009, Pages

  Sherren, Kate ^a   Klovdahl, Alden S ^b   Robin, Libby ^a,c   Butler, Linda ^b   Dovers, Stephen ^a  

^a AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^c NATIONAL MUSEUM OF AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

Author keywords

Coauthorship; Collaboration; Cosupervision; Research training; Social networks; Sustainability science

Indexed keywords

EID: 73649125470     PISSN: None     EISSN: 1712851X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (86)

1. Abbott, A. (2001). Chaos of disciplines. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2. Adams, J. D., Black, G. D., Clemmons, J. R., & Stephen, P. E. (2005). Scientific teams and institutional collaborations: Evidence from U. S. universities, 1981-1999. Research Policy, 34, 259-285.
3. Barabási, A. L., Jeong, H., Neda, Z., Ravasz, E., Schubert, A., & Vicsek, T. (2002). Evolution of the social network of scientific collaborations. Physica A, 311, 590-614.
4. Barjak, F. (2006). Team diversity and research collaboration in life sciences teams: Does a combination of research cultures pay off? Olten, Switzerland: University of Applied Sciences.
5. Beaver, D. d. (2001). Reflections on scientific collaboration (and its study): Past, present, and future. Scientometrics, 52(3), 365-377.
6. Becher, T. (1989). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Milton Keynes, UK: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.
7. Borgatti, S. P. (2002). NetDraw: Graph visualization software. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies.
8. Borgatti, S. P., & Everett, M. G. (2003). The network paradigm in organizational research: A review and typology. Journal of Management, 6(1), 991-1013
9. Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Freeman, L. C. (2002). UCINET for Windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies.
10. Bourdieu, P. (1988). Homo academicus (P. Collier, Trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. (Original work published in 1984)
11. Bozeman, B., & Corley, E. (2004). Scientists' collaboration strategies: Implications for scientific and technical human capital. Research Policy, 33, 599-616.
12. Braun, T., Glänzel, W., & Schubert, A. (2001). Publication and cooperation patterns of the authors of neuroscience journals. Scientometrics, 51(3), 499-510.
13. Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
14. Butler, L. (2003). Academic reactions: Modifying publication practices in response to funding formulas. Research Evaluation, 12(1), 39-46.
15. Butler, L., & Visser, M. S. (2006). Extending citation analysis to non-source items. Scientometrics, 66(2), 327-343.
16. Chartrand, G. (1985). Introductory graph theory. New York: Dover.
17. Chompalov, I., Genuth, J., & Shrum, W. (2002). The organization of scientific collaborations. Research Policy, 31, 749-767.
18. Cole, S. (1983). The hierarchy of the sciences? American Journal of Sociology, 89(1), 111-139.
19. Coleman, J. S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
20. Considine, M. (2006). Theorizing the university as a cultural system: Distinctions, identities, emergencies. Educational Theory, 56(3), 255-270.
21. Crane, D. (1969). Social structure in a group of scientists: A test of the 'Invisible College' hypothesis. American Sociological Review, 34(3), 335-352.
22. de Solla Price, D. (1965). Little science, big science. NY: Columbia University Press.
23. Department of Education, Science and Training. (2002). National research priorities. Canberra, Australia: Government of Australia. Retrieved March 21, 2009, from http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/research_sector/policies_issues_reviews/key_issues/national_research_priorities/default.htm
24. Donald, J. G. (1986). Knowledge and the university curriculum. Higher Education, 15, 267-282.
25. Dovers, S. (2005a). Environment and sustainability policy: Creation, implementation and evaluation. Sydney, Australia: Federation.
26. Dovers, S. (2005b). Clarifying the imperative of integration research for sustainable environmental management. Journal of Research Practice, 1(2), Article M1. Retrieved March 21, 2009, from http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/11/22
27. Frank, K. A. (1996). Mapping interactions within and between cohesive subgroups. Social Networks, 18, 93-119.
28. Fujigaki, Y. (2002). Analysis on dynamics of research sub-domains in interdisciplinary fields: Analysis using personal distribution versus papers. Scientometrics, 54(1), 63-74.
29. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzmann, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.
30. Gläser, J., & Laudel, G. (2005). The impact of evaluations on the content of Australian university research. In R. Julian, R. Rottier, & R. White (Eds). TASA 2005 conference proceedings (Section 11: Open Session). Hawthorn, Australia: The Sociological Association of Australia (TASA). Retrieved March 21, 2009, from http://www.tasa.org.au/conferencepapers05/papers%20(pdf)/open_glaser.pdf
31. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380.
32. Hawkes, J. (2001). The fourth pillar of sustainability: Culture's essential role in public planning. Melbourne, Australia: Common Ground and The Cultural Development Network.
33. Hogg, M. A., & Hains, S. C. (1998). Friendship and group identification: A new look at the role of cohesiveness in groupthink. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 323-341.
34. Hogg, M. A., & Terry, D. J. (2000). Social identity and self-categorization processes in organizational contexts. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 121-140.
35. Kates, R. W., Clark, W. C., Corell, R., Hall, J. M., Jaeger, C. C., Lowe, I., et al. (2001). Sustainability science. Science, 292, 641-642.
36. Katz, J. S. (1994). Geographical proximity and scientific collaboration. Scientometrics, 31(1), 31-43.
37. Klein, J. T. (1999). Mapping interdisciplinary studies. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities.
38. Klovdahl, A. S. (1997). Social network analysis. In J. P. Keeves (Ed.), Educational research, methodology and measurement: An international handbook (2nd ed., pp. 684-695). Cambridge, UK: Pergamon/Cambridge University Press.
39. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. (Original work published in 1962)
40. Landry, R., & Amara, N. (1998). The impact of transaction costs on the institutional structuration of collaborative academic research. Research Policy, 27, 901-913.
41. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.
42. Lattuca, L. R. (2002). Learning interdisciplinarity: Sociocultural perspectives on academic work. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(6), 711-739.
43. Lattuca, L. R., & Stark, J. S. (1995). Modifying the major: Discretionary thoughts from ten disciplines. Review of Higher Education, 18(3), 315-344.
44. Laudel, G. (2001). Collaboration, creativity and rewards: Why and how scientists collaborate. International Journal of Technology Management, 22(7/8), 762-781.
45. Laudel, G. (2002). What do we measure by co-authorships? Research Evaluation, 11(1), 3-15.
46. Laudel, G. (2006a). The art of getting funded: How scientists adapt to their funding conditions. Science and Public Policy, 33(7), 489-504.
47. Laudel, G. (2006b). Conclave in the Tower of Babel: How peers review interdisciplinary research proposals. Research Evaluation, 15(1), 57-68.
48. Liverman, D. M. (1999). Geography and the global environment. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 89(1), 107-120.
49. Long, J. S., & Fox, M. F. (1995). Scientific careers: Universalism and particularism. Annual Review of Sociology, 21, 45-71.
50. Ludwig, D., Walker, B., & Holling, C. S. (1997). Sustainability, stability and resilience. Conservation Ecology, 1(1), 7.
51. Mehra, A., Kilduff, M., & Brass, D. J. (2001). The social networks of high and low self-monitors: Implications for workplace performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 46(1), 121-146.
52. Melin, G. (2000). Pragmatism and self-organisation: Research collaboration on the individual level. Research Policy, 29, 31-40.
53. Metcalfe, J., Riedlinger, M., Pisarski, A., & Gardner, M. J. (2006). Collaborating across the sectors: The relationship between the humanities, arts and social sciences (HASS) and science, technology, engineering and medicine (STEM) sectors [CHASS occasional paper no. 3]. Canberra, Australia: Council for Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences.
54. Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. (2003). Ecosystems and human well-being: A framework for assessment. Washington, DC: Island.
55. Moses, I. (1990). Teaching, research and scholarship in different disciplines. Higher Education, 19, 351-375.
56. Najman, J. M., & Hewitt, B. (2003). The validity of publication and citation counts for sociology and other selected disciplines. Journal of Sociology, 39(1), 62-80.
57. Newman, M. E. J. (2001). The structure of scientific collaboration networks. PNAS: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 98(2), 404-409. Retrieved March 21, 2009, from http://www.pnas.org/content/98/2/404.full.pdf+html
58. Newman, M. E. J. (2004). Coauthorship networks and patterns of scientific collaboration. PNAS: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101(April supplement 1), 5200-5205. Retrieved March 21, 2009, from http://www.pnas.org/content/101/suppl.1/5200.full.pdf+html
59. Nowotny, H., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2001). Re-thinking science: Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
60. Poole, M. E. (1994). Melting 'snow' and shifting 'cultures': The strategic repositioning of Australian universities' research and development. Higher Education Research and Development, 13(2), 143-155.
61. Porac, J. F., Wade, J. B., Fischer, H. M., Brown, J., Kanfer, A., & Bowker, G. (2004). Human capital heterogeneity, collaborative relationships, and publication patterns in a multidisciplinary scientific alliance: A comparative case study of two scientific teams. Research Policy, 33, 661-678.
62. Price, R. J. (2003). Identifying social spaces in the Sustainable Grazing Systems program. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 43, 1041-1059.
63. 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, 48(10), 893-916.
64. Rhoten, D. (2004). Interdisciplinary research: Trend or transition. Items & Issues, 5(1-2), 6-11. Retrieved March 21, 2009, from http://publications.ssrc.org/items/items_5.1-2/interdisciplinary_research.pdf
65. Rhoten, D., & Parker, A. (2004). Risks and rewards of an interdisciplinary research path. Science, 306(December 17), 2046.
66. Rinia, E. J., van Leeuwen, T. N., Bruins, E. E. W., van Vuren, H. G., & van Raan, A. F. J. (2002). Measuring knowledge transfer between fields of science. Scientometrics, 54(3), 347-362.
67. Robinson, J. (2004). Squaring the circle? Some thoughts on the idea of sustainable development. Ecological Economics, 48, 369-384.
68. Russell, A. W. (2005). No academic borders? Transdisciplinarity in university teaching and research. Australian Universities Review, 48(1), 35-41.
69. Rydin, Y. (2006). Conclusions. In Y. Rydin & E. Falleth (Eds), Networks and institutions in natural resource management (pp. 201-216). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
70. Sherren, K. (2006). Mapping an interdiscipline: Research collaboration around sustainability in the tertiary sector. In V. Colic-Peisker, F. Tilbury, & B. McNamara (Eds), TASA 2006 conference proceedings (Section 2: Education, work, stratification and class). Hawthorn, Australia: The Sociological Association of Australia (TASA). Retrieved March 21, 2009, from http://www.tasa.org.au/conferencepapers06/papers/Education,%20Work,%20Stratification%20and%20Class/sherren.pdf
71. Snow, C. P. (1959). The two cultures and the scientific revolution. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
72. Stokes, T. D., & Hartley, J. A. (1989). Coauthorship, social structure and influence within specialties. Social Studies of Science, 19(1), 101-125.
73. Stokols, D., Misra, S., Moser, R. P., Hall, K. L., & Taylor, B. K. (2008). The ecology of team science: Understanding contextual influences on transdisciplinary collaboration. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35(2S), S96-S115.
74. Syme, G. (2005). Integration initiatives at CSIRO: Reflections of an insider. Journal of Research Practice, 1(2), Article M3. Retrieved March 21, 2009, from http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/17/26
75. Tichy, N. M., Tushman, M. L., & Fombrun, C. (1979). Social network analysis for organizations. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 507-519.
76. Tress, B., Tress, G., van der Valk, A., & Fry, G. (Eds). (2003). Interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary landscape Studies: Potential and limitations. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Delta Program, Alterra Green World Research, Landscape Centre. Retrieved March 21, 2009, from http://www.tress.cc/delta/series2.html
77. van Kerkhoff, L. (2005). Strategic integration: The practical politics of integrated research in context. Journal of Research Practice, 1(2), Article M5. Retrieved March 21, 2009, from http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/14/24
78. van Raan, A. F. J. (1990). Fractal dimension of co-citations. Nature, 347(October 18), 626.
79. Wagner, C. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research Policy, 34, 1608-1618.
80. Wasson, R. J., & Dovers, S. (2005). Integrative research in the university context: Centre for Resource and Environmental Studies, The Australian National University. Journal of Research Practice, 1(2), Article M4. Retrieved March 21, 2009, from http://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/13/23
81. Wellman, B. (1983). Network analysis: Some basic principles. Sociological Theory, 1, 155-200.
82. White, W. J. (1999). Academic topographies: A network analysis of disciplinarity among communication faculty. Human Communication Research, 25(4), 604-617.
83. Whitley, R. (1984). The intellectual and social organisation of the sciences. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.
84. Wilbanks, T. J. (1994). "Sustainable development" in geographic perspective [Presidential address]. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 84(4), 541-556.
85. World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future [The Brundtland Report]. New York: Oxford University Press.
86. Younglove-Webb, J., Gray, B., Abdalla, C. W., & Thurow, A. P. (1999). The dynamics of multidisciplinary research teams in academia. The Review of Higher Education, 22(4), 425-440.