Skip to main content

Scholarly motivations to conduct interdisciplinary climate change research

Abstract

Understanding and responding to today’s complex environmental problems requires collaboration that bridges disciplinary boundaries. As the barriers to interdisciplinary research are formidable, promoting interdisciplinary environmental research requires understanding what motivates researchers to embark upon such challenging research. This article draws upon research on problem choice and interdisciplinary research practice to investigate motivators and barriers to interdisciplinary climate change (IDCC) research. Results from a survey on the motivations of 526 Ph.D.-holding, early- to mid-career, self-identified IDCC scholars indicate how those scholars make decisions regarding their research choices including the role of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations and the barriers arising from the nature of interdisciplinary research and institutional structures. Climate change was not the main motivation for most respondents to become scholars, yet the majority began to study the issue because they could not ignore the problem. Respondents’ decisions to conduct IDCC research are driven by personal motivations, including personal interest, the importance of IDCC research to society, and enjoyment of interdisciplinary collaborations. Two thirds of respondents reported having encountered challenges in communication across disciplines, longer timelines while conducting interdisciplinary work, and a lack of peer support. Nonetheless, most respondents plan to conduct IDCC research in the future and will choose their next research project based on its societal benefits and the opportunity to work with specific collaborators. We conclude that focused attention to supporting intrinsic motivations, as well as removing institutional barriers, can facilitate future IDCC research.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Angelstam P, Andersson K, Annerstedt M, Axelsson R, Elbakidze M, Garrido P, Grahn P, Jönsson KI, Pedersen S, Schlyter P (2013) Solving problems in social-ecological systems: definition, practice and barriers of transdisciplinary research. Ambio 42:254–265

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Austin AE (2003) Creating a bridge to the future: preparing new faculty to face changing expectations in a shifting context. Rev High Educ 26:119–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Barry A, Born G, Weszkalnys G (2008) Logics of interdisciplinarity. Econ Soc 37:20–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Blickenstaff JC (2005) Women and science careers: leaky pipeline or gender filter? Gend Educ 17:369–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bridle H, Vrieling A, Cardillo M, Araya Y, Hinojosa L (2013) Preparing for an interdisciplinary future: a perspective from early-career researchers. Futures 53:22–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Brown VA, Harris JA, Russell JY (eds) (2010) Tackling wicked problems through the transdisciplinary imagination. Earthscan, London

    Google Scholar 

  7. Burkett VR, Suarez AG, Bindi M, Conde C, Mukerji R, Prather MJ, Clair ALS, Yohe GW (2014) Point of departure. In: Field CB et al (eds) Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of working group II to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 169–194

    Google Scholar 

  8. Campbell LM (2005) Overcoming obstacles to interdisciplinary research. Conserv Biol 19:574–577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Carayol N, Dalle J-M (2007) Sequential problem choice and the reward system in Open Science. Struct Chang Econ Dyn 18:167–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Carayol N, Thi TUN (2005) Why do academic scientists engage in interdisciplinary research? Res Eval 14:70–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Castán Broto V, Gislason M, Ehlers M-H (2009) Practising interdisciplinarity in the interplay between disciplines: experiences of established researchers. Environ Sci Pol 12:922–933

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Clark SG, Steen-Adams MM, Pfirman S, Wallace RL (2011) Professional development of interdisciplinary environmental scholars. J Environ Stud Sci 1:99–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Debackere K, Rappa MA (1994) Institutional variations in problem choice and persistence among scientists in an emerging field. Res Policy 23:425–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fischer EV, Mackey KRM, Cusack DF, DeSantis LRG, Hartzell-Nichols L, Lutz JA, Melbourne-Thomas J, Meyer R, Riveros-Iregui DA, Sorte CJB, Taylor JR, White SA (2012) Is pretenure interdisciplinary research a career risk? Eos 93:311–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fox HE, Christian C, Nordby JC, Pergams OR, Peterson GD, Pyke CR (2006) Perceived barriers to integrating social science and conservation. Conserv Biol 20:1817–1820

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Füssel H-M, Klein RJT (2006) Climate change vulnerability assessments: an evolution of conceptual thinking. Clim Chang 75:301–329

  17. Hackett EJ, Rhoten DR (2009) The Snowbird Charrette: integrative interdisciplinary collaboration in environmental research design. Minerva 47:407–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Heemskerk M, Wilson K, Pavao-Zuckerman M (2003) Conceptual models as tools for communication across disciplines. Conserv Ecol 7:8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hollingsworth R, Hollingsworth EJ (2000) Major discoveries and biomedical research organizations: perspectives on interdisciplinarity, nurturing leadership, and integrated structure and cultures. In: Weingart P, Stehr N (eds) Practising interdisciplinarity. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, pp 215–244

    Google Scholar 

  20. Jacobs JA, Frickel S (2009) Interdisciplinarity: a critical assessment. Annu Rev Sociol 35:43–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kinzig AP (2001) Bridging disciplinary divides to address environmental and intellectual challenges. Ecosystems 4:709–715

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Klein JT (1990) Interdisciplinarity: history, theory, and practice. Wayne State University Press, Detroit

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kuhn TS (1970) The structure of scientific revolutions, 2nd edn. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  24. Langfeldt L (2006) The policy challenges of peer review: managing bias, conflict of interests and interdisciplinary assessments. Res Eval 15:31–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lubchenco J (1998) Entering the century of the environment: a new social contract for science. Science 279:491–497

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lyall C, Fletcher I (2013) Experiments in interdisciplinary capacity-building: the successes and challenges of large-scale interdisciplinary investments. Sci Public Policy 40:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. MacMynowski DP (2007) Pausing at the brink of interdisciplinarity: power and knowledge at the meeting of social and biophysical science. Ecol Soc 12:20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mauser W, Klepper G, Rice M, Schmalzbauer BS, Hackmann H, Leemans R, Moore H (2013) Transdisciplinary global change research: the co-creation of knowledge for sustainability. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 5:420–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Merton RK (1957) Priorities in scientific discovery: a chapter in the sociology of science. Am Sociol Rev 22:635–659

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Miller TR, Baird TD, Littlefield CM, Kofinas G, Chapin FS III, Redman CL (2008) Epistemological pluralism: reorganizing interdisciplinary research. Ecol Soc 13:46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Mitchell RB, Weiler CS (2011) Developing next-generation climate change scholars: the DISCCRS experience. J Environ Stud Sci 1:54–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Mooney HA, Duraiappah A, Larigauderie A (2013) Evolution of natural and social science interactions in global change research programs. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110:3665–3672

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Morse WC, Nielsen-Pincus M, Force JE, Wulfhorst J (2007) Bridges and barriers to developing and conducting interdisciplinary graduate-student team research. Ecol Soc 12:8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Moslemi JM, Capps KA, Johnson MS, Maul J, McIntyre PB, Melvin AM, Vadas TM, Vallano DM, Watkins JM, Weiss M (2009) Training tomorrow's environmental problem solvers: an integrative approach to graduate education. Bioscience 59:514–521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Naiman RJ (1999) A perspective on interdisciplinary science. Ecosystems 2:292–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. National Academy of Sciences (2004) Facilitating interdisciplinary research. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  37. Neff MW (2011) What research should be done and why? Four competing visions among ecologists. Front Ecol Environ 9:462–469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Nichols LG (2007) Academic cartography: understanding the directions of modern biological science. Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  39. Nissani M (1997) Ten cheers for interdisciplinarity: the case for interdisciplinary knowledge and research. Soc Sci J 34:201–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Pfirman S, Martin P, Danielson A, Goodman RM, Steen-Adams M, Waggett C, Mutter J, Rikakis T, Fletcher M, Berry L, Hornbach D, Hempel M, Morehouse B, Southard R (2011) Interdisciplinary hiring and career development: guidance for individuals and institutions. National Council for Science and the Environment, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  41. Pfirman S, Martin PJ (2010) Facilitating interdisciplinary scholars. In: Frodeman R, Klein JT, Mitcham C (eds) Oxford handbook on interdisciplinarity. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 387–403

    Google Scholar 

  42. Pickett S, Burch WR Jr, Grove JM (1999) Interdisciplinary research: maintaining the constructive impulse in a culture of criticism. Ecosystems 2:302–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Pohl C (2011) What is progress in transdisciplinary research? Futures 43:618–626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Porter A, Rafols I (2009) Is science becoming more interdisciplinary? Measuring and mapping six research fields over time. Scientometrics 81:719–745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Rafols I, Leydesdorff L, O’Hare A, Nightingale P, Stirling A (2012) How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: a comparison between innovation studies and business & management. Res Policy 41:1262–1282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Rayner S, Malone EL (eds) (1998) Human choice and climate change: an international assessment. Batellle Press, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  47. Redclift M (1998) Dances with wolves? Interdisciplinary research on the global environment. Glob Environ Chang 8:177–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Reich SM, Reich JA (2006) Cultural competence in interdisciplinary collaborations: a method for respecting diversity in research partnerships. Am J Community Psychol 38:51–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Reyns NB, Langenheder S, Lennon JT (2007) Specialization versus diversification: a trade-off for young scientists? Eos 88:343–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Rhoten D (2003) A multi-method analysis of the social and technical conditions for interdisciplinary collaboration. The Hybrid Vigor Institute, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  51. Rhoten D (2004) Interdisciplinary research: trend or transition. Items and Issues 5:6–11

    Google Scholar 

  52. Rhoten D, O'Connor E, Hackett EJ (2009) The act of collaborative creation and the art of integrative creativity: originality, disciplinarity and interdisciplinarity. Thesis Eleven 96:83–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Rhoten D, Parker A (2004) Risks and rewards of an interdisciplinary research path. Science 306:2046

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Rhoten D, Pfirman S (2007) Women in interdisciplinary science: exploring preferences and consequences. Res Policy 36:56–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Rittel HWJ, Webber MM (1973) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4:155–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Roy ED, Morzillo AT, Seijo F, Reddy SM, Rhemtulla JM, Milder JC, Kuemmerle T, Martin SL (2013) The elusive pursuit of interdisciplinarity at the human-environment interface. Bioscience 63:745–753

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Salazar MR, Lant TK, Fiore SM, Salas E (2012) Facilitating innovation in diverse science teams through integrative capacity. Small Group Res 43:527–558

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Schmidt G, Moyer E (2008) A new kind of scientist. Nature Rep Clim Chang 2:102–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Schneider SH (1995) Evolutionary organizational models for interdisciplinary research and teaching of global environmental change. In: Waddington DJ (ed) Global environmental change science: education and training. Springer-Verlag, New York, pp 9–40

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  60. Siedlok F, Hibbert P (2014) The organization of interdisciplinary research: modes, drivers and barriers. Int J Manag Rev 16:194–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Sievanen L, Campbell LM, Leslie HM (2012) Challenges to interdisciplinary research in ecosystem-based management. Conserv Biol 26:315–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. van Rijnsoever FJ, Hessels LK (2011) Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration. Res Policy 40:463–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Weart S (2013) Rise of interdisciplinary research on climate. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 110:3657–3664

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Weiler CS (2007) Meeting Ph.D. graduates' needs in a changing global environment. Eos 88:149–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Winograd M, Hais M (2014) How millennials could upend Wall Street and corporate America. The Brookings Institution, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  66. Woodward K (2005) Encouraging recruitment, promotion and tenure, and awarding merit to interdisciplinary faculty. Interdisciplinary Initiatives Working Group. The Graduate School, The University of Washington, Seattle

    Google Scholar 

  67. Ziman J (1996) Is science losing its objectivity? Nature 382:751–754

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Ziman JM (1987) The problem of “problem choice”. Minerva 25:92–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Zoback ML, Payton A (2007) Crossing boundaries, hitting barriers. Nature 445:22

    Google Scholar 

  70. Zuckerman H (1978) Theory choice and problem choice in science. Sociol Inq 48:65–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We offer thanks to three anonymous reviewers whose considered comments substantially improved this manuscript. This work was supported in part by National Science Foundation grants # SES-0932916 (Whitman College/Weiler), IIA-1301792 (Idaho State University/Godsey), and EAR-1204762 (University of Pennsylvania/Bolson); National Aeronautics and Space Administration grant # NNX10AJ53G (Whitman College/Weiler); and by a Peter Paul Career Development Professorship (Boston University/ Marston).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anita Milman.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(PDF 573 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Milman, A., Marston, J.M., Godsey, S.E. et al. Scholarly motivations to conduct interdisciplinary climate change research. J Environ Stud Sci 7, 239–250 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-015-0307-z

Download citation

Keywords

  • Interdisciplinarity
  • Problem choice
  • Climate change research
  • Early-career researchers
  • Motivations
  • Barriers