Advertisement

Strategies for Identification of Interdisciplinary Research Subjects: Approach, Tools, and Opportunities for Sustainable Development of Agricultural Economies

  • Wilmar Osorio VianaEmail author
  • Paola Andrea Calderón Cuartas
  • Javier Mauricio Naranjo Vasco
Chapter

Abstract

The use of the historical particularities of the research group, as a valuable source of new interpretations of reality, is presented for a “change of mentality”, considering action at the individual and community levels. The scope of this chapter was to take a closer look at the scientific research activities that a small research group from Colombia has done in the field of engineering since 2010, in order to improve our knowledge management and to get a positive impact in our society. It is our desire that the perspectives grounded in our own experience and presented in this chapter improve over that situation and also can be useful for small, young, and enthusiastic research groups in the developing countries in LA&C and in other parts of the world. Similarly, it can provide them with some tools that can be adapted to its own social context, to accomplish its goals of general and global contributions of science and technology to human knowledge, well-being, and development for all.

Keywords

Sustainable development Agro-based economies Technological innovation systems Knowledge management indicators 

References

  1. Aamodt, A., & Plaza, E. (1994). Case-Based Reasoning: Foundational Issues, Methodological Variations, and System Approaches. Artificial Intelligence Communications, 7(1), 39–59. IOS Press. Retrieved from https://www.idi.ntnu.no/~agnar/publications/aicom-94.pdf
  2. Ahmadpoor, M., & Jones, B. F. (2017). The Dual Frontier: Patented Inventions and Prior Scientific Advance. Science, 357(6351), 583–587.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aam9527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bergek, A., Jacobsson, S., Carlsson, B., Lindmark, S., & Rickne, A. (2008). Analyzing the Functional Dynamics of Technological Innovation Systems: A Scheme of Analysis. Research Policy, 37(3), 407–429.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.12.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bergek, A., Hekkert, M., Jacobssonc, S., Markardd, J., Sandénc, B., & Truffer, B. (2015). Technological Innovation Systems in Contexts: Conceptualizing Contextual Structures and Interaction Dynamics. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 16, 51–64.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2015.07.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bermúdez, L., Moreno, E., & Rios, M. (2016). Innovation Strategies Developed by Research Centers in Public Universities of the Department of La Guajira, Colombia. INGE CUC, 12(1), 32–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Consejo Nacional de Política Económica y Social-CONPES, Dirección Nacional de Planeación de Colombia-DNP. (2015). Política Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación 2015–2025. Borrador. Retrieved from http://www.colciencias.gov.co/sites/default/files/upload/noticias/conpes-borrador-cti.pdf
  7. Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO. (2017). The Global Innovation Index 2017: Innovation Feeding the World. Retrieved from http://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo_pub_gii_2017.pdf
  8. Fairbanks, M., & Lindsay, S. (1997). Plowing the Sea: Nurturing the Hidden Sources of Growth in the Developing World. USA: Harvard Business Review Press.Google Scholar
  9. Flórez, G., Rincón, A., Cardona, P., & Alzate, A. (2017). Análisis multitemporal de las coberturas vegetales en el área de influencia de las minas de oro ubicadas en la parte alta del sector de Maltería en Manizales, Colombia. Dyna, 84(201), 95–101.  https://doi.org/10.15446/dyna.v84n201.55759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Frodeman, R. (Ed.). (2017). The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity (2nd ed.). UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Fortunato, S., Bergstrom, C., Börner, K., Evans, J., Helbing, D., Milojević, S., … Barabási, A. (2018). Science of science. Science, 359(6379).  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao0185
  12. Gurevitch, J., Koricheva, J., Nakagawa, S., & Stewart, G. (2018). Meta-analysis and the Science of Research Synthesis. Nature, 555, 175–182. Retrieved from https://www.nature.com/articles/nature25753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gosens, J., Lu, Y., & Coenen, L. (2015). The Role of Transnational Dimensions in Emerging Economy ‘Technological Innovation Systems’ for Clean-tech. Journal of Cleaner Production, 86(1), 378–388.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.08.029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gray, S., Zanre, E., & Gray, S. (2013). Fuzzy Cognitive Maps as Representations of Mental Models and Group Beliefs: Theoretical and Technical Issues. In E. Papageorgiou (Ed.), Fuzzy Cognitive Maps for Applied Sciences and Engineering – From Fundamentals to Extensions and Learning Algorithms (pp. 29–48). Berlin: Springer Publishing.Google Scholar
  15. Holguín, M., Cardona, O., Sierra, E., Mejía, J., Orozco, A., & Castellanos, G. (2016). Machine Fault Detection Based on Filter Bank Similarity Features Using Acoustic and Vibration Analysis. Mathematical Problems in Engineering., 2016, 1–14.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/7906834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Henly-Shepard, S., Gray, S., & Cox, L. (2015). The Use of Participatory Modeling to Promote Social Learning and Facilitate Community Disaster Planning. Environmental Science & Policy, 45, 109–122.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2014.10.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lyall, C., Williams, R., & Meagher, L. (2009). A Short Guide to Developing Interdisciplinary Strategies for Research Groups. Number 7: Developing Interdisciplinary Strategies for Research Groups. ISSTI The University of Edinburgh. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265425942_A_Short_Guide_to_Developing_Interdisciplinary_Strategies_for_Research_Groups
  18. Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico. (2015). Frascati Manual 2015: Guidelines for Collecting and Reporting Data on Research and Experimental Development, The Measurement of Scientific, Technological and Innovation Activities. Paris, Francia: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  19. Pentland, A. (2012). The New Science of Building Great Teams. USA: Harvard Business Review.Google Scholar
  20. Tannenbaum, S., Mathieu, J., Salas, E., & Cohen, D. (2012). Teams Are Changing: Are Research and Practice Evolving Fast Enough? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 5(1), 2–24.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2011.01396.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. United Nations Development Programme. (2016). Human Development Report 2016: Human Development for Everyone. Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2016_human_development_report.pdf
  22. Zeng, A., Shen, Z., Zhou, J., Wu, J., Fan, Y., Wang, Y., & Stanley, H. (2017). The Science of Science: From the Perspective of Complex Systems. Physics Reports, 714–715, 1–73.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2017.10.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wilmar Osorio Viana
    • 1
    Email author
  • Paola Andrea Calderón Cuartas
    • 1
  • Javier Mauricio Naranjo Vasco
    • 1
  1. 1.Research Group in Technological and Environmental Developments, Department of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and ArchitectureUniversidad Católica de ManizalesManizalesColombia

Personalised recommendations