Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Learning from the Transdisciplinary Case Study Approach: A Functional-Dynamic Approach to Collaboration Among Diverse Actors in Applied Energy Settings

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Tackling Long-Term Global Energy Problems

Part of the book series: Environment & Policy ((ENPO,volume 52))

Abstract

Participation of a variety of actors has been observed in both energy research and the transition process of energy systems, and more participation is commonly advocated. Despite this, ‘participation’ seems to be an all-purpose term with an unclear definition. To give it meaning, the following key questions must be addressed: Why and when should different actors be involved? Who should be involved and who should involve them? In which specific issues should the participants be involved and what are they expected to contribute? Which techniques allow for appropriate participation? How can informal participation techniques be combined to develop a staged, formal process? Finally, what role do research methods play in such processes? This contribution addresses these questions conceptually and then more concretely with illustrations from the authors’ own experiences in collaborating with diverse actors in a transdisciplinary research process. The chapter concludes that a functional-dynamic approach to addressing collaboration is necessary, further knowledge integration is crucial and a systematic and analytical framework is thus essential. These elements are presented in the transdisciplinary case study (TdCS) design. Appropriate and tailored participation techniques and research methods were selected and integrated in order to provide the prerequisites for inclusive collaboration, depending on the goals and phase of the research process in question.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For an overview, see Scholz, Lang, Walter, Wiek, and Stauffacher (2006).

  2. 2.

    When using a more general definition of the term empowerment as ‘to provide with the means or opportunity’ (Merriam-Webster’s Online Dictionary), one could claim that an involvement process, in general, contributes to the empowerment of those participating.

References

  • Andsager, J. L. (2000). How interest groups attempt to shape public opinion with competing news frames. J&MC Quarterly, 77(3), 577–592.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35, 216–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beierle, T. C. (2002). The quality of stakeholder-based decisions. Risk Analysis, 22, 739–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beierle, T. C., & Cayford, J. (2002). Democracy in practice. Public participation in environmental decisions. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, P., & Davis, G. (2002). Mapping public participation in policy choices. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 61, 14–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, K., Adger, W. N., Tompkins, E., Bacon, P., Shim, D., & Young, K. (2001). Trade-off analysis for marine protected area management. Ecological Economics, 37, 417–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, S. (2003). Deliberative democratic theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 6, 307–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chilvers, J. (2007). Towards analytic-deliberative forms of risk governance in the UK? Reflecting on learning in radioactive waste. Journal of Risk Research, 10(2), 197–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, H. M., & Evans, R. (2002). The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science, 32, 235–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahinden, U. (2006). Framing – Eine integrative Theorie der Massenkommunikation. Konstanz: UVK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Devine-Wright, P. (2007). Energy citizenship: Psychological aspects of evolution in sustainable energy technologies. In J. Murphy (Ed.), Framing the present, shaping the future: Contemporary governance of sustainable technologies. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiorino, D. J. (1990). Citizen participation and environmental risk: A survey of institutional mechanisms. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 15, 226–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., Read, S., & Combs, B. (1978). How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits. Policy Sciences, 8, 127–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flüeler, T., Krütli, P., & Stauffacher, M. (2007). Tools for local stakeholders in radioactive waste governance: Challenges and benefits of selected participatory technology assessment techniques. Final Report, April 2007. Contribution to the EU STREP Community Waste Management COWAM 2, Work Package 1: Implementing Local Democracy and Participatory Assessment Methods. All web links accessed November 16, 2011, http://www.cowam.com/?COWAM-2-Final-Reports

  • Flynn, R., & Bellaby, P. (Eds.). (2007). Risk and the public acceptance of new technologies. Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forester, J. (1999). The deliberative practitioner: Encouraging participatory planning processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Funtowicz, S. O., & Ravetz, J. T. (1993). Science for the post-normal age. Futures, 25(7), 739–755.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Häberli, R., Bill, A., Thompson Klein, J., Scholz, R. W., & Welti, M. (2001). Summary and synthesis. In J. Thompson Klein, W. Grossenbacher-Mansuy, R. Häberli, A. Bill, R. W. Scholz, & M. Welti (Eds.), Transdisciplinarity: Joint problem solving among science, technology, and society (pp. 3–22). Basel: Birkhäuser Verlag AG.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch Hardon, G., Bradley, D., Pohl, C., Rist, S., & Wiesmann, U. (2006). Implications of transdisciplinarity for sustainability research. Ecological Economics, 60, 119–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joubert, A. R., Leiman, A., de Klerk, H. M., Katua, S., & Aggenbach, J. C. (1997). Fynbos (fine bush) vegetation and the supply of water: A comparison of multi-criteria decision analysis and cost-benefit analysis. Ecological Economics, 22, 123–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krütli, P., Flüeler, T., Stauffacher, M., Wiek, A., & Scholz, R.W. (2010a) Technical safety vs. public involvement? A case study on the unrealised project for the disposal of nuclear waste at Wellenberg (Switzerland). Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences, 7(3): 229–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krütli, P., Stauffacher, M., Flüeler, T., & Scholz, R. W. (2006). Public involvement in repository site selection for nuclear waste: Towards a more dynamic view in the decision-making process. Conference proceedings. VALDOR 2006 – VALues in Decisions On Risk. Stockholm, May 14–18, 2006. SKI, SEPA, SGI, SRCE, OECD/NEA, UK Nirex, 96–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krütli, P., Stauffacher, M., Flüeler, T., & Scholz, R.W. (2010b). Functional-dynamic public participation in technological decision making: Site selection processes of nuclear waste repositories. Journal of Risk Research, 13(7): 861–875.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lengwiler, M. (2008). Participatory approaches in science and technology – Historical origins and current practices in critical perspective. Science Technology, & Human Values, 33, 186–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loukopoulos, P., & Scholz, R. W. (2004). Sustainable future urban mobility: Using ‘area development negotiations’ for scenario assessment and participatory strategic planning. Environment and Planning A, 36, 2203–2226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniels, T. L., & Gregory, R. (2004). Learning as an objective within a structured risk management decision process. Environmental Science & Technology, 38(7), 1921–1926.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniels, T. L., & Trousdale, W. (2005). Resource compensation and negotiation support in an aboriginal context: Using community-based multi-attribute analysis to evaluate non-market losses. Ecological Economics, 55, 173–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Midgley, G. (2003). Science as systemic intervention: Some implications of systems thinking and complexity for the philosophy of science. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 16(2), 77–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otway, H. (1987). Experts, risk communication, and democracy. Risk Analysis, 7(2), 125–129.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Owens, S., & Driffill, L. (2008). How to change attitudes and behaviours in the context of energy. Energy Policy, 36, 4412–4418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pahl-Wostl, C. (2002). Participative and stakeholder-based policy design, evaluation and modeling processes. Integrated Assessment, 3(1), 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petts, J. (2004). Barriers to participation and deliberation in risk decisions: Evidence from waste management. Journal of Risk Research, 7, 115–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pretty, J. N. (1995). Participatory learning for sustainable agriculture. World Development, 23(8), 1247–1263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renn, O. (2005). Partizipation – ein schillernder Begriff. Reaktion auf drei Beiträge zum Thema ‘Partizipation’. GAIA, 14(3), 227–228.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe, G., & Frewer, L. L. (2005). A typology of public engagement mechanisms. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 30(2), 251–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholz, R. W. (2000). Mutual learning as a basic principle for transdisciplinarity. In R. W. Scholz, R. Häberli, A. Bill, & M. Welti (Eds.), Transdisciplinarity. Joint problem-solving among science, technology and society. Proceedings of the international transdisciplinarity 2000 conference, Zurich. Workbook II: Mutual learning sessions (pp. 13–17). Zürich: Haffmans Sachbuch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholz, R. W. (2011). Environmental literacy in science and society: From knowledge to decision. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholz, R. W., Lang, D., Walter, A. I., Wiek, A., & Stauffacher, M. (2006). Transdisciplinary case studies as a means of sustainability learning: Historical framework and theory. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 7(3), 226–251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholz, R. W., Mieg, H. A., & Oswald, J. E. (2000). Transdisciplinarity in groundwater management: Towards mutual learning of science and society. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 123, 477–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholz, R. W., & Stauffacher, M. (2002). Unsere Landschaft ist unser Kapital: Überblick zur ETH-UNS Fallstudie ‘Landschaftsnutzung für die Zukunft: der Fall Appenzell Ausserrhoden’. In R. W. Scholz, M. Stauffacher, S. Bösch, & A. Wiek (Eds.), Landschaftsnutzung für die Zukunft: der Fall Appenzell Ausserrhoden. ETH-UNS Fallstudie 2001 (pp. 13–47). Zürich: Rüegger und Pabst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholz, R. W., & Stauffacher, M. (2007). Managing transition in clusters: Area development negotiations as a tool for sustaining traditional industries in a Swiss prealpine region. Environment and Planning A, 39(10), 2518–2539.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholz, R. W., Stauffacher, M., Bösch, S., Krütli, P., & Wiek, A. (2007). Entscheidungsprozesse Wellenberg – Lagerung radioaktiver Abfälle in der Schweiz. ETH-UNS Fallstudie 2006. Zürich, Chur: Rüegger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholz, R. W., Stauffacher, M., Bösch, S., & Wiek, A. (2002). Landschaftsnutzung für die Zukunft: der Fall Appenzell Ausserrhoden. ETH-UNS Fallstudie 2001. Zürich: Rüegger und Pabst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholz, R. W., & Tietje, O. (2002). Embedded case study methods: Integrating quantitative and qualitative knowledge. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheppard, S. R. J., & Meitner, M. (2005). Using multi-criteria analysis and visualisation for sustainable forest management planning with stakeholder groups. Forest Ecology and Management, 207, 171–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stauffacher, M. (2006). Beyond neocorporatism: New practices of collective decision making. Transdisciplinary case studies as a means for societal learning in sustainable development. Thesis for Doctor of Philosophy. Faculty of Arts, University of Zurich. Available online: http://www.dissertationen.unizh.ch (> Michael Stauffacher)

  • Stauffacher, M., Flüeler, T., Krütli, P., & Scholz, R. W. (2008a). Analytic and dynamic approach to collaborative planning: A transdisciplinary case study on sustainable landscape development in a Swiss pre-alpine region. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 21(6), 409–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stauffacher, M., Krütli, P., & Scholz, R. W. (2008b). Gesellschaft und radioaktive Abfälle: Ergebnisse einer schweizweiten Befragung. Zürich, Chur: Rüegger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stauffacher, M., Walter, A., Lang, D., Wiek, A., & Scholz, R. W. (2006). Learning to research environmental problems from a functional socio-cultural constructivism perspective: The transdisciplinary case study approach. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 7(3), 252–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, P. C., & Fineberg, V. (Eds.). (1996). Understanding risk: Informing decisions in a democratic society. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stirling, A. (2008). ‘Opening up’ and ‘closing down’ – Power, participation, and pluralism in the social appraisal of technology. Science Technology, & Human Values, 33, 262–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stringer, L. C., Dougill, A. J., Fraser, E., Hubacek, K., Prell, C., & Reed, M. S. (2006). Unpacking ‘participation’ in the adaptive management of social-ecological systems: A critical review. Ecology and Society, 11(2), 39. http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/articles/1896.html

    Google Scholar 

  • Trutnevyte, E., Stauffacher, M., & Scholz, R. W. (2011). Supporting energy initiatives in small communities by linking visions with energy scenarios and multi-criteria assessment. Energy Policy, 39, 7884–7895.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Asselt, M. B. A., & Rijkens-Klomp, N. (2002). A look in the mirror: Reflection on participation in Integrated Assessment from a methodological perspective. Global Environmental Change, 12, 167–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, G., & Devine-Wright, P. (2008). Community renewable energy: What should it mean? Energy Policy, 36, 497–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, G., Hunter, S., Devine-Wright, P., Evans, B., Hunter, S., & Fay, H. (2007). Harnessing community energies: Explaining and evaluating community-based localism in renewable energy policy in the UK. Global Environmental Politics, 7, 64–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webler, T. (1999). The craft and theory of public participation: A dialectical process. Journal of Risk Research, 2(1), 55–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiek, A., Scholz, R. W., Deér, S., Liechtenhan, W., & Tietje, O. (2002). Rahmenszenarien für die Entwicklung der Landschaftsnutzung im Kanton Appenzell Ausserrhoden – Kurzfassung. In R. W. Scholz, M. Stauffacher, S. Bösch, & A. Wiek (Eds.), Landschaftsnutzung für die Zukunft: der Fall Appenzell Ausserrhoden. ETH-UNS Fallstudie 2001 (pp. 249–268). Zürich: Rüegger und Pabst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiek, A. H., Binder, C. R., & Scholz, R. W. (2006). Functions of scenarios in transition processes. Futures, 38(7), 740–766.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, B. (1996). May the sheep safely graze? A reflexive view of the expert-lay knowledge divide. In S. Lash, B. Szerszynski, & B. Wynne (Eds.), Risk, environment and modernity (pp. 44–83). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Environmental Decisions (IED), ETH Zurich, Natural and Social Science Interface (NSSI), CH-8092, Zurich, Switzerland

    Michael Stauffacher

  2. Institute for Environmental Decisions (IED), ETH Zurich, Natural and Social Science Interface (NSSI), CH-8092, Zurich, Switzerland

    Pius Krütli

  3. Institute for Environmental Decisions (IED), ETH Zurich, 8092, Zurich, Switzerland

    Thomas Flüeler

  4. Institute for Environmental Decisions (IED), ETH Zurich, Natural and Social Science Interface (NSSI), CH-8092, Zurich, Switzerland

    Roland W. Scholz

Authors
  1. Michael Stauffacher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pius Krütli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas Flüeler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Roland W. Scholz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Stauffacher .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. ETH Zurich, Energy Science Center (ESC), Zürichbergstrasse 18, Zurich, 8032, Switzerland

    Daniel Spreng

  2. ETH Zurich, Institute for Environmental Decisions (I, Universitätsstrasse 22, Zurich, 8092, Switzerland

    Thomas Flüeler

  3. ETH Zurich, Centre for Energy Policy and Economics (, Zürichbergstrasse 18, Zurich, 8032, Switzerland

    David L. Goldblatt

  4. minsch sustainability affairs, Wehntalerstrasse 3, Zurich, 8057, Switzerland

    Jürg Minsch

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Stauffacher, M., Krütli, P., Flüeler, T., Scholz, R.W. (2012). Learning from the Transdisciplinary Case Study Approach: A Functional-Dynamic Approach to Collaboration Among Diverse Actors in Applied Energy Settings. In: Spreng, D., Flüeler, T., Goldblatt, D., Minsch, J. (eds) Tackling Long-Term Global Energy Problems. Environment & Policy, vol 52. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2333-7_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation