128
J. Zscheischler
reflected in the emergence of new disciplines, such as ecological economics, environmental sociology and sustainability science (Costanza 1989; Catton & Dunlap
1978; Komiyama and Takeuchi 2006).
In this context, land use science also gradually developed an integrated socioecological systems perspective over the past two decades. While researchers initially
focused on monitoring and modelling biophysical characteristics and land cover
changes (Verburg et al. 2013), they now seek for a more integrative understanding.
In addition, land use science has become an integral part of global change research
and sustainability science (Braimoh and Osaki 2010; Meyfroidt et al. 2013), in which
the urgency to change actions is often emphasised (Palsson et al. 2013).
This growing awareness of the decisive role played by human activities is especially reflected in the concept of the “Anthropocene”, which considers that human
activities have become a major geological factor (Crutzen 2002). Jahn et al. (2015,
p. 92) regarded the diagnosis of the “Anthropocene” as one of the most fundamental
changes of perspective over the last one hundred years: “Society and nature are so
closely interwoven that they can no longer be independently investigated’.
1
Since land use dynamics are simultaneously affected by biophysical, ecological,
economic and socio-cultural drivers, data and knowledge generated from land cover
analyses are insufficient for our understanding and for providing answers to many
of the urgent questions posed by society. What is also required is knowledge about
the actors involved, and their values, beliefs and motivations for decision-making.
A “radical change in perspective and action” is required, as new research questions
arise and necessitate new ways of thinking and action (Palsson et al. 2013).
This view has resulted in a new relation between knowledge and action (knowledge
for action), and consequently a new role for science. Science is expected to provide not
only more “systems knowledge”, but also knowledge about societal targets and opportunities for transformation. The evolution of the transdisciplinary research (TDR)
approach in land use science can be directly related to these developments.
7.2 The Development of the Concept of TDR
The concept of transdisciplinarity (TD) can still be regarded as a relatively young
one. Although the term “transdisciplinarity” was used by Jantsch (1970, 1972) and
Piaget (1972) in reference books of philosophy of science back in the early 1970s,
it rarely appeared until the 1990s (cf. Völker 2004). TD evolved from the concept of
“interdisciplinarity”, which was further clarified after the organisation and quality of
interdisciplinary research was unable to keep pace with the success generated by the
dissemination and use of the term (ibid.). For this reason, Mittelstraß introduced the
concept of “transdisciplinarity” at the “Bielefelder Symposium” in 1986, although
its definition was almost identical to the term “interdisciplinarity” (e.g. Mittelstrass
1 Translated from the German “Gesellschaft und Natur sind so eng verwoben, dass sie nicht mehr
unabhängig voneinander untersucht werden können,” p. 92.
J. Zscheischler
reflected in the emergence of new disciplines, such as ecological economics, environmental sociology and sustainability science (Costanza 1989; Catton & Dunlap
1978; Komiyama and Takeuchi 2006).
In this context, land use science also gradually developed an integrated socioecological systems perspective over the past two decades. While researchers initially
focused on monitoring and modelling biophysical characteristics and land cover
changes (Verburg et al. 2013), they now seek for a more integrative understanding.
In addition, land use science has become an integral part of global change research
and sustainability science (Braimoh and Osaki 2010; Meyfroidt et al. 2013), in which
the urgency to change actions is often emphasised (Palsson et al. 2013).
This growing awareness of the decisive role played by human activities is especially reflected in the concept of the “Anthropocene”, which considers that human
activities have become a major geological factor (Crutzen 2002). Jahn et al. (2015,
p. 92) regarded the diagnosis of the “Anthropocene” as one of the most fundamental
changes of perspective over the last one hundred years: “Society and nature are so
closely interwoven that they can no longer be independently investigated’.
1
Since land use dynamics are simultaneously affected by biophysical, ecological,
economic and socio-cultural drivers, data and knowledge generated from land cover
analyses are insufficient for our understanding and for providing answers to many
of the urgent questions posed by society. What is also required is knowledge about
the actors involved, and their values, beliefs and motivations for decision-making.
A “radical change in perspective and action” is required, as new research questions
arise and necessitate new ways of thinking and action (Palsson et al. 2013).
This view has resulted in a new relation between knowledge and action (knowledge
for action), and consequently a new role for science. Science is expected to provide not
only more “systems knowledge”, but also knowledge about societal targets and opportunities for transformation. The evolution of the transdisciplinary research (TDR)
approach in land use science can be directly related to these developments.
7.2 The Development of the Concept of TDR
The concept of transdisciplinarity (TD) can still be regarded as a relatively young
one. Although the term “transdisciplinarity” was used by Jantsch (1970, 1972) and
Piaget (1972) in reference books of philosophy of science back in the early 1970s,
it rarely appeared until the 1990s (cf. Völker 2004). TD evolved from the concept of
“interdisciplinarity”, which was further clarified after the organisation and quality of
interdisciplinary research was unable to keep pace with the success generated by the
dissemination and use of the term (ibid.). For this reason, Mittelstraß introduced the
concept of “transdisciplinarity” at the “Bielefelder Symposium” in 1986, although
its definition was almost identical to the term “interdisciplinarity” (e.g. Mittelstrass
1 Translated from the German “Gesellschaft und Natur sind so eng verwoben, dass sie nicht mehr
unabhängig voneinander untersucht werden können,” p. 92.