I would like to give you an early warning because my introduction will be a lot of stuff about concepts, frameworks, terms and the question of methods that were expected in the field, in the introduction round. That will come up the next days, I think.

So I try to give you a framework where you can then, during the week, attach, ah, now we are here or there. So that would be my intention and hopefully it works. So I decided to follow three questions during the talk that might be interesting for you. So the first part will be transdisciplinarity, what are we talking about.

So giving a kind of feeling what definitions exist in the world. And then the subtitle of my speech is new modes of research. If there is something new, there should be something old or conventional or something like that. And what makes the difference will be the second part.

And in the third part I would like to point out how to conceptualize transdisciplinary research processes. And after each question or each section of my talk, I will have a slide where we can pose questions. But if there is something immediate you need for better understanding, then please raise your hand. So it should be interactive, it should not be a lecture like at the university where I only speak and you think, what is he talking about.

So I am interested in getting your feedback and questions. So let's start with the first question. What are we talking about when we talk about transdisciplinarity? So first of all there is a big debate on disciplinarity, mono, multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity.

And there are many definitions existing and what is important when you talk about transdisciplinarity, you need to be clear about your background and what definitions or terms you have in mind when you talk about. So with this slide I would give you my background.

And I think when we talk about mono-disciplinarity, that is when researchers come together in a project, they have a common problem. And all the researchers are from a single discipline and working together. So they all more or less have a plier, they are quite different but they are pliers at least.

But when we are in a multidisciplinary team, then researchers from different disciplines come together, but they work independently or sequentially together on a common problem. So all the tools are separated, we not only have pliers, we also have a shoe, a hammer, a screwdriver and so on.

But they are quite separated and next to each other. When it comes to interdisciplinarity, then again, researchers from different disciplines come together and address a common problem. Although they have some kind of integration and that should be a toolbox.

So we have a kind of ordering system where all the tools are in, but we still have a specialist for each tool. And when it comes to transdisciplinarity, a kind of the Swiss army knife of science, then researchers from different disciplines work jointly together and first they create a common ground,

a common conceptual framework where they relate to and that goes beyond disciplinary boundaries. So they have a kind of specific framework concept in order to work on a certain problem. And in transdisciplinarity, when we talk about researchers, they are not necessarily coming from the academic system.

Also practitioners or other professional stakeholders can also be researchers within a transdisciplinary research project. So that's my background where I order the different approaches.

And when we are at transdisciplinarity, we see in the literature that there is a growing body of literature. So it begins here in the 1970s and here we have last year 2017. And colleagues from Switzerland asked the Web of Science how often does the term transdisciplinary appear in the topic of publications.

And you see here somewhere in the 90s there is a little take off and then in the 2000s they begin to increase. And what's the reason for? In the beginning we have very conceptual and theoretical work about transdisciplinarity. So in a conference in 1970, Erich Jansch coined the term transdisciplinarity

and he said that this is a set of axioms that is shared by different academic disciplines in order to increase the capability of society for continuous self-renewal.

So this is the idea that the academic system should change in order to support societal development or something like that. And then in the 80s an important writer is Jurg Mittelstrass and he also stays in the academic systems but he points out that transdisciplinarity is a form of research practice.

That means it's the way we are doing research that has freed itself from disciplinary boundaries, defining and solving its problems independent of any disciplinary background. So here is a strong impulse on changing the academic system and how disciplines can work together or create something new.

And then in the 2000s, or not, no, in the 1990s there was a debate about the role of science for societal development

and there were new terms coined like mode 2 research or socially robust knowledge, I will come back to this term later, or post-normal science, sustainability science has appeared where a strong impulse was that science should help problem solving

and not only help to solve problems but also to integrate societal actors into the research process, into the process of knowledge generation. And then in the 2000s there started systematic funding of transdisciplinary research,

at least for Europe's important starting point was Austria, Switzerland and Germany but also other countries have their funding systems but also in Australia and in the US. And because of this systematic funding we have an increase in publication because not only conceptual works were published like here in the early years

but now we have a growing body of literature on empirical findings. So there is a kind of enrichment in the scientific debate that is visible in the web of science. And with this increasing literature also we have an increasing number and a pattern of transdisciplinarity definitions.

So I start again with the rather old one from Erich Jansch, we have heard about it and he put in the middle that science serves a human purpose and within the science system there is a multilevel and goal system

that means that the purposes, the normative backgrounds, the practical implications and the empirical foundations of research are reordered along the human purpose again. And in 2006 with a growing body of literature on sustainability research

Gertrude Hirsch-Hardon from Switzerland and colleagues defined that transdisciplinarity is used for research that addresses the knowledge demands for societal problem solving regarding complex societal concerns. So they point out that transdisciplinarity is about understanding complex problems and there is an impulse to change practices within the society.

And at least the third definition that comes from our institute Thomas Jahn and colleagues point as a definition that transdisciplinarity is a critical and self-reflexive research approach. So there is a kind of shadowing, what does it mean, used for research.

There is a little bit detailed here, so it is critical and reflexive and it relates societal with scientific problems so it is not only about taking up and solving societal problems but it is also about combining both views and define a kind of new problem

and that is the point where I will come back later. And in this relation of societal and scientific problems the aim is to produce new knowledge by integrating scientific and extra scientific or non-scientific societal insights. So there is a process oriented approach behind

and the methods of integration are at the core. And when we have a bunch of definitions there are at least some common grounds where most transdisciplinarity experts would say yes more or less, that is a core point, a common ground for our work.

So the first is that it is problem oriented. We heard about, it starts with the real world societal problem and relates scientific to societal problems. And by doing that transdisciplinarity also reflects the relationships between problems the normative orientations in the background

and the proposed options for solutions. And the second point is that it is integrative. So we heard about building bridges between scientific cultures from natural science to social sciences, engineering, humanities and everything in between. And it also bridges and creates new relations between science and society.

And the reason for doing that is to enable mutual learning between different group of actors that won't come together without any transdisciplinary project and to allow co-production of knowledge. And the third main point is that transdisciplinarity regularly is context specific

because we have the problem orientation. So if we take up a real world problem then we must be context specific. That means we have a specific case, for example mobility patterns in New York or the question how to do sustainable transportation in New York

that might be very different from the question having sustainable transportation in New Delhi for example. So each case is standing for its own. It is embedded in a specific societal situation and the discourses at the ground are very different. But although being context specific there is the idea of learning from cases for other cases

and in this way having a kind of societal level where it is about shaping transformation in order when we find solutions for sustainable transportation and mobility

then it's about societal progress but also scientific insights should gain scientific progress. So the answer for the first question what are we talking about would for me be over the last decades we had several understandings of transdisciplinarity

and I forgot this point earlier. The common background why those several understandings evolved was very common because they all have a critical view on the scientific, the academic system itself and at the same time have a critical view on the societal challenges that are ahead of us.

So there's a kind of feeling uncomfortable with the things how they are going on and trying to find a new way, another way to approach them. At least integration is the main issue of transdisciplinary research.

And now the question to you, are there any further questions? Not really. Yes. So for example when we are in a context so the meaning of sustainability for example

would be very different. What is social sustainability? Is it about livelihoods? Maybe very different for developed or developing countries for example. And you have to be clear about it, not only talking about it is sustainable but you have to differ which context are you speaking about.

Then I might move to my second question. What makes the difference? I spoke a lot about disciplinary and transdisciplinary research but why should we do it?

And the idea of problem solving or problem orientation is one of the main background here because the general idea was to have a system where knowledge is generated, the science system.

And there's also a sphere, the political, practical, societal field where knowledge should be implemented. And in the beginning there was the idea in order to support society with coping with the challenges we need a knowledge transfer so knowledge is generated, put into a nice brochure

sent to decision makers in society and then the brochure lies there on the table and nobody knows what will happen and nothing will change. That is often the case.

And then the idea grows that there should be more feedback. So the knowledge transfer moves more to a mutual learning process where ideas or concepts are sent and then we talk about it and then questions arise, the scientific system may work on it and then some practitioners have the idea, no we have to move it a little bit further

and then it comes back to the science system and so everybody is learning and stepping forward. And then we have new knowledge on both sides but is that the solution? Is that the step where we would like to come to a knowledge generation for coping with problems?

I would say no, it's not only about sending boxes around or papers and ideas and so on but it's about moving the spheres a little bit. So science moves a bit, politics moves a bit and then there is a kind of overlap between those spheres and there we have the chance to implement

integrative methods where we really come to co-production and joint knowledge production and then something like the socially robust knowledge. That means that the scientific knowledge that is produced comes together with professional experiences and then there is something new that is approved for the context specific situation

that is suitable to the problem context we have at hand. So there is a new way where we try to integrate both knowledge systems so to say. And I really like Helga Novotny's quote here, so we have to rethink the place of people

in the knowledge produced by the science. So it's not only about producing abstract knowledge and providing it somewhere but it's about putting people, their knowledge, their interests, their aims into the research processes. And in doing so we have to look a little bit deeper

into what are we talking about when we talk about knowledge. So here is a little excursus about sources and types of knowledge and we already heard about different sources so we have scientific knowledge that comes from the disciplines from the academic system in a narrow sense but we also have professional knowledge.

So the people working at institutions they also might have an academic background because they have a PhD or at least have studied but they also have experiences from doing water management or from doing mobility concepts and goods and services.

So that's also a kind of knowledge and then we have tested knowledge that's the kind of knowledge that is not written down but there we know, there's a know how. So intuitively you know what to do when you try to solve a problem but you don't have a handbook so how can I do it? But that's coming from a huge body

of experiences. And then we have subjective experiences, I mentioned it here, so it's a kind of everyday knowledge. By doing, I don't know, by doing a kind of water treatment in my garden I learned that this and that will happen. And all those sources and I have the etc because there's much more like the indigenous knowledge

that doesn't fit in those boxes because then I haven't mentioned it here but there are many sources we have and then the task of transdisciplinarity is to give them our order. So how to see and learn and organize

what is within all those sources of knowledge. And there's a suggestion to do that in the way of first of all talking about systems knowledge. There we pick everything from those columns that is about the development, how, why a problem occurred, what are the reasons for, how it might develop in future and if you ask

different groups that are concerned to a problem they might have very different answers to what's the reason for a problem. And then you have the chance within the body of system knowledge to couple those different interpretations. So for example within a model. That's a conceptual model on social ecological systems

where different aspects can come together. Another kind of knowledge is and here we are again concerned with the normative backgrounds, it's orientation knowledge. That's the question of where would we like to aim at. So for example

the sustainable development goals on a global level are a social accepted definition of where we would like to head at. So there are the reasons for the need of change and it's also encompasses the desired goals or better practices that should be

in future in place. We now have why the problem is here and how does it look like and where would you like to go to and now we need a third kind of knowledge, it's transformation knowledge. So that's the knowledge that gives me hints, how do I come from the current situation to a future state.

There's all the stuff about technical, social, legal, cultural and other means of acting that aim at changing existing practices or introducing new ones. And that's a way where we can have a kind of highlight what are we talking about when we

speak yet we are generating new knowledge with transdisciplinary research for example. So what makes the difference? For me it's transdisciplinary starts where complex problems occur, that means not every problem must be solved within

transdisciplinary effort but when neither a single discipline nor a single actor in the society is able to cope with this problem then transdisciplinarity might be a good idea to approach it. And in doing so we have to recognize that there are different knowledge systems and we have to acknowledge that

there's not a clear hierarchy so the scientific knowledge is not better than the professional experiences or the everyday knowledge but we have to order it and to agree on that there are different types of knowledge. And joint efforts in knowledge production may facilitate the robust knowledge that is needed for

the future. Yes, it very much depends

on where you start with a project. It might be the case that there's a feeling of something is going wrong but you don't know why. Then you have the emphasis on the system knowledge. And perhaps a first project may end here and then we see ah now we know what's going on and why there is a

problem and we have a common understanding across different actors. And it also may be that orientation knowledge is missing so then you might begin with orientation knowledge and then afterwards try to understand why we have a problem and how could we come there. The only

thing where I see a kind of preconditions, if I talk about transformation then I need a kind of orientation where to go with. I have a question. I would like to have some more specification on those definitions.

Do you put transformation knowledge and transformative knowledge together here? That's just because it's for me it's a really important difference. Maybe we're coming to that and also orientation knowledge is target knowledge for you included or could we differentiate that maybe later? I'm just saying I'm coming

from sociology or science so it's really important for me. Yes. This was a try to give a rough overview and you're very right. Like I said for transdisciplinarity there's also a pattern of definitions how to organize different bodies of knowledge. And I would say orientation knowledge and target knowledge

are very similar. So I put it together here. But the question of transformation and transformative knowledge there we could and should distinguish. I tried to skip it for the introduction part where I see that the transformation knowledge

is more about as it is defined here as the means and the transformative knowledge is a little bit broader for me in the first place. Are there any further questions? Not so far?

Okay. Because then I would like to come to my third question. How to conceptualize transdisciplinary research processes?

And you already have here the outline of what comes now at this banner because I would like to introduce you to a model that was developed at the Institute for Social Ecological Research for organizing transdisciplinary research processes and for understanding the different challenges that we have

at hand. And as it is a huge block I would like to break it down. So we have a kind of first phase when we start. I said transdisciplinarity is problem oriented so we have the first step of project constitution or problem framing

where we should agree among different actors. Where would we like to go? What is the problem that we could work on and where should it lead to? And then there is a second phase. You can call it the project execution. So where the new knowledge is produced in terms of co-production and the knowledge

should be connectable to the problems we have, to the reality and the frameworks the actors, the different actors have and it should provide at least a kind of solution. And in the third phase and that's different to I would say traditional disciplinary research

it's about the transdisciplinary reintegration and bringing the results to fruition. And I would like to go to all of those three phases in a rough overview because you will meet them again during the program for the next week. So in the first phase we talk about the common research project. What is the problem

at hand? And I said we start always in transdisciplinarity with a kind of real world problem. So it might be, I don't know, a conflict between agriculture and conservation in a certain place and the people there realize we can't step further, we can't find a solution, we have too many contested

values, we don't know where to head on, how to come there and we have so many institutions that are involved in agriculture and conservation and they don't come together and they approach the science. And then the scientist says yes, agriculture and conservation

issues that are important for us, we are very interested in the causes and effects of changes in species distributions for example. So two very different views. And why they look at the causes or consequences of species distribution is because there is contested knowledge about the causes and the effects, we do not

know how the biological system exactly works, we have disciplinary specifications and so we can't find an answer to our questions. Although those two groups come together and then they have

to talk about what is our common research project, what is the problem framing, how can we collaborate and one example that might be is that they then agree that for the societal actors as the scientists, for example drivers and processes of ecosystem service changes

maybe changes in ecosystem services, maybe a way where both problems and questions relate to and then they can work together. Though it's not only about consultation from science to society but it's a kind of third thing that will be established in the transdisciplinary research process.

And then how to find this, how to find this kind of third kind of question, we can differ at least four steps. So we have a kind of first idea, what will we work on and then we identify whom do we need in the research

process. So what expertise do we need and who should contribute to what and then we can describe the societal problem better and also find research questions and in every step there might be a feedback loop because we learnt there is a research question so we don't have the expertise

in our team so we need a new team member and perhaps then the process has at least to be re-adapted and the final goal is to have common research questions where everyone can live with and have the feeling that yes it contributes to my question when we work on those

research questions. And then finally we have a project design and an integration strategy where I will come back in the second phase where it is about knowledge production. And when I try to produce new knowledge within a project context then I need these project

design and integration strategy. So the project design here is very simple. We have four sub-projects and a fifth one that is not lasting so long and we also have a coordination of all those sub-projects and it might be that

the project is a sub-project that is not taking so long place but here it contributes to another one or we have different kinds of collaboration between different sub-projects and that's not very different to a very disciplinary perhaps interdisciplinary project and what is important

is to build bridges between those projects which all follow their own research question at the forehand but we also need to build relations between those projects. So in the first phase it may be that we need to agree on what is our conceptual framework. So in the example it was ecosystem services

and kind of perspective where everyone can relate to and in the beginning of the project we need to be sure about do we speak about the same or at least we need to know where are our differences and then we can work a time separately and then we need to reintegrate

the findings. So one team that is talking about I don't know insect decline needs to know something from the other team about the resource management practices in agriculture and there we can build relations and bridges and so

the idea is that a coherent body of knowledge will evolve during the time of a transdisciplinary project. So it's not only about working in boxes and separately and then in the end putting all things together but

have in the duration of the project times where we talk about integration and as I said integration is one of the main tasks in transdisciplinarity. I would like to highlight what the challenges are here in these steps. First of all it's about knowledge so it's a cognitive and epistemic dimension

and in easy words we can say it's a linkage of different knowledge bases. So we need methods where we can relate I don't know technical data empirical findings from natural sciences and the qualitative data from social sciences for example where we can link those knowledge bases.

And the second challenge is because it's not only about knowledge we also need a kind of social integration where we form the ability for collaboration so we need common grounds and the organizational structure that we can come together and discuss together.

It's not only about the abstract abstracting of knowledge it's also we need places where different interests activities can come together. And when we meet together we also need to be very careful need to be very careful about communication because often in

transdisciplinary settings actors from science different disciplines and from the practical part come together and they all have different languages different technical terms different ideas and mindsets and it's not often so easy to understand if there's a kind

of it sounds like a misunderstanding but it's more the reason is more about not the willingness to understand but the ability because the frameworks are so different so we have to build a common discursive practice and that's the main challenge for the second phase

I would say but it's also important to have those integration challenges in mind when we try to find in the first phase when we try to find our common research project. And in the third phase so we have a joint problem we have produced new knowledge everything was fine and then often

projects and here because then we have our results they are published in very nice journals with high impact and the question is who will read it and who will apply this knowledge and so we have a third phase in transdisciplinary research that we call transdisciplinary integration and that is about

the assessment of the new knowledge that we have now at hand and related to the initial problems in society and also to the problems in the scientific sphere and

we also sometimes need to produce new products in order that they reach their target audience so for the science part it's very easy we can have the publications we have talks in conferences and so on and there we can talk about what we have learned in science and then there's a discourse where those results might fit in

for the societal part it might be a little bit harder especially for scientists because we need actor and sector specific strategies so in the example we can't have one report or outcome that is connectable to the agrarian people as well as to the conservation people for example

they have different aims and targets within their work and so they need specific strategies in order to find problem solutions within their sphere and we need space and institutions for the deliberation for example between those two communities and for the reflection so that we can have a societal discourse

about what might be new regulations or what targets could be set in order to change everyday habits or institutional change or to introduce new technologies or whatever is the context of your project

and if you look here at the banner it looks so nice it's coming from phase one or I can take this as well we have a problem we have new knowledge we have solutions and then the world would turn very nice and if you ask me is this model applicable from a

personal view I would say yes it is because I can understand how a project could look like when I have to design a project I see what I have to do I have some tasks that I have to fulfill in order to write a proposal or to write a management plan or something like that

but then you are in the project reality and then you realize that reality is not so linear like the arrows in the sphere so it might be we produce new knowledge and then we learn oh our problem was wrong we have to reframe it a little bit perhaps or you have some very

direct connection so you produce new knowledge here and it's without producing any strategy or management plan for the practice you have an immediate impulse for the societal discourse and it might be not so good for your project so perhaps you have to change again your project line in order to be connectable to the

discourse or you have a very fast result for the scientific sphere or some scientific discourse may directly address a societal problem and then everything mixes up

in our very nice picture and at least the process of knowledge generation is not as being in sub projects because sometimes you're asking yourself where I am and what are we doing and why are we doing that and so I would say the main challenge for transdisciplinarity is being reflective and allow iteration

so the awareness for changes in the problem field so if the initial problem or the actors change their mind or there are some impulses immediate events that may change your problems you should be aware of you can't go ahead if something changes in the field also the dynamics within the team or the stakeholders

perception you have around your project may change they react on what you are doing and so you should be aware of and then if you are aware and you realize that there is something changing you need to be adaptive so it's not worth to go through a planned through a disciplinary project like in a project plan yes

we said we have those three steps and then we are doing that because you have if something changes you may change your processes or methods or the products you plan to do you intended to have a very fine master plan for solving the conflicts between agriculture and conservation

and then you learn oh no it's not the master plan we need some little pieces we only have some bricks we can produce and then you have to reduce your expectations and to adapt it to the current situation and then again communication is very important for this process because you have to be very clear and transparent about

what changes how do you adapt in the project and at the foremost why do you change something and that you should be able to do this against the background what I mentioned before the different languages the mindsets concepts and aims that all the actors within a project may have in their backpack

and the question is what's here is it applicable and I would say yes because it's also applicable to organize summer school so we have the face of problem framing that's the topic of tomorrow as Diana said and then we have the topic of integration

that might be here through the process of knowledge generation very important the next day and then on Thursday we will meet again for the topic of evaluation where we have a kind of L shape here and on Friday you will speak about communication and that's also the

part here what is a little bit less reflected is the scientific discourse in specifics but as Diana mentioned the tension between disciplinary qualification within the PhD and the transdisciplinary context of a research approach or the problem you will

hand that might be an objective of reflection during the morning sessions for example or in the feedback rounds on Friday so I would say yes it's applicable and what my

most important points are is that the project design should facilitate integration and participation and should allow a kind of journey so coming from problems to options for solutions and the analytical desegregation of the process with those three steps might help to consider reflexive loops because I know where I have to

go back at that I can establish relationships and for the question how to conceptualize transdisciplinary research processes I would say try it because the summer school here brilliant minds should be a training room for that so thank you very much

and I forgot the question if there are any questions. Thank you I was just wondering I mean that model is an ideal type as far as I've understood it

and I'm wondering why the face of prepping and the governance of the project is left out in that model because from my experience usually before phase one you have to get funding for a project and so you need to make a research design or a project design and

often that happens in the sphere of science so that part usually isn't TD and I was wondering how to tackle that and how to make that problem visible in the model and also the problem or challenge of governance of a project. That's true the problem of funding I left out

because it's not very clear where or no there are different points where you can talk about how we can get our project funded there are different practices so to say perhaps it may be through your networking and your ongoing work you are experiencing there's a new research question we should attack and then you try to talk to scientists

and to the societal actors and then there is a kind of condensing of a new research project so then we are here in the question of what would we like to attach and then you go out and search for funding

but it also could be that there is a funding opportunity and they say we require that the problem should be in the field of AB or I don't know natural and social sciences and some municipalities for example on board and then you start very different in

this process and that is the idea to have here a more general view and the project governance is a kind of hidden in the coordination in combination with the integration parts where you

have different roles and responsibilities and where the yes I said the social and organizational part of integration where it comes to the fore and where you can see it

I have a very similar question so thank you for bringing this up Katarina because the first option you described now was that you can conduct this problem

framing stage in the proposal stage so you come out of this process with your research proposal and hand it in while the second version was there is a call and you try to get the setting right and write the proposal and then my question is

from your experience is it fundable for the ministry for example if you say in your proposal that the first stage of our research is to get the research question right and to build the team for this I can mainly speak about the German funding system because I think they are very

different in very different countries and for the research ministry in Germany they learned a lot because there were some projects that had several problems in the starting phase and now they are more and more turning at least in the field

of sustainability research to funding a kind of pre-phase of I don't know three months or up to a year where you have the opportunity to get your question and proposal right but I think that's a very luxury position although other funding

bodies in Germany are not following the scheme and one idea or approach that might be applicable in this point is because sustainability research as well as transdisciplinarity

research is taking place in teams it's very unusual that one institution or at least one person conducts such a project effort it's always about teams different institutions coming together and they all have experiences from the past and we learned that

a series of projects evolve and you might have a very unsmooth project in a constellation in the first hand and then you realize during the execution of the project how that wasn't right and we haven't had the right question

then we should make it deal it in another way and then you have the chance of a second project for example and then those processes of learning take place over a series of projects that's a kind of empirical look at those how to come to a good research question for example

and then we come back to those this is a very ideal and conceptual idea how to go through the steps it's not always talking about reality

I have actually two questions but only one is directed at you so I will start with that when we have a co-production of knowledge between societal and scientific actors I was wondering on the one hand as scientists we may have an own motivation

to address societal problems but do societal actors also have an own motivation to address scientific problems I don't think that is necessarily the intention should not be to address

the scientific problems by societal actors and that's the reason why it's so complicated in the beginning in the first phase how to bring together the societal view and the scientific to a third problem dimension so to say and to this integrated problem there

everyone should have a motivation to contribute to and then its task of then its task here in those ways of the scientists to bring the results that were produced jointly to bring it together to bring it back into the

scientific discourse it's not expected that I don't know something someone from policy or something like that presents here at a conference so it's the big point is to have here a really common joint shared problem

view where everyone can relate to this is your question mainly so there is so the rules are not completely comparable scientists role is a different role than those of stakeholders at least

in the way of communication for example but scientists may play a role in the communication to science to society at least but the other way around I think it's not so not the

prior goal so to say and then thank you then my second question is more directed into the room as you mentioned earlier there are different ideas and definitions of transdisciplinarity and I was wondering if there are other ideas or definitions within these rooms or

within this room and I would like to hear about that if it's the case or if there's some other background that you came to your mind that's maybe even conflicting with this idea that's that now somehow framed this summer school you don't have to answer that now maybe think about it and maybe

was just trying to it's fine but I think this question is important because my first sentence was you have to be clear about the background of your understanding

perhaps you can do it in this discussion Yeah I don't know like future earth is using a bit different definition of transdisciplinarity I think but I'm not sure I like the differences I think the degree is different like where to involve people and to the extreme side from the beginning

or like yeah the other side to integrate them into results or I don't know I have another question Yeah more to the third step because I had this experience in my project and it's more

transdisciplinary or disciplinary but there's always this problem between when the results of the scientific papers are published and when to present the results to the society and most of the times the researchers say yeah I cannot present

the results fully because they're not published yet and I don't know like the people are getting really disappointed like how to solve that and transdisciplinary projects would be interesting to know I assume that Jurg Ullmann might can speak about this in deep I don't know

but at least the start projects you have been involved in would you like to answer or should I give a more conceptual okay but I think that's a kind of problem and the tension we had between disciplinary standards and the expectation of society lectures when they are involved

in certain steps in the agenda of a transdisciplinary project and I think you have to find practical ways in order to show graphs without columns or scales or something like that

and yes it's a practical obstacle and I would like to go back to you talked about challenges

and about the cognitive and epistemic dimension of it and I see that there's we want it or not there's always a hierarchy of knowledge and maybe between disciplines but also between institutional non institutional academic actors and so on

and I was wondering if there's a side of that addresses that or like to see how to avoid it in any kind of way yes that's the main challenge for the methods that are applied for integration so you need to find ways to to balance out those hierarchies for example it might be very

practical so if there's a I don't know ten scientists sitting there and four people from practice perhaps those four practitioners are very standing and experienced and they will talk about what

they have to say but it also can be that they are kind of shy and impressed of the scientific I don't know giant who's sitting there and then doesn't bring in his views and or her views and then this is the thing that should be and must be considered when choosing the right methods for the integration for dialogue processes

where you have kind of for example faces where you only talk to to the societal actors and then to the scientists and then bring it together in a search that for example so where you need to kind of

being sensitive and always have in mind what is the aim of your project what do you need in which function from which persons or institutions I have a question about the communication and implementation phase and

in your experience how have you dealt with the expectations of society when you're working in a transdisciplinary project and the society is really expecting a number or like a really certain number

especially when you are working in environmental issues and how have you dealt with that so I'm not really sure if it's always the number that is expected but that's the thing that some actors are used to so there's coming the 42 and now we have a

solution for all our questions and I think it's because or the way out within those conceptual idea here is not only to have the expectations here when it comes to communications but it begins with the problem so if you are clear and if you

bring in societal views within the problem definition and the project design and then it comes clear what results could we expect then you have a kind of expectation management so

all should know what they can expect from this specific project and it might be at least that expectations are not met in the end but there's the possibility to have a dialogue on it

there don't seem to be pressing issues and I'm not the moderator but I think we can continue with the coffee break good, then I would like to thank you very much for your attention and your questions and I wish you a fruitful summer school