Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences

Co-production of knowledge between academic and non-academic communities is a prerequisite for research aiming at more sustainable development paths. Sustainability researchers face three challenges in such co-production: (a) addressing power relations; (b) interrelating different perspectives on the issues at stake; and (c) promoting a previously negotiated orientation towards sustainable development. A systematic comparison of four sustainability research projects in Kenya (vulnerability to drought), Switzerland (soil protection), Bolivia and Nepal (conservation vs. development) shows how the researchers intuitively adopted three different roles to face these challenges: the roles of reflective scientist, intermediary, and facilitator of a joint learning process. From this systematized and iterative self-reflection on the roles that a researcher can assume in the indeterminate social space where knowledge is co-produced, we draw conclusions regarding training.

Abstract Despite notable scientific and medical advances, broader political, socioeconomic and behavioural factors continue to undercut the response to the COVID-19 pandemic 1,2 . Here we convened, as part of this Delphi study, a diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 academic, health, non-governmental organization, government and other experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries and territories to recommend specific actions to end this persistent global threat to public health. The panel developed a set of 41 consensus statements and 57 recommendations to governments, health systems, industry and other key stakeholders across six domains: communication; health systems; vaccination; prevention; treatment and care; and inequities. In the wake of nearly three years of fragmented global and national responses, it is instructive to note that three of the highest-ranked recommendations call for the adoption of whole-of-society and whole-of-government approaches 1 , while maintaining proven prevention measures using a vaccines-plus approach 2 that employs a range of public health and financial support measures to complement vaccination. Other recommendations with at least 99% combined agreement advise governments and other stakeholders to improve communication, rebuild public trust and engage communities 3 in the management of pandemic responses. The findings of the study, which have been further endorsed by 184 organizations globally, include points of unanimous agreement, as well as six recommendations with >5% disagreement, that provide health and social policy actions to address inadequacies in the pandemic response and help to bring this public health threat to an end.

Abstract Expertise in research integration and implementation is an essential but often overlooked component of tackling complex societal and environmental problems. We focus on expertise relevant to any complex problem, especially contributory expertise, divided into ‘knowing-that’ and ‘knowing-how.’ We also deal with interactional expertise and the fact that much expertise is tacit. We explore three questions. First, in examining ‘when is expertise in research integration and implementation required?,’ we review tasks essential (a) to developing more comprehensive understandings of complex problems, plus possible ways to address them, and (b) for supporting implementation of those understandings into government policy, community practice, business and social innovation, or other initiatives. Second, in considering ‘where can expertise in research integration and implementation currently be found?,’ we describe three realms: (a) specific approaches, including interdisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity, systems thinking and sustainability science; (b) case-based experience that is independent of these specific approaches; and (c) research examining elements of integration and implementation, specifically considering unknowns and fostering innovation. We highlight examples of expertise in each realm and demonstrate how fragmentation currently precludes clear identification of research integration and implementation expertise. Third, in exploring ‘what is required to strengthen expertise in research integration and implementation?,’ we propose building a knowledge bank. We delve into three key challenges: compiling existing expertise, indexing and organising the expertise to make it widely accessible, and understanding and overcoming the core reasons for the existing fragmentation. A growing knowledge bank of expertise in research integration and implementation on the one hand, and accumulating success in addressing complex societal and environmental problems on the other, will form a virtuous cycle so that each strengthens the other. Building a coalition of researchers and institutions will ensure this expertise and its application are valued and sustained.

Hoffmann, S., C. Pohl, and J. G. Hering. 2017. Methods and procedures of transdisciplinary knowledge integration: empirical insights from four thematic synthesis processes. Ecology and Society 22(1):27. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-08955-220127

Stakeholder interactions are increasingly viewed as an important element of research for sustainable development. But to what extent, how, and for which goals should stakeholders be involved? In this article, we explore what degrees of stakeholder interaction show the most promise in research for sustainable development. For this purpose, we examine 16 research projects from the transdisciplinary research programme NRP 61 on sustainable water management in Switzerland. The results suggest that various degrees of stakeholder interaction can be beneficial depending on each project's intended contribution to sustainability, the form of knowledge desired, how contested the issues are, the level of actor diversity, actors' interests, and existing collaborations between actors. We argue that systematic reflection about these six criteria can enable tailoring stakeholder interaction processes according specific project goals and context conditions.

Abstract Populism typically pits political elites against “the virtuous people.” A distinct variant of populism (“science-related populism”) extends beyond politics, targeting academic elites and suggesting they ignore people’s common sense and will. Individual endorsement of such a worldview (“science-related populist attitudes”) has been conceptualized but not yet measured. Hence, we developed the SciPop Scale, a survey instrument to measure science-related populist attitudes. We tested 17 survey items in a first representative survey and developed an 8-item scale. We then tested German, French, and Italian versions of this scale in a second representative survey, employing confirmatory factor analysis, Item Response Theory, and external validity tests. Findings show that the SciPop Scale is a robust and reliable measure of populist demands toward science.

Societal issues such as poverty, water scarcity, and food insecurity make it more important than ever for science to produce knowledge that is relevant to address serious challenges on the ground. A growing number of research funding programmes emphasize the need for transdisciplinary (TD) coproduction of knowledge as one way of making research part of needed societal transformations. Despite this positive trend, very few studies have focused in particular on how research funding programmes themselves could enhance the implementation of TD research. To address this gap, we explored processes and structures of TD research funding programmes, and created a generic model that explicitly shows the key stages relevant to the enhancement of TD research. Based on a discussion of these key stages with representatives of four TD research funding programmes we coproduced design recommendations that offer guidance for implementation of future programmes.

Abstract Citizen science (CS) can foster transformative impact for science, citizen empowerment and socio-political processes. To unleash this impact, a clearer understanding of its current status and challenges for its development is needed. Using quantitative indicators developed in a collaborative stakeholder process, our study provides a comprehensive overview of the current status of CS in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. Our online survey with 340 responses focused on CS impact through (1) scientific practices, (2) participant learning and empowerment, and (3) socio-political processes. With regard to scientific impact, we found that data quality control is an established component of CS practice, while publication of CS data and results has not yet been achieved by all project coordinators (55%). Key benefits for citizen scientists were the experience of collective impact (“making a difference together with others”) as well as gaining new knowledge. For the citizen scientists’ learning outcomes, different forms of social learning, such as systematic feedback or personal mentoring, were essential. While the majority of respondents attributed an important value to CS for decision-making, only few were confident that CS data were indeed utilized as evidence by decision-makers. Based on these results, we recommend (1) that project coordinators and researchers strengthen scientific impact by fostering data management and publications, (2) that project coordinators and citizen scientists enhance participant impact by promoting social learning opportunities and (3) that project initiators and CS networks foster socio-political impact through early engagement with decision-makers and alignment with ongoing policy processes. In this way, CS can evolve its transformative impact.

It is increasingly expected from environmental research such as landscape research that science directly contributes to the solving of pressing societal problems. However, despite increased efforts to direct research towards societal problems, it is not obvious if science has become more effective in supporting environmental problem-solving. We present in this article a framework that facilitates the analysis and design of problem-orientation in research fields. We then apply the proposed framework to a concrete example of a problem-oriented landscape research field -namely research on biotic invasions. Invasion research addresses the problem that some organisms, that have been introduced by humans to a new geographic area where they were previously not present, spread in the landscape and pose negative impacts.

Given that research on sustainable development usually relates to real-world challenges, it requires researchers to align scientific knowledge production with concrete societal problem situations. To empirically explore how researchers frame scientific contributions when designing and planning projects, we conducted a qualitative study on land use-related projects based on the methodology of grounded theory. We identified major influence factors and various types of research design. Among the factors that influence project framing, scientific considerations were found to be more important than expected. Core characteristics of project framings concerned (a) type of scientific contributions envisaged; (b) real-world sustainability challenges addressed, and (c) researchers' conceptions of how knowledge would reach its addressees. Three different types of project framing were found, suggesting that framing strongly depends on (the researchers' perception of) how well a real-world problem situation is understood scientifically and how strongly are societal actors aware of the problem and act upon it. The spectrum of how researchers planned that knowledge would reach its addressees comprised communicating results to interactive conceptions allowing for mutual learning throughout the research process. The typology reveals a variety of useful and promising project framings for sustainable development research. The typology may serve to reconcile conceptual ideals and expectations with researchers' realities.

BACKGROUND: There has been much discussion about coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the virus that causes it, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in children and adolescents, since the pandemic was recognised in early 2020. Understanding their role in this pandemic is important for the development of appropriate prevention measures. OBJECTIVE: To summarise evidence about three aspects of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 in children and adolescents: (1) severity of SARS-CoV-2 presentation, (2) risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and (3) risk of transmitting SARS-CoV-2.METHODS: We searched PubMed and MedRxiv for studies on SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 in children and adolescents from January 2020 to 21 January 2021. The electronic search was supplemented by papers found in a manual search or suggested by experts up to 29 March 2021. We included case reports, cross-sectional studies, cohort studies, narrative reviews or viewpoints, systematic reviews and modelling studies. We synthesised the information descriptively and attempted to report findings separately for: infants and small children (0-5 years) who are mostly pre-school; school children (6-12 years) broadly covering primary school years; and adolescents (13-17 years). RESULTS: Of 2778 screened articles, we included 63 (20 case reports, 18 cross-sectional studies, 8 cohort studies, 6 narrative reviews or viewpoints, 10 systematic reviews and 1 modelling study). Children (≤12 years of age) and adolescents (13-17 years of age) usually present with mild disease, with few requiring intensive care treatment. A minority of children of all ages (<18 years) remains asymptomatic throughout the course of infection. In serological studies, reported symptoms are similar in children with and without SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. Children and adolescents can acquire and transmit SARS-CoV-2. The risks of acquiring and transmitting SARS-CoV-2 seems to increase with age. There was limited information about SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern. Poor reporting of age groups and contextual factors such as levels of community transmission, school closures and other non-pharmaceutical interventions make synthesis of findings across studies difficult. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical presentation and role of children and adolescents in SARS-CoV-2 susceptibility and transmission needs further investigation, particularly with regard to variants of concern. Large, prospective studies that attempt to minimise biases in design, are analysed appropriately and reported comprehensively should be conducted.

Pohl, C., G. Wuelser, P. Bebi, H. Bugmann, A. Buttler, C. Elkin, A. Grêt-Regamey, C. Hirschi, Q. B. Le, A. Peringer, A. Rigling, R. Seidl, and R. Huber. 2015. How to successfully publish interdisciplinary research: learning from an Ecology and Society Special Feature. Ecology and Society 20(2): 23. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07448-200223

Alpine resources will play a crucial role in the development of the European Alpine region: They are triggering genuine innovations in technology, social and cultural institutions, property ownership, and economic valuation. Natural, social, cultural, and economic resources are crucial assets for sustainable development in Alpine regions. This was reason enough for the International Scientific Committee for Alpine Research (ISCAR), an organization in which the Interacademic Commission for Alpine Studies (ICAS) represents the Swiss Academies, to make Alpine resources the main topic of the 2014 ForumAlpinum. ICAS invited ISCAR to report on the outcomes of the Forum.

The ALLEA report “Sustainable and FAIR Data Sharing in the Humanities” provides key recommendations to make digital data in the humanities “Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable”, in line with the FAIR principles. The document is designed as a practical guide to help scholars, research funders, professionals and policymakers navigate the shift towards a sustainable data sharing culture.

Back in 2008, the Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences published "Integrity in scientific research: principles and procedures". Since then, the scientific environment has changed considerably. In response to these developments, a group of experts with representatives from the Swiss Academies of Arts and Sciences, the Swiss National Science Foundation, swissuniversities and Innosuisse has drawn up a new code of conduct for scientific integrity. The principles of reliability, honesty, respect and accountability form the core of the new code. These values help strengthen a culture of scientific integrity in the long run. One of the chief aims of the code is, to improve scientific integrity in all aspects of research and teaching, in particular in the training and promotion of young scientists. The code takes into account current developments in the areas of open science and social media, in addition to, shedding light on the issue of statutes of limitations. However, both the regulatory and concrete implementation of these standards, remains the responsibility of the respective universities and funding organisations.

Cette contribution vise à s’interroger sur les identités disciplinaires de chercheurs qui pratiquent la recherche interdisciplinaire. Nous tentons de mettre en évidence la nature paradoxale du travail interdisciplinaire au travers des regards que portent des chercheurs sur leur propre identité dans le contexte académique. Cette nature paradoxale correspond à une tension entre, d’une part, des identités disciplinaires relativement stables et institutionnellement reconnues et, d’autre part, des identités interdisciplinaires hybrides qui doivent encore obtenir une forme de reconnaissance. Nous proposons une typologie de différents profils types qui se déroule sur un continuum allant de la disciplinarité à l’indisciplinarité : l’identité disciplinaire ; les identités interdisciplinaires, déclinées en identité thématique, identité hybride, « interdisciplinary native » et « interdisciplinary migrant » ; et enfin l’identité indisciplinée. Notre questionnement s’appuie sur les résultats d’une recherche menée sur les pratiques de recherche interdisciplinaire.

A growing number of inter- and transdisciplinary (ITD) toolkits provide methods, processes, concepts, heuristics, frameworks, and other resources for designing and implementing ITD research. A brief overview of the currently fragmented toolkits landscape is provided, fleshed out through descriptions of four toolkits. Fragmentation means that researchers are unaware of, and do not have access to, the full array of tools that could benefit their investigations. Overcoming fragmentation requires attention to toolkitting, which is the relatively overlooked bundle of practices involved in the creation, use, maintenance, funding, and study of toolkits. In particular, the processes and expertise involved in the creation, maintenance, and study of toolkits are described. Toolkitting as metawork can make resources more accessible, useful, and rigorous, enhancing ITD research. Future toolkitting can be strengthened with attention to key questions that can guide the activities of, respectively, toolkit creators and curators, scholars, and funders. Examining the toolkits landscape through the lens of toolkitting suggests that the development of a comprehensive, ongoing inventory is a first step in overcoming toolkit fragmentation. An inventory could also be the foundation for an even bolder initiative-a federated knowledge bank-that connects and develops the range of existing and future toolkits. The inventory and federated knowledge bank also provide a shared project to bring together the expertise of ITD toolkit creators, curators, users, funders, and scholars to achieve a step-change in enhancing ITD research.

and the United Nations' Global Digital Compact. Integrated strategies that combine fiscal policy, regulation and social policies are critical to ensuring generative AI advances societal health and equity while avoiding harm from excessive job displacement.

This report summarizes the statistical analysis of the findings of a web-based survey conducted by the Digital Methods and Practices Observatory (DiMPO), a working group under VCC2 of the DARIAH research infrastructure (Digital Research Infrastructure for the Arts and Humanities). In order to provide an evidence-based, up-to-date, and meaningful account of the emerging information practices, needs and attitudes of arts and humanities researchers in the evolving European digital scholarly environment, the web survey involved a transnational team of researchers from more than a dozen countries, and addressed digitally-enabled research practices, attitudes and needs in all areas of Europe and across different arts and humanities disciplines and contexts.

In this communication, we present the background and core elements of the 2021 edition of the International Transdisciplinarity Conference . Beginning with a brief history of how the event was initiated and the role played by saguf in supporting its development, we then detail the main features of the conference and its relevance for transdisciplinary sustainability research and education.