Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11189/9094
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorVan Zyl, Izaken_US
dc.date.accessioned2023-05-29T11:46:19Z-
dc.date.available2023-05-29T11:46:19Z-
dc.date.issued2022-
dc.identifier.citationVan Zyl, I. 2022. Towards a unified concept of transdisciplinary research. The Journal for Transdisciplinary Research in Southern Africa, 18(1): a1279. [https://doi.org/10.4102/ td.v18i1.1279]en_US
dc.identifier.issn2415-2005-
dc.identifier.issn1817-4434-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11189/9094-
dc.description.abstractIn 2005, the Journal for Transdisciplinary Research in Southern Africa (TDSA) was forged on the concept of transdisciplinarity. Being appointed as the editor of this journal in 2022, I am newly confronted and intrigued by the term transdisciplinarity. I found myself asking – and being asked – what it means for scientific research and its purpose for broader (southern African) society. Thinking about the journal more specifically, what kind of submissions and audience should it attract under a transdisciplinary mantle? It is (fortunately) outside the scope of this editorial to review the history of the scholarship of transdisciplinarity. That said, it is both a historical and emerging paradigm in the philosophy of science. Scholars such as Piaget and Mittelstrass pioneered the concept in the 1970s and 1980s. Arguably, however, the roots of transdisciplinary thinking in science can be traced back further to when paradigms for understanding complexity started emerging. There is now a substantive body of transdisciplinary academic work. However, what can we distil as transdisciplinary thinking or paradigm elements? How do these interact with the scientific research endeavour? I would venture a few propositions at the risk of reducing (or ignoring) the wealth of literature on transdisciplinarity. These are my ideological takeaways from attempting to be a transdisciplinary scholar in southern Africa and must be treated with caution. Firstly, in a transdisciplinary paradigm, (traditional) disciplinary boundaries are fluid and not incommensurate. Fluidity goes to ontological, epistemological, methodological and axiological boundaries – an argument I unpacked in Van Zyl. The very notion of ‘boundary’ is not valuable for the transdisciplinary paradigm, much like ‘objectivity’ is not helpful in the constructivist paradigm. This is not to say that disciplinary boundaries are non-existent but instead dynamic and permeable.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherAOSISen_US
dc.relation.ispartofThe Journal for Transdisciplinary Research in Southern Africaen_US
dc.subjectTransdisciplinary researchen_US
dc.subjecteducationen_US
dc.subjectknowledge production in academiaen_US
dc.subjectknowledge requestsen_US
dc.subjectsolving societal problemsen_US
dc.titleTowards a unified concept of transdisciplinary researchen_US
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.4102/ td.v18i1.1279-
dc.typeArticleen_US
Appears in Collections:Edu - Journal Articles (DHET subsidised)
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Towards_a_unified_concept.pdfArticle275.31 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

83
Last Week
1
Last month
7
checked on Aug 12, 2026

Download(s)

39
checked on Aug 12, 2026

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in Digital Knowledge are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.