Transdisciplinary weed research: new leverage on challenging weed problems?

N. Jordan, M. Schut, S. Graham, J. N. Barney, D. Z. Childs, S. Christensen, R. D. Cousens, A. S. Davis, H. Eizenberg, D. E. Ervin, C. Fernandez-Quintanilla, L. J. Harrison, M. A. Harsch, S. Heijting, M. Liebman, D. Loddo, S. B. Mirsky, M. Riemens, P. Neve, D. A. PeltzerM. Renton, M. Williams, J. Recasens, M. Sønderskov

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

Transdisciplinary weed research (TWR) is a promising path to more effective management of challenging weed problems. We define TWR as an integrated process of inquiry and action that addresses complex weed problems in the context of broader efforts to improve economic, environmental and social aspects of ecosystem sustainability. TWR seeks to integrate scholarly and practical knowledge across many stakeholder groups (e.g. scientists, private sector, farmers and extension officers) and levels (e.g. local, regional and landscape). Furthermore, TWR features democratic and iterative processes of decision-making and collective action that aims to align the interests, viewpoints and agendas of a wide range of stakeholders. The fundamental rationale for TWR is that many challenging weed problems (e.g. herbicide resistance or extensive plant invasions in natural areas) are better addressed systemically, as a part of broad-based efforts to advance ecosystem sustainability, rather than as isolated problems. Addressing challenging weed problems systemically can offer important new leverage on such problems, by creating new opportunities to manage their root causes and by improving complementarity between weed management and other activities. While promising, this approach is complicated by the multidimensional, multilevel, diversely defined and unpredictable nature of ecosystem sustainability. In practice, TWR can be undertaken as a cyclic process of (i) initial problem formulation, (ii) ‘broadening’ of the problem formulation and recruitment of stakeholder participants, (iii) deliberation, negotiation and design of an action agenda for systemic change, (iv) implementation action, (v) monitoring and assessment of outcomes and (vi) reformulation of the problem situation and renegotiation of further actions. Notably, ‘purposive’ disciplines (design, humanities and arts) have central, critical and recurrent roles in this process, as do integrative analyses of relevant multidimensional and multilevel factors, via multiple natural and social science disciplines. We exemplify this process in prospect and retrospect. Importantly TWR is not a replacement for current weed research; rather, the intent is to powerfully leverage current efforts.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)345-358
Number of pages14
JournalWeed Research
Volume56
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

weed
weeds
stakeholders
stakeholder
sustainability
weed control
ecosystems
ecosystem
collective action
environmental economics
social sciences
herbicide resistance
private sector
arts
complementarity
socioeconomics
decision making
art
herbicide
farmers

Keywords

  • agroecosystem processes
  • crop protection
  • ecosystem services
  • interdisciplinary research
  • multistakeholder processes
  • systems research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
  • Agronomy and Crop Science
  • Plant Science

Cite this

Jordan, N., Schut, M., Graham, S., Barney, J. N., Childs, D. Z., Christensen, S., ... Sønderskov, M. (2016). Transdisciplinary weed research: new leverage on challenging weed problems? Weed Research, 56(5), 345-358. https://doi.org/10.1111/wre.12219

Transdisciplinary weed research : new leverage on challenging weed problems? / Jordan, N.; Schut, M.; Graham, S.; Barney, J. N.; Childs, D. Z.; Christensen, S.; Cousens, R. D.; Davis, A. S.; Eizenberg, H.; Ervin, D. E.; Fernandez-Quintanilla, C.; Harrison, L. J.; Harsch, M. A.; Heijting, S.; Liebman, M.; Loddo, D.; Mirsky, S. B.; Riemens, M.; Neve, P.; Peltzer, D. A.; Renton, M.; Williams, M.; Recasens, J.; Sønderskov, M.

In: Weed Research, Vol. 56, No. 5, 01.01.2016, p. 345-358.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Jordan, N, Schut, M, Graham, S, Barney, JN, Childs, DZ, Christensen, S, Cousens, RD, Davis, AS, Eizenberg, H, Ervin, DE, Fernandez-Quintanilla, C, Harrison, LJ, Harsch, MA, Heijting, S, Liebman, M, Loddo, D, Mirsky, SB, Riemens, M, Neve, P, Peltzer, DA, Renton, M, Williams, M, Recasens, J & Sønderskov, M 2016, 'Transdisciplinary weed research: new leverage on challenging weed problems?', Weed Research, vol. 56, no. 5, pp. 345-358. https://doi.org/10.1111/wre.12219
Jordan N, Schut M, Graham S, Barney JN, Childs DZ, Christensen S et al. Transdisciplinary weed research: new leverage on challenging weed problems? Weed Research. 2016 Jan 1;56(5):345-358. https://doi.org/10.1111/wre.12219
Jordan, N. ; Schut, M. ; Graham, S. ; Barney, J. N. ; Childs, D. Z. ; Christensen, S. ; Cousens, R. D. ; Davis, A. S. ; Eizenberg, H. ; Ervin, D. E. ; Fernandez-Quintanilla, C. ; Harrison, L. J. ; Harsch, M. A. ; Heijting, S. ; Liebman, M. ; Loddo, D. ; Mirsky, S. B. ; Riemens, M. ; Neve, P. ; Peltzer, D. A. ; Renton, M. ; Williams, M. ; Recasens, J. ; Sønderskov, M. / Transdisciplinary weed research : new leverage on challenging weed problems?. In: Weed Research. 2016 ; Vol. 56, No. 5. pp. 345-358.
@article{f1b8d42c2c2b455ca7eddae54f5ed0f7,
title = "Transdisciplinary weed research: new leverage on challenging weed problems?",
abstract = "Transdisciplinary weed research (TWR) is a promising path to more effective management of challenging weed problems. We define TWR as an integrated process of inquiry and action that addresses complex weed problems in the context of broader efforts to improve economic, environmental and social aspects of ecosystem sustainability. TWR seeks to integrate scholarly and practical knowledge across many stakeholder groups (e.g. scientists, private sector, farmers and extension officers) and levels (e.g. local, regional and landscape). Furthermore, TWR features democratic and iterative processes of decision-making and collective action that aims to align the interests, viewpoints and agendas of a wide range of stakeholders. The fundamental rationale for TWR is that many challenging weed problems (e.g. herbicide resistance or extensive plant invasions in natural areas) are better addressed systemically, as a part of broad-based efforts to advance ecosystem sustainability, rather than as isolated problems. Addressing challenging weed problems systemically can offer important new leverage on such problems, by creating new opportunities to manage their root causes and by improving complementarity between weed management and other activities. While promising, this approach is complicated by the multidimensional, multilevel, diversely defined and unpredictable nature of ecosystem sustainability. In practice, TWR can be undertaken as a cyclic process of (i) initial problem formulation, (ii) ‘broadening’ of the problem formulation and recruitment of stakeholder participants, (iii) deliberation, negotiation and design of an action agenda for systemic change, (iv) implementation action, (v) monitoring and assessment of outcomes and (vi) reformulation of the problem situation and renegotiation of further actions. Notably, ‘purposive’ disciplines (design, humanities and arts) have central, critical and recurrent roles in this process, as do integrative analyses of relevant multidimensional and multilevel factors, via multiple natural and social science disciplines. We exemplify this process in prospect and retrospect. Importantly TWR is not a replacement for current weed research; rather, the intent is to powerfully leverage current efforts.",
keywords = "agroecosystem processes, crop protection, ecosystem services, interdisciplinary research, multistakeholder processes, systems research",
author = "N. Jordan and M. Schut and S. Graham and Barney, {J. N.} and Childs, {D. Z.} and S. Christensen and Cousens, {R. D.} and Davis, {A. S.} and H. Eizenberg and Ervin, {D. E.} and C. Fernandez-Quintanilla and Harrison, {L. J.} and Harsch, {M. A.} and S. Heijting and M. Liebman and D. Loddo and Mirsky, {S. B.} and M. Riemens and P. Neve and Peltzer, {D. A.} and M. Renton and M. Williams and J. Recasens and M. S{\o}nderskov",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/wre.12219",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "56",
pages = "345--358",
journal = "Weed Research",
issn = "0043-1737",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Transdisciplinary weed research

T2 - new leverage on challenging weed problems?

AU - Jordan, N.

AU - Schut, M.

AU - Graham, S.

AU - Barney, J. N.

AU - Childs, D. Z.

AU - Christensen, S.

AU - Cousens, R. D.

AU - Davis, A. S.

AU - Eizenberg, H.

AU - Ervin, D. E.

AU - Fernandez-Quintanilla, C.

AU - Harrison, L. J.

AU - Harsch, M. A.

AU - Heijting, S.

AU - Liebman, M.

AU - Loddo, D.

AU - Mirsky, S. B.

AU - Riemens, M.

AU - Neve, P.

AU - Peltzer, D. A.

AU - Renton, M.

AU - Williams, M.

AU - Recasens, J.

AU - Sønderskov, M.

PY - 2016/1/1

Y1 - 2016/1/1

N2 - Transdisciplinary weed research (TWR) is a promising path to more effective management of challenging weed problems. We define TWR as an integrated process of inquiry and action that addresses complex weed problems in the context of broader efforts to improve economic, environmental and social aspects of ecosystem sustainability. TWR seeks to integrate scholarly and practical knowledge across many stakeholder groups (e.g. scientists, private sector, farmers and extension officers) and levels (e.g. local, regional and landscape). Furthermore, TWR features democratic and iterative processes of decision-making and collective action that aims to align the interests, viewpoints and agendas of a wide range of stakeholders. The fundamental rationale for TWR is that many challenging weed problems (e.g. herbicide resistance or extensive plant invasions in natural areas) are better addressed systemically, as a part of broad-based efforts to advance ecosystem sustainability, rather than as isolated problems. Addressing challenging weed problems systemically can offer important new leverage on such problems, by creating new opportunities to manage their root causes and by improving complementarity between weed management and other activities. While promising, this approach is complicated by the multidimensional, multilevel, diversely defined and unpredictable nature of ecosystem sustainability. In practice, TWR can be undertaken as a cyclic process of (i) initial problem formulation, (ii) ‘broadening’ of the problem formulation and recruitment of stakeholder participants, (iii) deliberation, negotiation and design of an action agenda for systemic change, (iv) implementation action, (v) monitoring and assessment of outcomes and (vi) reformulation of the problem situation and renegotiation of further actions. Notably, ‘purposive’ disciplines (design, humanities and arts) have central, critical and recurrent roles in this process, as do integrative analyses of relevant multidimensional and multilevel factors, via multiple natural and social science disciplines. We exemplify this process in prospect and retrospect. Importantly TWR is not a replacement for current weed research; rather, the intent is to powerfully leverage current efforts.

AB - Transdisciplinary weed research (TWR) is a promising path to more effective management of challenging weed problems. We define TWR as an integrated process of inquiry and action that addresses complex weed problems in the context of broader efforts to improve economic, environmental and social aspects of ecosystem sustainability. TWR seeks to integrate scholarly and practical knowledge across many stakeholder groups (e.g. scientists, private sector, farmers and extension officers) and levels (e.g. local, regional and landscape). Furthermore, TWR features democratic and iterative processes of decision-making and collective action that aims to align the interests, viewpoints and agendas of a wide range of stakeholders. The fundamental rationale for TWR is that many challenging weed problems (e.g. herbicide resistance or extensive plant invasions in natural areas) are better addressed systemically, as a part of broad-based efforts to advance ecosystem sustainability, rather than as isolated problems. Addressing challenging weed problems systemically can offer important new leverage on such problems, by creating new opportunities to manage their root causes and by improving complementarity between weed management and other activities. While promising, this approach is complicated by the multidimensional, multilevel, diversely defined and unpredictable nature of ecosystem sustainability. In practice, TWR can be undertaken as a cyclic process of (i) initial problem formulation, (ii) ‘broadening’ of the problem formulation and recruitment of stakeholder participants, (iii) deliberation, negotiation and design of an action agenda for systemic change, (iv) implementation action, (v) monitoring and assessment of outcomes and (vi) reformulation of the problem situation and renegotiation of further actions. Notably, ‘purposive’ disciplines (design, humanities and arts) have central, critical and recurrent roles in this process, as do integrative analyses of relevant multidimensional and multilevel factors, via multiple natural and social science disciplines. We exemplify this process in prospect and retrospect. Importantly TWR is not a replacement for current weed research; rather, the intent is to powerfully leverage current efforts.

KW - agroecosystem processes

KW - crop protection

KW - ecosystem services

KW - interdisciplinary research

KW - multistakeholder processes

KW - systems research

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84991338747&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84991338747&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/wre.12219

DO - 10.1111/wre.12219

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:84991338747

VL - 56

SP - 345

EP - 358

JO - Weed Research

JF - Weed Research

SN - 0043-1737

IS - 5

ER -