Given the complexity of contemporary societal challenges such as climate change, sustainability transformations and pandemics, the question of how these challenges can be adequately addressed has become increasingly urgent in recent years. In the highly differentiated societies of the 21st century, there is generally no shortage of experts who can make a valuable contribution to addressing these problems. However, what tends to be lacking is a meaningful integration of these individual perspectives across disciplinary boundaries (interdisciplinarity) as well as the integration of knowledge from science, policy and practice (transdisciplinarity) in order to avoid a one-sided understanding of and solution to the aforementioned challenges. For this reason, more and more inter- and transdisciplinary research programs are being set up to address societally relevant issues by bundling several projects under one roof and involving a large number of different disciplines and stakeholders. However, this integration does not take place automatically, but must be proactively encouraged, fostered and led. This dissertation aims to contribute to the theoretical understanding as well as the practical implementation of inter- and transdisciplinary (ITD) integration in research programs and projects by embracing three research foci: (a) the role of conditions under which ITD integration takes place (structures), (b) the role of integrative leadership to advance ITD integration processes (agency), and (c) the role of integrative methods to facilitate ITD integration (means). [...]

Complex global social-ecological challenges of our time such as climate change, biodiversity loss or, more recently, the Covid-19 pandemic can neither be comprehensively understood nor properly addressed by employing a single disciplinary or sectoral perspective. For this reason, more and more large inter- and transdisciplinary (ITD) initiatives are on the rise, intending to open up the silo-like production of knowledge and to advance the integration of different fields of expertise within academia, but also across science, policy and practice. While the need for ITD initiatives in order to both understand and address the complexity of such global socio-ecological challenges has increasingly been acknowledged by research institutions, funders and public authorities, a question remains concerning the extent to which prevailing conditions suffice for conducting ITD research, particularly in terms of whether the envisioned integration of perspectives and actors really happen in practice. This paper embraces a holistic view on ITD integration by presenting both an analytical framework and empirical insights from three ITD initiatives based in Switzerland dealing with sustainable urban water management, (future) extreme events and cross-sectoral climate impacts and climate services in different socio-economic contexts. The framework is based on critical realist reasoning and employs a structure-agency lens by distinguishing conditions of integration at different structural levels, while also acknowledging the power of actors to shape integration and the respective structures. The paper thereby illustrates and helps diagnose the source of challenges experienced in living up to ITD integration endeavors and how these different structural levels are interrelated and impact ITD integration. We conclude by discussing entry points for action aimed at transforming currently unfavorable structures into favorable ones. We thereby intend to provide, in particular, insights for a wide range of actors interested in making sure that ITD initiatives intended to address the global social-ecological challenges of our time can realize their full integration potential in practice.

This paper focuses on the critical role of integrative leadership in inter- and transdisciplinary (ITD) research programs. ITD programs have become one of academia's responses to address contemporary sustainability challenges. Fulfilling the promise of such programs is extraordinarily challenging for all involved participants, but especially for program leaders who have to ensure that the perspectives of the involved program participants become truly integrated and that final and useful synthesis outputs are created. We present six core leadership challenges and respective strategies to address them to advance integration within ITD programs. These challenges include (1) mastering complexity and ambiguity, (2) advancing decision-making with lateral leadership, (3) ensuring responsibility and accountability, (4) setting program boundaries, (5) selecting suitable projects, and (6) dealing with misconceptions. We derived these challenges and respective strategies from both leading and studying in-depth three ITD programs focusing on sustainability issues in Switzerland. With this paper, we intend to promote awareness about the range of leadership challenges in ITD programs and provide actionable knowledge, which can support in particular fellow and future leaders, but also funders and heads of research institutions in their efforts to realize the integrative potential of such programs.

Theory of Change (ToC) has been promoted as a useful tool in sustainability research for visioning, planning, communication, monitoring, evaluation and learning. It involves a mapping of steps towards a desired long-term goal supplemented with continuous reflection on how and why change is expected to happen in a particular context. However, there is limited reported experience with the development and application of ToCs in inter- and transdisciplinary research contexts. While some previous publications have focused on ex-post application, there has been little discussion about the process of developing and using ToCs in strategic planning and monitoring in large inter- and transdisciplinary research programs. This article reports challenges and lessons learned from the experience of developing and using ToCs in the inter- and transdisciplinary research program Wings (Water and sanitation innovations for non-grid solutions). Challenges include (1) managing time constraints, (2) balancing between concrete and abstract discussions, (3) ensuring diversity in group composition, (4) fluctuating between reservations and appreciation, and (5) fulfilling both service and science roles while leading the ToC process. The experience highlights the importance of alternating formal and informal interaction formats throughout the process, ensuring heterogenous group formation, involving early career scientists, being responsive to emergent needs and making the added value of developing and using ToCs explicit and tangible for all participants. Although these lessons are mainly derived from developing ToCs within the interdisciplinary program team, they can support other programs in both their inter- and transdisciplinary research endeavors.