In this position paper, we use the example of The University of Texas at Austin's Planet Texas 2050 (PT2050) to argue that the Grand Challenge (GC) framework for ambitious research initiatives must create meeting grounds for transdisciplinary integration of science, technology, engineering, mathematics (STEM), arts, and humanities, along with community perspectives. We trace the historical trajectory of GCs, and reframe GC initiatives within the literature of inter- and transdisciplinarity. We present PT2050 as a case study of the infrastructural supports and imaginative process for creating level meeting grounds for transdisciplinarity. We demonstrate the benefits of these meeting grounds through projects, products, and funding generated. We contend that engaging arts, humanities, and community in co-design from the beginning is critical because complex, urgent challenges such as the climate crisis are embedded in human societies and demand solutions based in understanding of social, cultural, and historical contexts as well as STEM applications.
AdgerW. Neil, BarnettJon, BrownKatrina, MarshallNadine, and O'BrienKaren. 2013. “Cultural Dimensions of Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation.” Nature Climate Change3 (2): 112–117.
2.
BarrosVicente R., FieldChristopher B., DokkenDavid Jon, MastrandreaMichael D., MachKatharine J., Eren BilirT., ChatterjeeMonalisa, . 2014. “Climate Change 2014 Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability Part B: Regional Aspects: Working Group II Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.” In Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: Part B: Regional Aspects: Working Group II Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 1–1820. New York: Cambridge University Press.
3.
BarryAndrew, and BornGeorgina. 2013. Interdisciplinarity: Reconfigurations of Social and Natural Sciences, 1–56. London: Routledge.
4.
BarryAndrew, BornGeorgina, and WeszkalnysGisa. 2008. “Logics of Interdisciplinarity.” Economy and Society37 (1): 20–49.
5.
BergmannMatthias, JahnThomas, KnoblochTobias, KrohnWolfgang, and PohlChristian. 2012. Methods for Transdisciplinary Research: a Primer for Practice. Campus Verlag.
6.
BernsteinJay H.2015. “Transdisciplinarity: A Review of Its Origins, Development, and Current Issues.” Journal of Research Practice11 (1): 1–20.
7.
BixlerR. Patrick, LieberknechtKatherine, AtshanSamer, ZutzClare P., RichterSteven M., and Amy BelaireJ.. 2020. “Reframing Urban Governance for Resilience Implementation: The Role of Network Closure and Other Insights from a Network Approach.” Cities103: 102726.
8.
BixlerR. Patrick, LieberknechtKatherine, LeiteFernanda, FelknerJuliana, OdenMichael, RichterSteven M., AtshanSamer, ZilvetiAlvaro, and ThomasRachel. 2019. “An Observatory Framework for Metropolitan Change: Understanding Urban Social–Ecological–Technical Systems in Texas and Beyond.” Sustainability11 (13): 3611.
9.
BlueGwendolyn2016. “Framing Climate Change for Public Deliberation: What Role for Interpretive Social Sciences and Humanities?” Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning18 (1): 67–84.
BromFrans WA.2019. “Institutionalizing Applied Humanities: Enabling a Stronger Role for the Humanities in Interdisciplinary Research for Public Policy.” Palgrave Communications5 (1): 1–8.
12.
BrownHelen, SpickettJeffery, and KatscherianDianne. 2014. “A Health Impact Assessment Framework for Assessing Vulnerability and Adaptation Planning for Climate Change.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health11 (12): 12896–12914.
CastreeNoel, AdamsWilliam M., BarryJohn, BrockingtonDaniel, BüscherBram, CorberaEsteve, DemerittDavid, . 2014. “Changing the Intellectual Climate.” Nature Climate Change4 (9): 763–768.
15.
CostaRosário Couto2019. “The Place of the Humanities in Today's Knowledge Society.” Palgrave Communications5 (1): 1–5.
16.
CushingLara, Morello-FroschRachel, WanderMadeline, and PastorManuel. 2015. “The Haves, the Have-Nots, and the Health of Everyone: The Relationship Between Social Inequality and Environmental Quality.” Annual Review of Public Health36: 193–209.
17.
DahlstromMichael F.2014. “Using Narratives and Storytelling to Communicate Science with Nonexpert Audiences.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences111 (Suppl. 4): 13614–13620.
18.
DastonLorraine, and ParkKatharine. 1998. Wonders and the Order of Nature, 1150-1750. New York: Zone Books.
19.
DawkinsRichard1998. Unweaving the Rainbow: Science, Delusion and the Appetite for Wonder. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
20.
De MelloMarcelo Fejio2008. “Towards an All-Embracing Optimism in the Realm of Being and Doing.” Transdisciplinarity: Theory and Practice85–97.
21.
DorgeloCristin, and KalilTom. 2012. 21st Century Grand Challenges. The White House: President Barack Obama.
22.
Editors. 2017. “How to Avoid Glib Interdisciplinarity.” Nature552: 148.
23.
ElliottAlexander, and CullisJames. 2017. “The Importance of the Humanities to the Climate Change Debate.” In Climate Change and the Humanities: Historical, Philosophical and Interdisciplinary Approaches to the Contemporary Environmental Crisis, edited by ElliottCullis, and DamodaranVinita, 15–42. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
24.
European Research Area Board. 2009. “Preparing Europe for a New Renaissance. A Strategic View of the European Research Area.” First report of the European Research Area Board – 2009.” http://aei.pitt.edu/46044/.
FriendRobert, and MoenchM.. 2013. “What is the Purpose of Urban Climate Resilience? Implications for Addressing Poverty and Vulnerability.” Urban Climate6: 98–113.
27.
FrodemanRobert, 2013. Sustainable Knowledge: A Theory of Interdisciplinarity. London: Springer.
28.
FrodemanRobert, KleinJulie Thompson, and MitchamCarl, eds. 2012. The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
29.
FrodemanRobert, and MitchamCarl. 2007. “New Directions in Interdisciplinarity: Broad, Deep, and Critical.” Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society27 (6): 506–514.
HeiseUrsula K.2017. “Introduction: Planet, Species, Justice—and the Stories we Tell About Them.” In The Routledge Companion to the Environmental Humanities, edited by HeiseJon Christensen, and NiemannMichelle, 17–26. New York: Routledge.
34.
HicksDiana2016. “Grand Challenges in US Science Policy Attempt Policy Innovation.” International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy11 (1-3): 22–42.
35.
Honeybun-ArnoldaElliot, and ObermeisterNoam. 2019. “A Climate for Change: Millennials, Science and the Humanities.” Environmental Communication13 (1): 1–8.
36.
HorowitzCarol R., ShameerKhader, GabriloveJanice, AtrejaAshish, ShepardPeggy, GoytiaCrispin N., SmithGeoffrey W., . 2017. “Accelerators: Sparking Innovation and Transdisciplinary Team Science in Disparities Research.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health14 (3): 225.
37.
HulmeMike2011. “Meet the Humanities.” Nature Climate Change1 (4): 177–179.
38.
HurayPaul G.1987. “A Research and Development Strategy for High Performance Computing.” Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy. https://eric.ed.gov/?id = ED336086.
39.
JesdaleBill M., Morello-FroschRachel, and CushingLara. 2013. “The Racial/Ethnic Distribution of Heat Risk–Related Land Cover in Relation to Residential Segregation.” Environmental Health Perspectives121 (7): 811–817.
40.
JosephJonathan2013. “Resilience as Embedded Neoliberalism: A Governmentality Approach.” Resilience1 (1): 38–52.
41.
KaldeweyDavid2018. “The Grand Challenges Discourse: Transforming Identity Work in Science and Science Policy.” Minerva56 (2): 161–182.
42.
KatsouleasTom, MillerRichard, and YortsosYannis. 2013. “The NAE Grand Challenges Scholars Program.” The Bridge43 (2): 53–56.
43.
KeyworthG. A.1985. “The Challenges and Opportunities of a New ERA in Space: How Will We Respond?” In Lunar Bases and Space Activities of the 21st Century, edited by MendellW. W., 11–15. Houston, TX: Lunar and Planetary Institute.
LahsenMyanna, and TurnhoutEsther. 2021. “How Norms, Needs, and Power in Science Obstruct Transformations Towards Sustainability.” Environmental Research Letters16 (2): 025008.
46.
LapaigeVéronique, and EssiembreHélène. 2010. “Innoversity in Knowledge-for-Action and Adaptation to Climate Change: The First Steps of an ‘Evidence-Based Climatic Health’ Transfrontier Training Program.” Advances in Medical Education and Practice1: 89.
LeMenagerStephanie, and FooteStephanie. 2014. “Editors’ Column.” Resilience: A Journal of the Environmental Humanities1 (1). doi:10.5250/resilience.1.1.00.
50.
LevinEugene1989. “Grand Challenges to Computation Science.” Communications of the ACM32 (12): 1456–1457.
51.
LidskogRolf, StandringAdam, and WhiteJames M.. 2022. “Environmental Expertise for Social Transformation: Roles and Responsibilities for Social Science.” Environmental Sociology8 (3): 255–266.
52.
LieberknechtKatherine2019. “Building and Innovating upon McHarg's Ecological Survey: The Texas Case.” Socio-Ecological Practice Research1 (3): 283–296.
53.
LieberknechtKatherine (forthcoming). “Leading with Local Knowledge: Austin, Texas’ Network of Plans and the Co-Designed Climate Navigators’ Tool and Process.” Journal of Planning Education and Research. Accepted November 14, 2022.
LloretJ., Abós-HerràndizR., AlemanyS., AlluéR., BartraJ., BasagañaM., BerdaletE., . 2020. “The Roses Ocean and Human Health Chair: A New Way to Engage the Public in Oceans and Human Health Challenges.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health17 (14): 5078.
MaasenSabine, and LievenOlivere. 2006. “Transdisciplinarity: A New Mode of Governing Science?” Science Public Policy33: 399–410.
59.
Max-NeefManfred2005. “Foundations of Transdisciplinarity.” Ecological Economics53 (1): 5–16.
60.
MaxwellKate, and BenneworthPaul. 2018. “The Construction of new Scientific Norms for Solving Grand Challenges.” Palgrave Communications4 (1): 1–11.
61.
McGregorS. L.2013. “Transdisciplinarity and Biomimicry.” Transdisciplinary Journal of Engineering & Science4: 57–65.
62.
MooreSteven A., TorradoMarla, and JoslinNicole. 2019. “Knowledge Production for Interdependent Critical Infrastructures: Constructing Context-Rich Relationships Across Ecosociotechnical Boundaries.” Environmental Science & Policy99: 97–104.
63.
MorozovEvgeny2013. To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism. New York: PublicAffairs.
64.
National Research Network Review Committee and Lawrence Kleinrock. 1988. Toward a National Research Network. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
65.
NeimanisAstrida, ÅsbergCecilia, and HedrénJohan. 2015. “Four Problems, Four Directions for Environmental Humanities: Toward Critical Posthumanities for the Anthropocene.” Ethics & the Environment20 (1): 67–97.
Office of the Vice President for Research. 2020. “Grand Challenges are Moonshot Goals.” Bridging Barriers, UT Austin. https://bridgingbarriers.utexas.edu/.
70.
Olmos-PeñuelaJulia, BenneworthPaul, and Castro-MartinezElena. 2014. “Are ‘STEM from Mars and SSH from Venus’?: Challenging Disciplinary Stereotypes of Research's Social Value.” Science and Public Policy41 (3): 384–400.
71.
OlsonSteve2016. Grand Challenges for Engineering: Imperatives, Prospects, and Priorities: Summary of a Forum. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
72.
PalssonGisli, SzerszynskiBronislaw, SörlinSverker, MarksJohn, AvrilBernard, CrumleyCarole, HackmannHeide, . 2013. “Reconceptualizing the ‘Anthropos’ in the Anthropocene: Integrating the Social Sciences and Humanities in Global Environmental Change Research.” Environmental Science & Policy28: 3–13.
73.
PedersenDavid Budtz2016. “Integrating Social Sciences and Humanities in Interdisciplinary Research.” Palgrave Communications2 (1): 1–7.
PriceD.1963. Little Science, Big Science. New York: Columbia University Press.
77.
PriceDerek J. De Solla1986. Little Science, big Science … and Beyond. 2nd ed. New York: Columbia University Press.
78.
RanganathanMalini, and BratmanEve. 2021. “From Urban Resilience to Abolitionist Climate Justice in Washington, DC.” Antipode53 ((1)1): 115–137.
79.
RauserCasandra2021. “UCLA Sustainable LA Grand Challenge: Innovatively Applying Research to Create the First Sustainable Megacity.” In World Scientific Encyclopedia of Climate Change, edited by Jan Dash, 105–114. Singapore: World Scientific. doi:10.1142/9789811213946_0015.
80.
ReddyRaj1988. “Foundations and Grand Challenges of Artificial Intelligence: AAAI Presidential Address.” AI Magazine9 (4): 9.
RenwickChris2016. “Biology, Social Science and History: Interdisciplinarity in Three Directions.” Palgrave Communications2 (1): 1–5.
83.
RiggJonathan, and MasonLisa Reyes. 2018. “Five Dimensions of Climate Science Reductionism.” Nature Climate Change8 (12): 1030–1032.
84.
RigolotCyrille2020. “Transdisciplinarity as a Discipline and a Way of Being: Complementarities and Creative Tensions.” Humanities and Social Sciences Communications7 (1): 1–5.
85.
RosenzweigCynthia, SoleckiWilliam D., Romero-LankaoPatricia, MehrotraShagun, DhakalShobhakar, and IbrahimSomayya Ali. 2018. Climate Change and Cities: Second Assessment Report of the Urban Climate Change Research Network. New York: Cambridge University Press.
86.
SchmidtJan C.2011. “What is a Problem?” Poiesis & Praxis7 (4): 249–274.
87.
ScholzRonald, and SteinerGerald. 2015. “The Real Type and Ideal Type of Transdisciplinary Processes: Part I—Theoretical Foundations.” Sustainability Science10 (4): 527–544.
88.
Segalàs CoralJordi, and Tejedor PapellGemma. 2013. “Transdisciplinarity: A Must for Sustainable Education.” Proceedings of the 41st SEFI Annual Conference 2013. pp. 36–43, Lueven, Belgium.
ShenskyMichael G., TreloganJessica, Acquaye-SeedahEdith, RouxStanley J., and BrownKatherine A.. 2019. Geospatial Analysis of Environmental Suitability for Burkholderia Species Using Data Analytics. Leuven: Texas ScholarWorks. https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/handle/2152/82326/.
UejioChristopher K., WilhelmiOlga V., GoldenJay S., MillsDavid M., GulinoSam P., and SamenowJason P.. 2011. “Intra-urban Societal Vulnerability to Extreme Heat: The Role of Heat Exposure and the Built Environment, Socioeconomics, and Neighborhood Stability.” Health & Place17 (2): 498–507.
103.
United States Office of Science, and Technology Policy. 1989. “The Federal High Performance Computing Program.” Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy.
104.
US Global Change Research Program. 2017. “Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume I.” https://science2017.globalchange.gov/.
105.
VossKelly C.2008. “Prolegomena for a Transdisciplinary Approach to Esotericism.” In Transdisciplinarity: Theory and Practice, edited by NicolescuBasarab, 115–126. New York: Hampton Press.
