1. An extensive review of the academic and policy literature on IDR/TDR and AHSS integration found plural understandings of IDR and TDR in the academic literature and a lack of shared understandings across academic and policy literatures. The academic literature identified 25 factors that can help or hinder IDR/TDR, from personal qualities and motivations to disciplinary cultures and assumptions, institutional supports and the overall policy landscape, noting that these are context-dependent and many can either help or hinder depending for instance on the phase of the project. Tools and time to acknowledge and work with these factors are therefore critical in improving IDR/TDR.
2. Once the academic literature review was completed a survey of researchers experienced in IDR/TDR was undertaken along with interviews with policymakers. Among the key barriers highlighted by the survey were career path issues, differences between academic cultures and disciplinary knowledges, and institutional factors. In particular, pursuing IDR/TDR careers was considered risky by researchers, with institutional reward systems, publication structures and funding programmes still primarily organised along disciplinary lines.
An extensive consultation exercise was undertaken with stakeholders to explore their experiences of the challenges and opportunities of AHSS integration through six learning case workshops which focused on exploring contributions from the AHSS, but in particular the AH, in such research. It was not determined that inter- or transdisciplinary research is better suited to addressing any particular societal challenges, but rather that meaningful integration of AHSS perspectives, as well as stakeholder perspectives, should be considered for all research addressing societal challenges. Consequently, SHAPE-ID recommends a holistic approach to funding societal challenges research, embedding socio-cultural questions in challenge-led or mission-led research wherever appropriate.
The project has furthermore recommended the involvement of AHSS and inter- and transdisciplinary experts in funding programme and call design. These recommendations are made in all SHAPE-ID policy briefs, which have been widely disseminated (1047 downloads on Zenodo as of 30/11/2021).
Simultaneously, the project built, maintained and grew a network of contacts and engaged in an active programme of dissemination and communication, including presentations, blogs, meetings, web and social media and a webinar series.
3. A system of categories presenting preconditions for successful AHSS integration was developed. Recommendations were organised into three categories: structural factors, including the research and policy landscape and institutional structures; competencies and attributes necessary for AHSS integration; and cross-cutting categories concerning understanding and the research life cycle. These classifications underpinned the design of the toolkit. A key focus of developing the toolkit was to reduce duplication of effort in the future by synthesising existing knowledge where it already exists and acting as a “gateway” to direct users to relevant guides, checklists, case studies and recommendations.
Following the production of the toolkit, the project team have actively pursued opportunities to deliver training to funders and researchers, for instance through training co-organised with Net4Society (the National Contact Point network for Horizon Europe Cluster 2) in July 2021 and a workshop organised at the International Transdisciplinarity Conference in September 2021.
