NERC RESEARCH STUDENTSHIPS
NAME OF LEAD SUPERVISOR
Nicholas Polunin
NAME(S) OF CO-SUPERVISOR(S)
Selina Stead
Clare Fitzsimmons
TITLE OF PROJECT (250 CHARACTERS INCLUDING SPACES)
Interdisciplinary dialogues: citation networks in marine science and management
SUMMARY OF RESEARCH PROGRAMME: (UP TO 2 SIDES A4)
A brief description of the proposed research is required, including details of research training. Any associated research
grants should be mentioned with reference numbers.
Scientists traditionally sought solutions within their respective disciplinary frameworks (Redman et al. 2004),
however the scientific disciplines required to address fundamental environmental problems faced by society are
inseparable (Daily & Ehrlich 1999; Schoenberger 2001; Weszkalnys 2004). Environmental crises are being
explained in terms of the dynamics of coupled human and biophysical systems (Gunderson et al. 2002) and social
and economic are brought into natural resource assessments (Armsworth and Roughgarden 2001; McClanahan and
Cinner 2008; McClanahan et al. 2008). ‘Interdisciplinarity’ (drawing on disciplinary perspectives and integrating
these into more comprehensive understandings) is being highlighted by governments and funding bodies to steer
environmental research away from single-discipline science (Rhoten 2004) and address multidimensional
challenges (Barry et al. 2008; Bruce et al. 2004; Chan et al. 2007; Ewel 2001; MacMynowski 2007; Mascia 2003;
Mascia et al. 2003; Weszkalnys 2004), however, the extent of current attempts to cross all disciplinary boundaries
is scarcely known. Interdisciplinary progress has been made in medical, educational and social subjects (Klein
1990) while advances in environmental science appear to have been modest (Chan et al. 2007; MacMynowski
2007) attributable especially to epistemological differences (Campbell 2005; MacMynowski 2007; Max -Neef
2005).
Interdisciplinarity in the marine environment
In the UK, the academic landscape is changing (Meagher & Lyall 2005) and interdisciplinary research is gaining
momentum through the provision of specific funding calls (Bruce et al. 2004). The Living With Environmental
Change programme (LWEC) is the response of the UK's major funders (led by ESRC and NERC). The RELU
programme led by Newcastle University also shows the way forward for relevant research (Lowe & Phillipson
2006; Lowe et al. 2009; Marzano et al. 2006). The marine sector has traditionally lagged behind agriculture
(Ostrom et al. 1999, Ostrom 2008) But the expectation that 75% of humans (>4 billion) will live within coastal
zones by 2020 (Allison et al. 2004) and dynamic nature of the environment involved (Gallup et al. 1999) warrant a
truly interdisciplinary framework (Adger et al. 2005; Carpenter et al. 2006; Tompkins & Adger 2005). The recent
formation of Marine Scotland and the Marine Management Organisation (to be based on Tyneside). This study will
highlight significant gaps in marine knowledge networks and help inform funding prio rities for marine science
research.
Three models of marine management will be explored herein, with a view to assessing whether the degree of
interdisciplinary displayed by each can be related to its perceived ‘success’ as a management construct. Marine
Spatial Planning, Integrated Coastal Zone Management, and Adaptive Management have been selected as
representing three distinct phases of disciplinary growth. A number of factors are considered to influence the
evolution of interdisciplinary research. One of these is age; where disciplines are continually changing and
evolving over time. As knowledge accumulates scientific specialisation occurs, leading to divisions in ideology,
epistemology, methodology and consequent fragmentation (Dogan & Pahre 1990). In this space where fragments of
specialism confront their counterparts from other fields or big challenges posed in new areas, innovation is likely to
occur and new disciplines emerge. It is has therefore been hypothesized that newer subject categories are m ore
likely to be ‘interdisciplinary’ in nature (Daily & Ehrlich 1999; Morillo et al. 2003; Pickett et al. 1999)., a maxima
being reached, when the research community becomes well enough established to almost exclusively self perpetuate, at which point interdisciplinarity begins to decline (Janis 1982).
MSP, ICZM and adaptive management sit conceptually at different stages of interdisciplinary development, yet all attempt
to provide frameworks for marine management. Adaptive management has enjoyed enduring appeal within the marine
community, whereas despite being the only comprehensive framework for managing the coastal environment, and
explicitly requiring input from many disciplines, ICZM has waned over recent years (e.g. aspects of the Common Fisheries
Policy, that were initially founded on the principles of ICZM, have been gradually replaced by the language of adaptive
management, and though relatively new, MSP is now dominating both policy making and the literature (Douvere & Ehler
2008; Maes 2008; Taussik 2007).
Major expectations are that a) that interdisciplinarity will increase over time, and b) more highly interdisciplinary work
will ‘more successfully’ address environmental problems, leading to enduring popularity with both funders and publishers.
Here therefore, we use time series data to compare the evolution of these three fields, using their different stages of
maturity, to establish whether such expectations can be objectively confirmed using the bibliometric record. Such work is
required to better understand the dynamics of the field, offering the potential to raise the profile of marine research relative
to its more highly funded agricultural counterparts, helping inform internal research agendas, and highlighting specific
opportunities in interdisciplinary marine science, which more effectively meet funders’ requirements. Explicit local
benefits also include insight into how a new metrics driven Research Assessment Framework could best capture
excellence in interdisciplinary marine science, and guide potential future research programme design.
Application of bibliometrics to interdisciplinary research
Tools to measure the transfer of knowledge across fields (Leydesdorff 2007) and overlap in domains across
disciplinary boundaries (Janssen et al. 2006) have recently been developed but to date interdisciplinary progress in
the environmental sciences has been largely confined to the grey literature (Katz & Plevin 1998). All of these
arguments are especially pertinent to the field of Marine Management, which is supported by a number of theoretical
frameworks, interdisciplinary mandates and ca 50 yr history amenable to social network analysis (SNA; Kildow 1997); the
marine management community providing the opportunity for study across the full breadth of the natural and social
science spectrum (Chaniotis & Stead 2007).
The student will: (1) employ the Thomson-Reuters ISI Web of Knowledge to extract data from 5 year intervals over
the period 1978-2008 on citation patterns (i) within the environmental sciences (ii) from the environmental sciences
across to the social sciences (iii) from the environmental sciences across to all other subjects, using the ISI and
JACS categorizations of the discipline structure; (2) derive connectance, modularity and SNA variables to identify
network structure, highlight emergent disciplines and characterise the extent and character of interdisciplinarity,
and factors such as age, publication culture, size and subject classification that drive these; (3) Use the evolutionary
spectrum of marine management constructs (MSP via ICZM to Adaptive Mana gement) as a conceptual anchor upon
which to base a more tightly constrained time-series of networks at an appropriate scale; (4) Identify key players
objectively from these networks, conducting interviews and focus groups to provide insight into the true
interdisciplinary dynamics and perceived successes of these communities and context surrounding developments in
the field; and (5) Integrate qualitative perceptions of interdisciplinarity into the marine management networks,
using these to validate (or otherwise) quantitative mapping and draw out inferences on the evolution of marine
management as an example of inter- or multi-disciplinarity.
Since the ISI classification adds an element of subjectivity, the study will identify whether, and if so how, a more objective
journal classification system, based for example on citation patterns alone, would alter the identified functional roles of
individual subjects within the network, using novel network structural methods such as ‘modularity’ (Da Silva et al. 2008;
Guimera & Amaral 2005; Guimera et al. 2004; Newman 2006). Our pilot study was of the citation network for a one year
period (Hicks In Review, 2009), however such networks evolve over time as new documents are created (Leicht et al.
2007), making it difficult to determine whether subjects have become more or less connected, and whether
interdisciplinary nodes emerge or dissipate over time. This study provides an opportunity to address this, permitting
predictive statements and testing emerging paradigm theories. A specific case study also aims to address scale-dependant
network effects, which are as yet unstudied in this context.
The connectedness of the general network also stimulates the need for interviews and focus groups to pursue the context in
which this empirical work can be interpreted. Well-intentioned efforts toward interdisciplinary research still seem to
privilege one epistemology over another in question formulation and research (MacMynowski 2007). Even in the most
integrative fields, scientific stakeholders are believed to be holding on to a system framed by disciplinary boundaries
(Miller et al. 2008), and without further study of context this cannot currently be determined from the network data. In
studying the internal dynamics of marine management in this way, we attempt to identify the relevance of accommodating
and integrating disparate values, epistemologies, and knowledge toward a more robust understanding of complex issues,
such as sustainability that are imperative to our understanding of our rapidly changing world.
The student will receive targeted training in network and bibliographic methods (Polunin/Fitzsimmons) and social
science research skills, such as interview and focus group methodologie s (Stead/Polunin), in addition to attending
the SAGE Graduate School programme. Through supervision, training will be given on experimental design,
network analysis and modelling and statistical analysis. The student will contribute to an international scientific
meeting (6 th ICEF, Lausanne, 2011) and join relevant professional societies. Complementary ESRC and
Leverhulme standard grants are anticipated. These would provide additional training through post-doctoral
mentoring and peer support.
Month
1-6
3-6
5-8
9-12
8-24
22-30
30-36
Activity
Literature review and familiarisation (end March 2010)
Initial data acquisition and network training, UCINet and Pajek, (Dec 2009-Feb2010)
Time series data analysis (end may 2010)
First publication and national conference presentation (June-Sept 2010)
Sub-sampling of networks and ICZM exploration + ethnographic work: interviews and focus groups.
Data integration; major international conference
Thesis preparation and submission
Name of all supervisors
(including CASE)
Present post
Length of
research
experience
Number of students currently being supervised who are in
the:
1st year
Nicholas Polunin
Prof.
30 y
Selina Stead
Snr Lecturer
15 y
Clare Fitzsimmons
Teaching Fellow
14 y
1
2nd year
3rd year
3rd year+
TOTAL
2
2
1
6
1
2
0
Recent publications by supervisor(s) relevant to research area:
Polunin:
Hicks C, Fitzsimmons C, Polunin NVC. Interdisciplinary dialogue among the environmental sciences?
Environmental Conservation (in review)
Stead:
Chaniotis P, Stead S 2007. Interviewing people about the coast on the coast: Appraising the wider adoption of
ICZM in North East England. Marine Policy 31(4):517-526.
Fitzsimmons.
Katz JS, Stewart S, Fitzsimmons C 2001 Science Foresight Project Final Report Volumes 1-3. Report numbers
DSTL/TR01967, DSTL/TR01968, DSTL/TR01969.
Fitzsimmons C, Murton C, Pullum F. 2003. A Network Analysis of Naval Systems Department: Capability
Shortfalls in Naval S&T. Dstl/TR/2345/2003.
Fitzsimmons C, Hallam L, Nelstrop J, Reinhold C. 2004. Managing and Integrating Science and Technology
Information and Knowledge. Dstl/TR/2221/2005
Fitzsimmons C, Ford R, Hallam L 2004 Developing Research Exploitation Metrics for UK Technology
Development Capability. DPA/TR/1001/2004