The immense challenges associated with realizing ocean and coastal sustainability require highly skilled interdisciplinary marine scientists. However, the barriers experienced by early career researchers (ECRs) seeking to address these challenges, and the support required to overcome those barriers, are not well understood. This study examines the perspectives of ECRs on opportunities to build interdisciplinary research capacity in marine science. We engaged 23 current and former graduate students and postdoctoral fellows in a policy Delphi method with three rounds of surveying that included semi-structured questionnaires and q-methodology. We identified the following five barriers that limit ECRs’ capacity for interdisciplinary research: (i) demanding workloads; (ii) stress linked to funding, publishing, and employment uncertainty; (iii) limited support for balancing personal and professional commitments; (iv) ineffective supervisory support; and (v) the steep learning curve associated with interdisciplinary research. Our analysis highlights three main types of responses to these barriers adopted by ECRs, including “taking on too much”, “coping effectively”, and “maintaining material wellbeing at any cost”. To overcome these barriers, we propose the following three institutional actions to build early career interdisciplinary researcher capacity: formalize mentorship, create interdisciplinary research groups, and mainstream mental health support.

Transdisciplinary researchers collaborate with diverse partners outside of academia to tackle sustainability problems. The patterns and practices of social interaction and the contextual nature of transdisciplinary research result in different performance expectations than traditional, curiosity-driven research. Documenting patterns of interaction can inform project success and affirm progress toward interim outcomes on the way to achieve sustainability impacts. Yet providing credible and robust indicators of research activity remains challenging. We provide quantitative and qualitative indicators for assessing transdisciplinary practices and patterns through social network analysis (SNA). Our assessment developed four criteria to reveal how SNA metrics provide insight into (1) diversity of participants; (2) whether and how integration and collaboration are occurring, (3) the relative degrees of network stability and fragility, and (4) how the network is structured to achieve its goals. These four key criteria can be used to help identify patterns of research activity and determine whether interim progress is occurring.

A challenge for transdisciplinary sustainability science is learning how to bridge diverse worldviews among collaborators in respectful ways. A temptation in transdisciplinary work is to focus on improving scientific practices rather than engage research partners in spaces that mutually respect how we learn from each other and set the stage for change. We used the concept of Nicolescu’s “Hidden Third” to identify and operationalize this transformative space, because it focused on bridging “objective” and “subjective” worldviews through art. Between 2014 and 2017, we explored the engagement of indigenous peoples from three inland delta regions in Canada and as a team of interdisciplinary scholars and students who worked together to better understand long-term social–ecological change in those regions. In working together, we identified five characteristics associated with respectful, transformative transdisciplinary space. These included (1) establishing an unfiltered safe place where (2) subjective and objective experiences and (3) different world views could come together through (4) interactive and (5) multiple sensory experiences. On the whole, we were more effective in achieving characteristics 2–5—bringing together the subjective and objective experiences, where different worldviews could come together—than in achieving characteristic 1—creating a truly unfiltered and safe space for expression. The novelty of this work is in how we sought to change our own engagement practices to advance sustainability rather than improving scientific techniques. Recommendations for sustainability scientists working in similar contexts are provided.

This research is a critical examination of the behavioral foundations of livelihood pathways over a 50-year time period in a multispecies fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. Fishers make difficult decisions to pursue, enjoy, and protect their livelihoods in times of change and uncertainty, and the resultant behaviors shape efforts to advance sustainability through coastal and marine fisheries governance. However, there is limited evidence about fishers’ behavioral changes over long time periods, and the psychosocial experiences that underpin them, beyond what is assumed using neoclassical economic and rational choice framings. Our analysis draws on 26 narrative interviews with fishers who have pursued two or more fish species currently or formerly. Fishers were asked about their behavioral responses to change and uncertainty in coastal fisheries across their entire lifetimes. Their narratives highlighted emotional, perceptual, and values-oriented factors that shaped how fishers coped and adapted to change and uncertainty. The contributions to theory and practice are two-fold. First, findings included variation in patterns of fisher behaviors. Those patterns reflected fishers prioritizing and trading-off material or relational well-being. With policy relevance, prioritizations and trade-offs of forms of well-being led to unexpected outcomes for shifting capacity and capitalization for fishers and in fisheries more broadly. Second, findings identified the influence of emotions as forms of subjective well-being. Further, emotions and perceptions functioned as explanatory factors that shaped well-being priorities and trade-offs, and ultimately, behavioral change. Research findings emphasize the need for scientists, policy-makers, and managers to incorporate psychosocial evidence along with social science about fisher behavior into their models, policy processes, and management approaches. Doing so is likely to support efforts to anticipate impacts from behavioral change on capacity and capitalization in fleets and fisheries, and ultimately, lead to improved governance outcomes.

Rivers and dams are increasingly contested venues where knowledge pluralism is critical for effective governance. To navigate change, decision-makers can adopt culturally-sensitive interventions to address the needs of diverse stakeholders and rights holders. Calls for Indigenous flows have become important as dam operators seek to renew their legal and social licenses to operate. Knowledge pluralism is needed to enhance decision-making about flows that better address complexity and change to Indigenous livelihoods and cultural practices. However, leveraging diverse knowledge types to inform these interventions is not simply a matter of changing management practice. Power relations can constrain knowledge pluralism. We contribute an empirical example that links power in a decision-making process about a dam in Saskatchewan, Canada, to the losses experienced by downstream Indigenous communities. This paper operationalizes power to illustrate its methodological utility and documents the interconnected losses, experienced by resources users, resultant from the marginalization of Indigenous knowledge.