The Inter-and Transdisciplinary PhD Supervision Guide

by ITD Alliance Early Career Researchers (ECR) Working Group THE INTERAND TRANSDISCIPLINARY (ITD) PHD SUPERVISION GUIDE October 2025 FEEDBACK We warmly invite both doctoral researchers and supervisors to share your feedback on this guide. Please send your responses to the following questions to the authors (BinBin J. Pearce, [email protected]) after you have made use of the guide. This guide is a continuous work in progress, and your input will be invaluable in helping us refine and improve it for future users. AUTHORS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 2. What questions has this guide possibly missed that would have been important to address? 3. Our main recommendations for the authors of the Guide are: 1. Has this guide helped you in your ITD research journey? If at all, how? Erika Angarita , Anna Hajdu , Yanyan Huang , BinBin Pearce 1 2 3 4 Guadalupe Peres-Cajías , Hussein Zeidan , Yuanyuan Zhu (2025) 5 6 7 Layout Hajdu and Zhu The authors warmly acknowledge the help and support of many of the colleagues within and beyond the ITD Alliance community who have contributed to the realization and improvement of this guide. Thanks to the constructive and thorough feedback given to us by Nathalie Dupin (ETHZ) and Catherine Lyall, whose expertise and knowledge in this field helped us stay on track. We are inspired and motivated by their work. We also thank Sabine Hoffmann and Hanna Salomon for supporting the idea from the beginning and for helping us to test the guide with doctoral researchers at EAWAG. Finally, we are very grateful to the members of the Early Career Researchers Working Group of the Global Alliance for Interand Transdisciplinarity (ITD Alliance), particularly Sigrid Brydolf, for their valuable feedback during our virtual coffees. 2 (listed in alphabetical order) 1 - Thünen Institute of Biodiversity 2 - Leibiz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO) 3 - Fudan University 4 - TU Delft 5 - Universidad Católica Boliviana/Echo-Vrije Universiteit Brussel 6 - Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam 7 - Maastricht University TABLE OF CONTENTS 04 Why an ITD PhD Supervision Guide? 07 How to Use this Guide 11 Guiding Questions for Various PhD Phases 24 Concluding Reflections Starting Recruitment/Hiring Accompanying 25 Suggested Readings ITD Foundations Related Fields (Self-reflection methodology) New Directions Concluding (Analysing, Evaluating, and Ending) The ITD PhD Supervision Guide synthesizes scholarly discussions and experiences on ITD supervision challenges and insights, and provides questions for discussion and reflection, enabling doctoral researchers and their supervisors to exchange ideas, enhance communication, and navigate the complexities of the PhD journey together. 3 Carrying out interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary (ITD) research is essential for addressing complex, real‐world problems, yet doctoral researchers pursuing these approaches face unique supervisory challenges. Interdisciplinarity refers to research that integrates concepts, theories, and methods from two or more disciplines to create more comprehensive insights or solutions that could not be achieved within a single disciplinary frame (Klein, 2010). Transdisciplinarity, additionally, transcends academic boundaries by combining scientific knowledge with the experiential and value-based knowledge of non-academic actors, such as policymakers, practitioners, or communities (Pohl & Hirsch Hadorn, 2007). Both approaches share a commitment to integration and synthesis, but they differ in scope: interdisciplinary research bridges disciplines within academia, whereas transdisciplinary research connects academic and societal domains. These challenges often stem from differences in epistemological assumptions, conflicting methodological preferences, and fragmented institutional structures. Supervisors from different disciplinary backgrounds may hold divergent views on research quality and doctoral guidance, leading to inconsistent expectations and unclear communication (Vanstone et al., 2013). Without structured guidance, both doctoral researchers and their supervisors struggle to manage these tensions, underscoring the need for dedicated support frameworks. Interdisciplinary research requires PhD researchers to integrate distinct disciplinary languages and conceptual frameworks, often leading to communication barriers and cognitive obstacles that hinder research progress. Transdisciplinary research, on the other hand, extends beyond academia, requiring doctoral researchers to balance scholarly rigor with stakeholder expectations and needs, further complicating supervision. It should be noted that interdisciplinary approaches (ITD) can either be applied across various topics and disciplines or constitute a research topic in their own right. WHY AN ITD PHD SUPERVISION GUIDE? 4 In a co-supervision model involving committees composed of members from diverse disciplinary backgrounds, specific challenges also tend to arise. While the doctoral researcher may benefit from diverse perspectives, this setting can also introduce power imbalances and diffuse responsibility, potentially leaving doctoral researchers caught between conflicting priorities (Kálmán et al., 2022). In the absence of clear supervisory frameworks, early-career researchers may find themselves in a “liminal” space, facing heightened uncertainty about their professional identity (Djinlev et al., 2023). The pressure to deliver societally relevant outcomes can also weaken the coherence of academic supervision. Scholars have emphasized the need for improved supervision models through enhanced training, clearly defined co-supervision protocols, and greater institutional flexibility (Rana et al., 2025 ). Yet institutional policies often fail to accommodate these complexities, reinforcing the necessity of experience-based guidance in interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary (ITD) research contexts. Recognizing these challenges, we aim to integrate our experiences and scholarly discussions on ITD supervision, including its challenges, best practices, and key insights, into this guide to create a structured, experience-based resource that supports doctoral researchers and their supervisors in navigating these complex research landscapes. These questions were developed during multiple work sessions by the creators of this guide, which include both current and former doctoral researchers at various stages of their doctoral journey, as well as a supervisor. We also included extensive feedback from postdoctoral researchers and other doctoral researchers in two feedback sessions held by the ITD Alliance Early Career Researchers (ECR) Working Group. The final version of the guide will also incorporate feedback from many others following a test run of the draft you have in front of you. The insights have been cross-checked and aligned with the topics outlined in the ITD Alliance ECR Handbook, as well as existing resources on interdisciplinary supervision (Lyall, Meagher, & Tait, 2008). WHY AN ITD PHD SUPERVISION GUIDE? 5 The nature, limits and origins of knowledge in the context of ITD research1 EPISTEMOLOGY WHY AN ITD PHD SUPERVISION GUIDE? 6 The contextual circumstances in which an ITD PhD takes place, and the extent to which the PhD team can overcome barriers and/or make use of existing resources2 INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT AND EXPECTATIONS Career development prospects of ECRs and the process of finding suitable intellectual/publishing communities that would support an ITD career3 CAREER ORIENTATION AND PROFESSIONAL IDENTITY Managing collaborations outside the university and managing the uncertainties and ambiguities that are central to ITD PhD projects COMPLEXITY MANAGEMENT How to consider and realize the impact of the work that results from an ITD PhD DISSEMINATION PATHWAYS 1 This structuring of epistemology is inspired by the philosopher’s toolbox by Eigenbrode et. al (2007), Philosopher’s Toolbox 2 Baptista and Klein (2022) 3 Djinlev et al. (2023); Bridl et al. (2013) The organization of this guide was also inspired by the ”toolbox for philosophical dialogue” for interdisciplinary collaboration (Eigenbrode et. al, 2007). The guiding questions in the section “Guiding Questions for Various PhD Phases” cover the following five topics: Conversations about ways of thinking and working can be challenging, especially between doctoral researchers and supervisors. The questions in this guide are meant to make such dialogue easier and more constructive. The questions in this guide are intended to support joint reflection between the doctoral researcher and the supervisory team. Some may be better suited for group discussion, others for individual reflection. While we label them as “discussion” and “reflection” questions for ease of use, they are interchangeable depending on your specific context. Discussion questions aim to foster mutual understanding of roles, expectations, and processes in an ITD PhD. These are organized into five thematic clusters (see page 5). Reflection questions help supervisors and supervisees develop self-awareness of their perspectives on ITD research. In the section “Guiding Questions for Various Phases of the PhD”, you’ll find space to take notes during discussions or reflections. We encourage you to have a copy ready and use the note areas in whatever way works best for you —whether that’s jotting down thoughts, making lists, doodling, sketching, or mapping out ideas. This is your space to think, explore, and express. How to use this guide 01. USE GUIDING QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION AND REFLECTION 7 The guide can be used to support all the stages of a PhD journey. For this purpose the guiding questions are clustered into four main phases: How to use this guide 02. FOLLOW QUESTIONS FOR VARIOUS PHASES OF YOUR PHD JOURNEY The recruitment stage of the PhD (these are questions that can be asked during the hiring process, for example) The starting stage (the first year, for example, although this will vary from person to person) The PhD accompanying stage, while research and writing is going on The conclusion of the PhD (including analyzing the ITD journey, examining the work, and end of the PhD) This guide provides the language to ask those questions, which are not always obvious or easy to ask. As doctoral researchers and supervisors, we may be in different life stages and realities, which can make us unaware that the assumptions we take for granted, what feels like the 'water we swim in', may not be shared by others. Engaging in these conversations can serve as a mirror, helping you reflect on the kind of supervisory relationship you have - and the one you wish to build. We encourage you to develop your own questions that reflect your unique PhD journey or supervisory experience. 1 2 3 4 8 The “ITD Passport” is designed to help clarify the context in which your PhD takes place. After the doctoral researcher and supervisor(s) individually fill out the ITD Passport they can come together in a meeting to discuss them and establish a timeline to formulate their answers for the following sections of the ITD Guide. How to use this guide 03. USE THE ITD PASSPORT AS A STARTING POINT Welcome ITD doctoral researcher! Fill out your ITD Passport to get started: My PhD program (name, academic department, country, etc.) The relation of my PhD program to ITD research (inexistent, few/some/many previous works rooted in ITD have been developed/my program is focused on ITD research) My location (if it differs from your institute, it may be important to mention this) My first language is the same as the one expected for my PhD thesis (If not, specify how you plan to manage this difference) My prior experience in ITD research (inexistent, basic, regular, consistent, highly developed) My current life stage is characterised by (age, family, job, etc.) The time I can allocate for my PhD (considering my life stage) Something about myself relevant to this journey My expectations when I finish my ITD PhD The main challenges in conducting this ITD PhD (institutional, academic, team, personal or other) Key skills I rely on to face the uncertainties/fears of pursuing an ITD PhD/institutional support for these situations My favourite ways to learn 9 How will I identify and address potential knowledge gaps in disciplines outside my primary expertise? How will I establish clear communication and role expectations from the start? What mechanisms should be in place to ensure consistent and structured supervision? How can I help doctoral researchers develop a coherent research identity within an ITD framework? What resources can I provide doctoral researchers to support their competence development for the ITD research? How will I support the doctoral researcher in navigating disciplinary tensions or conflicting methodologies? What steps will I take to help the doctoral researcher build a strong network across disciplines and with stakeholders? How will I ensure that ITD aspects of the research are recognized and valued in the doctoral researcher’s final PhD assessment? How do I plan to monitor and adjust supervision strategies to ensure the doctoral researcher stays on track? ADDITIONAL REFLECTION QUESTIONS FOR SUPERVISORS PHD STARTING PHASE (REFLECTION) 16 ADDITIONAL REFLECTION QUESTIONS FOR THE DOCTORAL RESEARCHER: 2 What are the disciplines and methodologies that I am interested in, and the ones I am already trained in? Which areas of focus can we already identify (and how might they affect our publication strategy going forward)? What strategies will I use to build and maintain relationships with stakeholders throughout my research? How do I learn and work most effectively, and how can I ask my supervisory team to best work with me? 1 PHD ACCOMPANYING PHASE (DISCUSSION) What challenges have emerged in communication with your supervisors or collaborators? What strategies have been tried and what has been the result so far? 2 COMPLEXITY MANAGEMENT 17 How are you managing the integration of different disciplinary or stakeholder perspectives in your research? How are you maintaining coherence in your research despite the diverse inputs and perspectives? What challenges have arisen? How have you approached these challenges? EPISTEMOLOGY How are you ensuring that your research remains academically rigorous while also being accessible and relevant to nonacademic stakeholders? 3 1 3 EPISTEMOLOGY; COMPLEXITY MANAGEMENT 1 PHD ACCOMPANYING PHASE (DISCUSSION) 18 Does the doctoral researcher feel adequately supported by the supervisors and institution? If not, what changes would help? INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT AND EXPECTATIONS What additional support/training will facilitate your ITD research? How can you attain it? 3 4 5 CAREER EXPECTATIONS AND PROFESSIONAL IDENTITY How will I guide the doctoral researcher in selecting suitable publication outlets (disciplinary vs. interdisciplinary journals, policy briefs, etc.)? Is the doctoral researcher finding opportunities to publish or present their work in ways that reflect its ITD nature? How will I support the doctoral researcher in identifying and applying for additional training or funding opportunities relevant to ITD research? How has the doctoral researcher’s work evolved, and does it align with the initial objectives? Has this alignment/misalignment been discussed with the doctoral researcher and the supervisory team? Are there any emerging conflicts between disciplines or stakeholders, and how can they be addressed? What feedback mechanisms have been effective in guiding the doctoral researcher’s progress? Which ones have not? How can I better support the doctoral researcher in managing the tensions between disciplinary depth and interdisciplinary breadth? Are there gaps in the doctoral researcher’s ITD skill set that we should help address? How can I enhance the doctoral researcher’s visibility and professional network within and beyond academia? What steps can I take to facilitate the doctoral researcher’s engagement with stakeholders in a meaningful and sustained way? Am I adapting our supervision approach to meet the evolving needs of the doctoral researcher’s ITD work? What lessons am I learning from this supervision process that could inform future ITD PhDs? How can assessment criteria be adapted to fairly evaluate ITD PhD research? ADDITIONAL REFLECTION QUESTIONS FOR SUPERVISORS PHD ACCOMPANYING PHASE (REFLECTION) ADDITIONAL REFLECTION QUESTIONS FOR THE DOCTORAL RESEARCHER: 3 How has my research question or methodology evolved due to ITD insights? How am I able to balance the theoretical and applied aspects of my work? What adjustments have I made to my workflow to manage the additional complexity of ITD research? How am I ensuring that my research remains academically rigorous while also being accessible and relevant to non-academic stakeholders? What strategies am I using to stay motivated and manage potential challenges? Based on the answers to the above questions, the doctoral researcher and the supervisor can check their “ITD Passports” at this point to see if something needs to be updated. 19 1 Building on the earlier answers, the supervisor(s) and doctoral researcher may consider the following questions during an evaluative period of the PhD: Is the doctoral researcher fully aware of the evaluation process? Are there gaps in the skill set of the supervisory team for guiding the doctoral researcher, and how can we address them? Are there potential challenges in the evaluation process posed by conducting ITD doctoral research? How can these challenges be addressed? How are examiners chosen to evaluate an ITD doctoral researcher? How will the doctoral researcher be evaluated by the examinations? Has the assessment criteria been adapted to fairly evaluate the ITD PhD research? EVALUATING THE ITD PHD JOURNEY PHD CONCLUDING PHASE 20 At the end of each academic year or another relevant milestone agreed upon between the doctoral researcher and the supervisor, it would be an opportunity to reflect on how the process has been going. Some examples may be the following questions: What has changed between each stage of the PhD journey that affects how the doctoral researcher and supervisor(s) should work together? What processes are working well? What can be improved? What are the surprising insights that we have gained so far about the PhD journey? What needs to be changed going forward? ANALYZING THE ITD PHD JOURNEY 4 21 1 1 1 PHD CONCLUDING PHASE 4 How did the interdisciplinary or transdisciplinary aspects of the research shape the final outcomes of this PhD? What insights can be shared with stakeholders to help improve future research? EPISTEMOLOGY; DISSEMINATION PATHWAYS How has your understanding of ITD research evolved during your PhD? EPISTEMOLOGY 1 3 END OF THE ITD PHD (DISCUSSION) How do you assess the realworld relevance and impact of your research? EPISTEMOLOGY; DISSEMINATION PATHWAYS 2 21 PHD CONCLUDING PHASE 22 4 How can the impact of this PhD research extend beyond academia into broader societal contributions? DISSEMINATION PATHWAYS; CAREER EXPECTATIONS AND PROFESSIONAL IDENTITY END OF THE ITD PHD (DISCUSSION) 4 What recommendations would you give to institutions to better support ITD PhD researchers? INSTITUTIONAL SUPPORT AND EXPECTATIONS 5 What were the most effective strategies for fostering collaboration between academic and non-academic stakeholders? COMPLEXITY MANAGEMENT 6 22 PHD CONCLUDING PHASE 23 4 END OF THE ITD PHD (REFLECTION) What were the most significant challenges in supervising this ITD PhD, and how were they addressed? How can future ITD PhD supervision be improved based on this experience? How am I supporting my doctoral researcher in transitioning to a new/relevant career after the PhD? What are the main suggestions I will offer to other ITD PhD supervisors? How did the supervisory team navigate disciplinary tensions or methodological differences? How do I see the future of ITD research in my field, and how can the PhD training be better aligned with these trends? ADDITIONAL REFLECTION QUESTIONS FOR SUPERVISORS ADDITIONAL REFLECTION QUESTIONS FOR THE DOCTORAL RESEARCHER: How has my understanding of ITD research evolved during my PhD? What strategies helped me to manage the complexities of supervision and collaboration? What lessons from my PhD journey can inform future ITD doctoral researchers? What skills have I developed during my PhD that I find most valuable for my future career? How would I approach an ITD research project differently if I were to start again? 23 What are the main lessons learned from using this guide? A key takeaway for what makes a good ITD PhD supervisory relationship is: At the end of this guide, we invite you to pause and reflect on your own journey and experiences. The following prompts are designed to guide your reflection on both your PhD journey and the use of this guide. We also warmly welcome you to share your feedback for this guide. You will find instructions for doing so on page 2. 24 CONCLUDING REFLECTION How has my perspective on ITD research changed since starting the PhD journey? 25 SUGGESTED READINGS ITD FOUNDATIONS Bammer, G., O’Rourke, M., O’Connell, D., Neuhauser, L., Midgley, G., Klein, J. T., Grigg, N. J., Gadlin, H., Elsum, I. R., Bursztyn, M., Fulton, E. A., Pohl, C., Smithson, M., Vilsmaier, U., Bergmann, M., Jaeger, J., Merkx, F., Vienni Baptista, B., Burgman, M. A., … Richardson, G. P. (2020). Expertise in research integration and implementation for tackling complex problems: When is it needed, where can it be found and how can it be strengthened? Palgrave Communications, 6(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0380-0 Baptista, B. V., & Klein, J. T. (2022). Institutionalizing Interdisciplinarity and Transdisciplinarity: Collaboration across Cultures and Communities (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003129424 Brandt, P., Ernst, A., Gralla, F., Luederitz, C., Lang, D. J., Newig, J., Reinert, F., Abson, D. J., & Von Wehrden, H. (2013). A review of transdisciplinary research in sustainability science. Ecological Economics, 92, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.04.008 Bridle, H., Vrieling, A., Cardillo, M., Araya, Y., & Hinojosa, L. (2013). Preparing for an interdisciplinary future: A perspective from early-career researchers. Futures, 53, 22–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2013.09.003 Chambers, J. M., Wyborn, C., Ryan, M. E., Reid, R. S., Riechers, M., Serban, A., Bennett, N. J., Cvitanovic, C., Fernández-Giménez, M. E., Galvin, K. A., Goldstein, B. E., Klenk, N. L., Tengö, M., Brennan, R., Cockburn, J. J., Hill, R., Munera, C., Nel, J. L., Österblom, H., … Pickering, T. (2021). Six modes of coproduction for sustainability. Nature Sustainability, 4(11), 983–996. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893021-00755-x Craps, M. (2019). Transdisciplinarity and Sustainable Development. In W. L. Filho (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Sustainability in Higher Education. Springer. Craps, M., & Brugnach, M. F. (2015). A relational approach to deal with ambiguity in multi-actor governance for sustainability. WIT Transactions on Ecology and The Environment, 199, 233–243. https://doi.org/10.2495/RAV150201 Djinlev, V., Dallo, I., Müller, S. M., Surchat, M., Von Rothkirch, J., Wenger, A., & Späth, L. (2023). Challenges and strategies in transdisciplinary research ‐ early career researchers’ perspectives. GAIA - Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society, 32(1), 172–177. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.32.1.16 Dupin, N., & Lyall, C. (2024). Graduate Education in a Hyper-competitive Global Environment. In R. Szostak (Ed.), Handbook of Interdisciplinary Teaching and Administration (pp. 294–315). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035309870.0002710.4337/9781035309870 Dupin, N., & Lyall, C. (2024). Career. In F. Darbellay (Ed.), Elgar Encyclopedia of Interdisciplinarity and Transdisciplinarity (pp. 32–35). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035317967.ch0810.337/9781035317967 Eigenbrode, S. D., O’rourke, M., Wulfhorst, J. D., Althoff, D. M., Goldberg, C. S., Merrill, K., Morse, W., Nielsen-Pincus, M., Stephens, J., Winowiecki, L., & Bosque-Pérez, N. A. (2007). Employing philosophical dialogue in collaborative science. BioScience, 57(1), 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1641/B570109 Frodeman, R., Klein, J. T., & Pacheco, R. C. dos S. (Eds.). (2017). The Oxford handbook of Interdisciplinarity (Second edition). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198733522.001.0001