Rebecca Freeth

When people ask me what my role is in the Leverage Points project, I tend to take a deep breath before embarking on an explanation. I start with what I’m not doing; I’m not looking at the content of sustainability transitions or the mechanisms of leverage points; I’m not studying food or energy systems in Lower Saxony or Transylvania as my colleagues are.  Actually, I hasten to add, I am deeply interested in all these things.  But I’ve travelled from Cape Town to Lüneburg to study the Leverage Points team itself, to learn about interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research from the inside (well, from the boundary, with one foot in and one foot out, but that’s for another blog post) and to engender learning within the team itself.   So that we all end up a bit wiser about the how-to of research collaboration across disciplines or, to borrow Ulrike Felt’s evocative term, different “epistemic living spaces” (2009).  To my surprise, most people I explain this to get it first time: “Oh, yes, that makes sense. Collaborative research can get pretty complicated at times.”  And then their expressions cloud a little: “Ooh, that must be pretty uncomfortable for the team, to be your research subjects.”

This job is called Formative Accompanying Research.  FAR.  I have a vivid memory of watching an episode of Sesame Street as a child, in which Oscar the Grouch runs towards the TV screen, until it is filled with his furry face, saying: “This is NEAR” and then runs, puffing hard, into the far distance, until a little speck shouts, “This is FAR”.  Again and again and again – which was endlessly entertaining for children like me.

Yes, it may be uncomfortable for the team, and for me, at times.  And I could end up doing a lot of running between being close-up and further away, to get perspective.  But the intention is both simple and positive, as articulated in the Leverage Points project description: To gain insights into the research process and keep looping these back into the project to the benefit of the Leverage Points team, and to the benefit of inter- and transdisciplinary methodological development more broadly.

If I think about each of the three words in the job of formative accompanying research, the ‘how’ of this task also becomes a little clearer.

Formative, for me, is the opposite of summative.  Instead of an outsider conducting an evaluation at the end of Leverage Points and pointing out to everyone what went well and what didn’t and what we could have done differently if only we’d known better, this is about learning in situ, and as close to real-time as is feasible.  The advantage is that we can gain insights and course-correct as we go.

In music, accompaniment involves providing the harmonic background or rhythmic structure for a lead singer or musicians.  A good musical accompanier takes their cue from the lead performers and makes sure they are not themselves too loud or too obvious.  This idea strongly appeals to me; I see my task as not being in the foreground, but to get the beat of the Leverage Points project (see principle 1 at the end of this piece) and help create some of the conditions that allow us to notice when we are out of synch, to pause, hopefully laugh a little at ourselves, learn something from the experience and then pick up the harmony again.

Lastly, that little word research. I’m drawn to the characteristically contentious differentiation Bruno Latour made between “science” and “research”.  Referring to science as if it was dead and buried, he wrote, “While Science had certainty, coldness, aloofness, objectivity, distance and necessity, Research appears to have all the opposite characteristics: it is uncertain; open-ended; immersed in many lowly problems of money, instruments, and know-how …”.  (1999:20).  Although the Leverage Points project is located in the field of Sustainability Science – which, it must be said, has done a lot towards resuscitating science since Latour wrote these words – the particular role of formative accompanying research will require some tolerance of uncertainty and ambiguity for all of us, especially in these early months while we are still finding our rhythm.

So, the intention is not to subject the team to great discomfort.  And where I get it ‘wrong’ as a researcher – such as overstepping boundaries, or missing the beat – this will hopefully sensitize all of us to both roles: Being a researcher and being on the ‘other side’ – being researched.

Given that Leverage Points owes its name and much of its conceptual framing to Donella Meadows, I have returned to her for some guiding principles.  She was, by all accounts, not only an incisive thinker, but also a wise, humorous and often kind human being.  Her way of being is already instructive to me.  Donella’s book “Thinking in Systems: A primer”, published posthumously, concludes with 15 principles or “systems wisdoms” for “living successfully in a world of systems” (2008:170).  I concur with most of them, but my current Top Six, which I will try to apply to my practice of formative accompanying research with the Leverage Points system, are:

1. Get the beat of the system before intervening (as described above);
2. Use concrete, truthful and rich language, “enriched with systems concepts”;
3. Enhance whole system properties, such as growth, stability and resilience;
4. Respect and distribute information, to strengthen feedback loops;
5. Pay attention to what is important, not just what is quantifiable; and
6. Offer both a critical and an appreciative lens so as not to “weight the bad news more heavily than the good” (2008:185). I believe we learn best under conditions that feel safe-enough for each of us – knowing we all have different safety thresholds – but not so comfortable that we fall asleep in them.

Some of these principles come fairly automatically to me after nearly 20 years of working with organisational teams and inter-organisational collaborations, and some will stretch me considerably over the next three years.

Watch this space.

References

Felt, U. 2009 (Ed.). Knowing and Living in Academic Research: Convergence and heterogeneity in research cultures in the European context. Prague: Institute of Sociology of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic.

Latour, B. 1999. Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

 Meadows, D. 2008. Thinking in Systems: A primer. Wright, D (Ed.). Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing.

At the beginning of February we had our first Leverage Points annual retreat with the 21 of us. This is the fourth important milestone since the start of this project in April 2015. After laying down the conceptual foundations in early November, having kick-off meetings together with the post-docs and PhDs in September and November, this retreat got us thinking at what makes Leverage Points as a whole greater than the sum of its parts. Our motivation was to bring individual aims together and ‘think like a project’. We spent three intense days exchanging ideas, gaining fresh outlooks, and making decisions on key research questions, cross cutting themes, and the transformative case studies. And here is an overview of our struggle.

Day 1 was dedicated to sharing the progress made within our main WorkPackages and creating a common background. ReStructure (WP2), ReConnect (WP3), ReThink (WP4), and the Formative Accompanying Researcher(s) (WP 7) gave their updates, clarified their conceptual underpinnings and research aims. WP5 (the transformative case studies) presented the current state of the case study selection, described the potential cases, introduced some of the case partners, and highlighted opportunities and challenges.
Most importantly, as a foundation for the work done within Integration and Synthesis (WP6) we tried to see how these pieces fit together. We scoped for synergies and ways to align to the project rationale: understanding systems’ transformations towards sustainability by going beyond descriptive analytical research towards transformational sustainability research, and by using and advancing ‘leverage points’ (Meadows 1999) as a key concept.

On Day 2 we continued looking into the relations between the work packages with an emphasis on the transformative case studies where we strive to link conceptual and empirical insights into place-based studies dealing with actionable knowledge. We mapped our research outlines (using VUE) to the potential case studies, in an exercise. This also facilitated the selection of the transformative case studies within the two study regions of Leverage Points: Transylvania and Lower Saxony.
During Day 2 we also heard and discussed about the interests and concerns of the PhD students, in particular in relation to the transformative case studies.

On Day 3 we focused on discussing and planning fieldtrips to Lower Saxony and Transylvania, as well as tasks and actions of the team members until the end of this year. Day 3 also included a passionate intermezzo from our administrative staff.

The retreat in pics

Now three outcomes and highlights of this vibrant experience:

1. We saw how the individual research pieces fit together, the overlapping points, and what is the resulting big picture. By zooming in and out individual thesis, work packages, and thematic fields (food and energy), we began to solve the Leverage Points puzzle. After many of us worked in disciplinary silos during the past months, the retreat was the signal for coming together in a more consolidated academic research team.

Bonding and nurturing by dialogue: Gradually, during the three days, we tuned into each other’s epistemic living spaces (Felt 2009), calibrated our academic ‘realities’, adjusted our epistemological and ontological expectations, bridged worldviews and knowledge systems, negotiated our values, and checked our normative assumptions. There is still a lot of work to be done especially regarding timing, communication, and coordination, but this little ‘dance’ brought us a closer.

2. Despite some initial confusion, which, as somebody put it, is an intrinsic feature of such a complex setting, we decided on two transformative case studies. Following up field scoping in search of spots of societal need and interest in Lower Saxony and Romania, we selected among two potential case studies in Germany and three potential cases in Romania.

3. Finally, this retreat led us not only to thinking like a research project, but ultimately to ‘feeling’ as a team of people. After some energizing rounds of ‘research speed dating’ we gained a fresh non-academic outlook on our project and decided we are happy to be working together.

The retreat in pics

Although we are going to use this blog more intensively or at least on a regular basis, you can also check other blogs and media channels connected to some of us. Please feel free to let us know what you would be interested in finding on this ‘updates’ page of our blog.

Blogs
Sustainability Governance
Ideas for Sustainability
Ecology Statistics Sustainability Conservation Happiness
Sustainability Logbook

Twitter

https://twitter.com/HenrikvnWehrden

References
Felt, Ulrike. “Knowing and living in academic research.” Convergence and heterogeneity in research cultures in the European context (2009): 242.

On Friday 8^th January, Andra, Daniel and I headed out to Transylvania for a week of ‘scoping’ fieldwork. Our aim was to come up with some practical options for the transdisciplinary case study in Romania. More information on the case studies and their role in the project is here. In this blog post, I will just give and overview of the highlights of the trip, and a few key emerging discussions.

Highlight 1: The richness of opportunity

Prior to the trip, Andra had invested a lot of time into locating organisations and projects with potential for collaboration. She drew a lot on her experience from her PhD work in Joern Fischer’s sustainable landscapes project, and with assistance from Tibi Hartel. We therefore met with a range of organisations and were able to present the Leverage Points project and ourselves, and hear about an extensive range of exciting initiatives. We learned about emerging cultural centres, ecotourism ventures, farming associations, and projects to conserve and promote traditional meadows and tree pastures. All were presented by dedicated people who were passionate about what they were doing, and obviously had deep understanding of the systems they were working in. To be surrounded by such enthusiasm and skill was a very positive experience for me, and left me (even more) excited about the work we will do in Romania.

Highlight 2: Links to the empirical (‘traditional science’) work

For all of the possibilities we saw, I could see clear links to the empirical elements of Leverage Points. The TD case could learn from the empirical work and vice versa. For example, in the case of a cultural centre, the reconnect workpackage could help to inform design in terms of understanding how to connect people to their environment. But the same workpackage could also use the case as an observation or study opportunity to test ideas. Such opportunity to fit between the different components of our project help to confirm the relevance of our study design.

Highlight 3: Opportunities for team discussion

During travel time and meals, we had plenty of time as a team for discussion. We talked about the TD case studies. This included weighing up the pros and cons and practicalities of cases we had seen; or thinking about what the tangible case would be if we worked with a particular organization. Such conversations are essential for case selection and development. And gave us space to develop a shared understanding on what was important, and what we are aiming for. Additionally, we talked a lot about the overall project, how we thought it was going, tensions we are experiencing, etc. None of these conversations were representative of the overall project – we were just three people. But I certainly find it helpful to hear about individual experiences so that I can consider them when thinking about how we manage and develop the project.

Next steps

Now that we are back, I think we all need to catch up on sleep and emails. Andra is currently collating her notes on the TD case, and I am doing the same for my thoughts on the fit to the empirical work packages. We have had a debrief to discuss our favourite cases, and what the tangible case actually is (place, people, topic, actions, etc.). We are now putting together all our thoughts to come up with a short list of 2 or 3 cases, and to ‘map’ how the empirical work could fit to it. These will then be presented at the project retreat in February, with the intention that we select our case then.

Leuphana University Lüneburg (foundation under public law), Faculty of Sustainability invites applications for 8 new PhD positions within a new, trans-disciplinary project funded by the State of Lower Saxony and Volkswagen Foundation entitled: Leverage Points for Sustainability Transformation: Institutions, People and Knowledge

All eight positions will be as PhD Researcher– Wissenschaftliche/r Mitarbeiter/in, salary group E 13 TV-L (50%). Starting ideally October 2015, for a duration of up to 3 years.

Application deadline: 30th June, 2015

To apply
The official job adverts for all eight positions and details of how to apply can be found at http://www.leuphana.de/bewerben/jobs-und-karriere/forschung-lehre.html PDF versions of the official adverts can be found at https://leveragepoints.org/jobs/

Leuphana University Lüneburg  invites expressions of interest for 8 new PhD positions within the trans-disciplinary project funded by the State of Lower Saxony and Volkswagen Foundation entitled: Leverage Points for Sustainability Transformation: Institutions, People and Knowledge.

Details of the eight positions can be found at www.leveragepoints.org/jobs/

There were some technical problems with the Leuphana university’s email servers last week. If you have submitted an application for one of the four postdoc positions and have not received an email confirmation please resend your application.

The deadline for all four postdoc positions is the 10th of March 2015.

We have now published the adverts for four post doc positions on the Leverage Points project.  Job descriptions, person specifications and information on how to apply are available on the Jobs page.