Taking Interdisciplinarity for Granted
professor RoB white | MAY 2026
Photo by UX Indonesia on Unsplash
So called ‘interdisciplinary’ grants are increasingly the flavour of the month and will keep increasing in value from the point of view of government selection and funding processes. This is especially the case for large scale projects.
However, such grants are tricky at the best of times. They depend on having an experienced team that is expert across distinct disciplinary areas. They also require a basic understanding of what ‘interdisciplinarity’ actually means.
The notions of ‘discipline’ and ‘disciplinary’ refer to specific demarcations of knowledge. They relate to domains of specialised inquiry which are each in their own right a shared enterprise centred around a particular epistemology (or ‘ways of knowing’) and methodology (or the frameworks for particular methods of data collection). They have their own language, theories and concepts and draw on particular technical skills and technologies.
The division of knowledge into specific spheres of specialised knowledge is relatively recent, given that for centuries there was no demarcation (and therefore no silos) that separated philosophy from science, sociology from natural history. The approach was driven by the problem; concepts and methods were spurred by how best to understand, interpret and respond to a particular issue, dilemma or conundrum.
Today, knowledge tends to be much more fragmented and sequestered.
Counter to this are several academic trends. For example, there is cross-disciplinary work. This refers to research that explains or addresses aspects of one discipline (e.g., forensic investigations) from the perspective or through the instruments or methods of another (e.g., social science evaluation of forensic science as a social process).
Multidisciplinary approaches on the other hand involve the coming together of different disciplines (with different types of knowledge and expertise) to analysis specific problems, but working within their own disciplinary framings and methods. For instance, study of cybercrime involving the trafficking of protected plants might involve computer specialists, lawyers, botanists and criminologists, each contributing their own understanding to the nature of the problem and how to respond to it.
Interdisciplinary work, however, is much more ambitious. This refers to the re-making of disciplines and disciplinary boundaries. Particular research that utilises different disciplinary concepts, perspectives and methods are, in essence, integrated into a novel perhaps more comprehensive perspective. This advanced articulation of different branches of knowledge is sometimes called ‘transdisciplinary’.
Whatever the combination, and to whatever the degree of integration, the mixing and matching of disciplines in undertaking research ultimately depends on three key things:
• first, there must be a topic or problem that evidently requires more than one discipline in pursuit of an answer (e.g., IT specialists and criminologist examining hate crime on the Internet);
• second, the topic or problem must be of high enough importance and/or public profile so as to garner the attention of potential funding bodies (e.g., Internet-based terrorism messages giving rise to real world incidents); and
• there must be demonstrated expertise held by each specific disciplinary member of the composite team (e.g., there must be no weak links in the chain of disciplinary knowledge and skills).
To address complex problems, whether in abstract theory or practical application, it is increasingly recognised that constructing research teams from diverse disciplines may provide insight and expertise greater than just the one discipline or indeed the sum of the parts.
This shift toward integrated research and scholarship is not new as mentioned above – it used to be the cornerstone of any and all quests for knowledge.
It is also reflected in the historical development of ‘fields’ as distinct from disciplines. For example, criminology is a field, comprised of disciplines such as law, sociology, history and psychology, amongst others. Each discipline brings it specific contributions to the study of crime, criminality and criminal justice. Collectively, they define what ‘criminology’ is and the general parameters of the field as a branch of knowledge.
In constructing research partnerships, therefore, it is wise to be conscious of the accordion-like separations and coming together of various knowledges, the continuing relevance of knowledge fusions, the importance of distinctiveness, and realistic assessment of what each player brings to the research table depending on the nature of the problem or project.
Governments and government grants bodies are increasingly looking to academic research and applied scholarship to provide answers to big societal problems. Priority areas are presently being set, and many of these intrinsically demand cross-disciplinary, multidisciplinary and/or interdisciplinary approaches.
Time, then, for researchers to sharpen up their partnerships, collaborations and co-designs, but do so well in advance of putting together a grant application. Compelling research design begins with cohesive teamwork and processes that demonstrate that each partner knows the contributions and expertise of the other. It is this prior togetherness that also conveys the potential public benefits of a specific project and, specifically, that something might actually be achieved by it.
