Research, part of a special feature on Meaningful Transdisciplinary Collaborations for Sustainability: Local, Artistic, and Scientific Knowledge

INTRODUCTION

The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES 2019) defines transformative change as “a fundamental, system-wide reorganization across technological, economic and social factors, including paradigms, goals and values,” and recognizes that we need deep transformations toward sustainability from a social-ecological perspective. A social-ecological perspective recognizes that humans and nature form part of an interconnected and inextricably linked system that is dynamic, adaptive, and interdependent (Virapongse et al. 2016, Biggs et al. 2021). Although this understanding of social-ecological systems is not new, we find ourselves in a time of planetary crises due to complex and wicked problems that single-discipline, instructive (didactic), natural science-dependent (positivistic), and sector-based research is unable to provide adequate responses to (Pörtner et al. 2023, Urai and Kelly 2023).

As highlighted by Malcolm Fernandes (in Chaillou et al. 2020), the power and hegemony of the English language and positivistic science have contributed to the “rational” separation of humans and nature in our study and understanding of the world. As we come to terms with the inadequacy of single-discipline studies to inform sustainability solutions, there is a growing recognition of transdisciplinary research to transcend the disciplines and work with collaborators outside of academia to grapple with intractable problems found within complex social-ecological systems (Biggs et al. 2021, Franke et al. 2022, Strand et al. 2022a). This has also been the case when it comes to sustainable ocean governance, where transdisciplinarity, co-design, co-production, and co-creation of knowledge are promoted as part of the necessary solutions to the “science we need for the ocean we want” by the UN Ocean Decade for Sustainable Development (UNESCO 2020), and continue to be praised by scholars for their potential for impactful and socially significant research (Moallemi et al. 2020, Franke et al. 2022, Hills and Maharaj 2023).

What transdisciplinary research and knowledge co-production with non-academic collaborators should look like in practice remains contentious and under scrutiny (Turnhout et al. 2013), leading to various and sometimes differing recommendations and suggestions for how to conduct impactful and inclusive transdisciplinarity (Beier et al. 2016, Jahn et al. 2021, Franke et al. 2022, Strand et al. 2022a). For example, Jahn et al. (2021) find that there are five different research modes, or “clusters,” in transdisciplinary research for sustainability science, namely “purely academic research,” “practice consultation,” “selective practitioner involvement,” “ideal-typical transdisciplinary research,” and “practice-oriented research.” Similarly, Chambers et al. (2021:983) identify six “modes” of sustainability co-production, namely “(1) researching solutions; (2) empowering voices; (3) brokering power; (4) reframing power; (5) navigating differences and (6) reframing agency,” and Strand et al. (2022a) highlight diverse approaches to involving non-academic collaborators in transdisciplinarity for transformative ocean governance research on a continuum, from partly working with non-academic “stakeholders” as “research participants” to ensuring that non-academic “collaborators” or “co-researchers” form just as much part of the team as academic collaborators. This paper argues that transdisciplinary research should preferably align with the latter, or what Max-Neef (2005) calls “strong transdisciplinarity,” where the role of non-academic collaborators and contributors are a structural element of the project and that the project is collaborative from the very start in setting the research agenda and developing the methodologies. This means that there is a need to “acknowledge power systems that enable certain knowledge to dominate in potential ocean futures” (Franke et al. 2022:22), and this research set out to explore the value of arts-based participatory research for more equitable transdisciplinary collaborations between academic and non-academic collaborators. Norström et al. (2020:182) identify four principles that should be considered for co-production of knowledge in sustainability research to “engage in meaningful co-productive practices,” namely (1) context-based, (2) pluralistic, (3) goal-oriented, and (4) interactive research. Similarly, Breckwoldt et al. (2021:1) propose four measures to “improve participation in, and ownership of, the research by local counterparts” in transdisciplinary marine research, namely (1) building rapport, (2) engaging and exchanging, (3) being accommodating and attentive, and (4) being respectful. Transdisciplinarity in practice, though, should still be critical of co-production approaches to avoid “shifting the burden of response onto vulnerable parties” (Blythe et al. 2018), such as involving non-academic co-researchers without reimbursing for their time and efforts.

Beyond these principles and measures, we argue that transdisciplinary collaborations need to actively deconstruct colonial power structures and center learning to pursue more equitable approaches. For example, instead of the UN Ocean Decade emphasizing the need to “Change humanity’s relationship with the ocean” (Challenge 10, UNESCO 2020), we can, through meaningful transdisciplinary collaborations with coastal communities, learn from existing human relationships with the ocean that are caring, interdependent, and multidimensional (Hau‘ofa 1998, Chilisa 2019, Mulalap et al. 2020, Okafor-Yarwood et al. 2020, Boswell and Thornton 2021, Strand et al. 2022b). To do this, however, we find that there is a need to actively blur and disrupt the roles of contributors in terms of who is seen as a “researcher” and who is being “researched.” This research, therefore, considers how and if we can pursue transdisciplinary collaborations that give equitable valuation and recognition to plural ways of knowing the ocean.

In a South African context of violent historical segregation to the environment and environmental decision-making, and continuous exclusion of local communities in informing ocean management (Sowman and Sunde 2018, Mbatha 2022, Peer et al. 2022, Strand et al. 2022c), there is an urgent need to identify opportunities for more inclusive and transdisciplinary knowledge creation supporting ocean governance. By co-creating knowledge through photography and storytelling with various non-academic collaborators, this research highlights opportunities, lessons, and limitations to consider when pursuing arts-based transdisciplinary research for transformative ocean governance. To ensure that we promote and encourage “transformative change” toward more sustainable social-ecological systems, this paper therefore reflects on the utility and experiences of contributing to and taking part in arts-based participatory research projects in two different ocean governance contexts in South Africa: Algoa Bay, Eastern Cape province, and Mandeni in KwaZulu-Natal province. Analyzing reflections by social and marine scientists, Indigenous and local community members, and artists taking part in these transdisciplinary collaborations, we argue that we should aim to advance what we call comprehensive transdisciplinarity and that this should involve particular attention to trust-building and thorough scoping, benefits to knowledge holders, expectation clarification, flexibility in knowledge sharing, and opportunities for non-academic collaborators to be involved in the whole process from design to dissemination. Finally, the paper concludes with recommendations for academic institutions to better support more equitable and meaningful transdisciplinary collaborations in the future.

METHODS AND CONTEXTS

Arts-based methods have been found to prompt multiple perspectives on an issue or topic (Barone and Eisner 2012, Leavy 2020), and can support what is known as a pluriversality (denying universality) of ways of knowing (epistemology), being in (ontology), and valuing (axiology) the world (Moon et al. 2021). The term pluriversality has been extensively discussed in the works of Mignolo (2000), and refers to deconstructing the myth of universality, and recognizing that knowledges are built on different cultures, where none are universal. Arts-based methods can also activate the imagination and create emotional connections and communicate beyond the written word to better reach non-academic audiences (Barone and Eisner 2012, Leavy 2020, Strand et al. 2022c). In a context where ocean conservation and ocean governance processes continue to marginalize and undermine Indigenous and local coastal communities that depend on the ocean for livelihoods and well-being (Sowman and Sunde 2018, Mbatha 2022, Peer et al. 2022, Strand et al. 2022c), the need to imagine more equal realities and futures becomes paramount. This is increasingly important in a context where government representatives, policy makers, and researchers are exploring opportunities to advance more equitable and inclusive ocean decision-making (Bennett 2022, Lombard et al. 2023).

Aiming to highlight perspectives of different co-researchers and co-facilitators^[1] in their experience of contributing to or taking lead in shaping an arts-based transdisciplinary research project, the methodological approach informing this paper was twofold. Firstly, the arts-based participatory research conducted in two different ocean governance contexts in South Africa forms part of a larger Ph.D. project exploring the value and usefulness of these methods for more equitable approaches to ocean decision-making (Strand 2023). Secondly, following these arts-based processes, co-researchers and co-facilitators were asked to reflect on their experience of participating in these transdisciplinary collaborations, and this paper is the outcome of this process. Algoa Bay and Mandeni are two contexts that are significantly different in both ocean governance approaches and in their sociopolitical complexities, and although we do not compare them, this helps explore the usefulness of the arts-based participatory research methods for more equitable transdisciplinary collaborations.

Algoa Bay

Located in the southeast of South Africa (Fig. 1), Algoa Bay is home to the populous city of Gqeberha (formerly Port Elizabeth) and is known for its rich marine biodiversity, ocean-related sectors such as shipping, tourism, and fishing, and a large coastal population with a variety of socioeconomic interactions and multidimensional demographics (Rivers et al. 2022, Jacob et al. 2023). Apartheid and colonialism have had significant impact on current Algoa Bay demographics and spatial planning across the bay, as both resulted in institutionalized and structural racism as well as forced removals of Black and Colored families, communities, and populations from the coastline and the city centers (Rasdien et al. 2008, Rogerson 2017, Roux 2021). As a result, legacies of colonization and apartheid have and continue to exclude Indigenous and local communities from ocean and coastal governance processes as well as reduce their access to the ocean and coast. This continues to impact people’s past, present, and future relationships with the ocean and coast, which need to be considered when working toward transformative ocean governance. This research aimed to inform a pilot marine spatial plan that seeks to influence the national marine spatial planning process in South Africa (Dorrington et al. 2018, Rivers et al. 2023a), specifically to identify pathways to ensure Indigenous and local priorities, interests, and knowledges directly inform ocean decision-making.

The arts-based participatory research in Algoa Bay worked with 24 co-researchers from across the bay, self-identifying as Indigenous Khoisan knowledge holders, spiritual healers and chiefs, marine educators, sangomas (Nguni traditional healers), youth, recreational ocean users, ocean conservation activists, small-scale fishers, subsistence fishers, bait collectors, and residents interested in the future of the ocean, but feeling excluded from current decision-making. The 24 co-researchers, though far from representative, reflect a multi-identity and multi-cultural engagement with the ocean. From over a year of close collaboration between April 2021 and April 2022, the arts-based research went through stages of initial outreach and shaping workshops, cross-learning arts-based workshops, in situ storytelling and photography, and collaborative analysis workshops, finally resulting in an exhibition and multi-stakeholder workshop, where co-researchers collaborated in each stage (full methodological approach in Strand 2023). This exhibition and workshop were attended by co-researchers and co-facilitators, Indigenous and local knowledge holders, all tiers of government, subsistence and small-scale fishers, conservation authorities, national marine spatial planning working group representatives, heritage managers, conservation organizations, coastal managers, and scientists. Together, people discussed and developed recommendations for how to best recognize the knowledges, priorities, and ocean connections conveyed through the photostories in marine spatial planning moving forward (Rivers et al. 2023a, Rivers et al. 2023b).

Mandeni

Situated in KwaZulu-Natal Province in the northeast of South Africa, Mandeni Local Municipality is approximately 100 km north of the city of eThekwini “In the Bay” (formally known as Durban). The uThukela marine protected area (MPA), stretching between Tinley Manor in the south and Mtunzini in the north (see Fig. 1), was declared in 2017 and signed into force in 2019 by the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment. The Department has subsequently handed over the management of the MPA to a conservation authority, Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife, who is receiving support from the non-governmental organization (NGO) Wildtrust for enforcement of regulations and in developing the management plan. Mandeni is a rural area known for farming, fishing, long-stretching beaches, and an abundant coastline, and is located in the very center of uThukela MPA. Despite this, local communities expressed that they had not been consulted at all prior to the proclamation of the MPA, which they fear will result in further limitations and restrictions to their livelihoods, fishing practices, and cultural heritage. The arts-based research in Mandeni aimed to identify ways in which Indigenous, traditional, and local priorities, connections, interests, and knowledge could better inform and influence the management of the uThukela MPA (Strand 2023).

The arts-based participatory research in Mandeni collaborated with 24 co-researchers from Hwebede, Mangeza, and Mhlubulo communities, self-identifying as subsistence and small-scale fishers, sangomas (traditional healer/diviner), recreational ocean users, iNdunas (traditional community leaders), youth, coastal foragers and harvesters, religious ocean users, and inyangas (herbalists). Although the co-researchers are far from representative, they together reflect a broad variety of ocean users and ocean connections within a small geographical area. Despite similarities in socioeconomic standing and backgrounds, race, language, and household locations, the diversity of ocean knowledges and stories emerging from the research emphasize the complexity of human dimensions in ocean protection and governance. From a year of close collaboration between May 2022 and April 2023, similarly to Algoa Bay, the Mandeni research process went through stages of initial outreach and shaping workshops, cross-learning arts-based workshops, in situ storytelling and photography, collaborative analysis workshops, and finally an exhibition and multi-stakeholder workshop (Fig. 2). The final exhibition and workshop were attended by local community members, traditional authorities, conservation authorities, local fishers, all tiers of government, heritage managers, coastal managers, NGOs, and scientists. Together, people discussed and developed recommendations for how the priorities of the co-researchers can directly inform the forthcoming uThukela management plan and the implementation of the MPA moving forward (Strand 2023).

Analysis: reflections for more equitable collaborations

The value and usefulness of the arts-based participatory research processes in Algoa Bay and Mandeni for more equitable ocean governance have been discussed in detail in Strand (2023). The specific analysis for this paper rather focuses on the value of these research processes for horizontal and equitable transdisciplinary research and collaborations. Although transdisciplinary knowledge production with non-academic collaborators as co-researchers and participatory research methods have the opportunity to deconstruct, destabilize, and challenge current top-down and asymmetrical knowledge hierarchies (Leavy 2017, Manuel-Navarrete et al. 2021, Strand et al. 2022a), they still run the risk of perpetuating these exact hierarchies (Turnhout et al. 2013). Switzer (2018:193) emphasizes the role of skilled facilitators and careful research design considerations, such as flexible, multiple, and open-ended interactions, in re-distributing power through participatory visual research methods, stating:

...[t]he role of the facilitator or researcher and research context cannot be discounted. Hence, it is not the use of photography that creates a more level playing field, but rather, the open-ended dialogue and discussion, the skill of the facilitator or researcher, and other research design considerations... that may contribute to this re-distribution of power.

Following the arts-based research processes in Algoa Bay and Mandeni, co-researchers and co-facilitators were asked by the principal researcher to share their reflections on their personal experience of the research processes, which resulted in this manuscript. Ten co-researchers and co-facilitators who wanted to take part in this process shared their reflections and were asked if they wanted to contribute to a co-authored output, the outcome of which is this paper. The sharing of reflections was conducted through an open conversation; short, structured interviews; or self-recorded on phones by responding to a short question guide as outlined below. All reflections were collected between April and December 2022.

• Please reflect on the research process thus far
• How did you experience the arts-based workshops and process?
• What was your experience of contributing to the research process?
• How did the exhibition make you feel?
• What have you learnt, if anything?
• What are your main take-aways from the research process?

The open format in which contributors could decide to respond to the above guiding questions provided people the opportunity to respond in a way that best suited them and their time commitments. The open-ended questions also prompted contributors to reflect on both opportunities and challenges of the arts-based research, and follow-up questions were asked if needed. Interviews were transcribed and initially analyzed by the principal investigator according to the most prominent emerging themes. This initial coding (Appendix 1) was then reviewed by all ten contributors to this paper. The following results are therefore presented according to these emerging themes, as they have been shaped by written or conversational engagements with the co-authors. All reflections are directly quoted contributions of the co-authors and can be found under their respective theme. The authors of this paper are knowledge holders representing several different perspectives, disciplines, expertise, and lived experiences from the Algoa Bay and Mandeni research processes (Table 1).

The contributions from the two contexts to this specific manuscript (Algoa Bay = 4, Mandeni = 2, both = 4) are sometimes overlapping, as several co-authors worked in both contexts. The contributions are also slightly unequal because the timelines differed between the research in the two focus areas. At the time of data collection, several co-researchers in Algoa Bay were occupied with other responsibilities whilst Mandeni co-researchers were preparing their final photostories for the exhibition, which meant that the sharing was completely on a voluntary basis. Therefore, when asked whether they wanted to share their reflections, only four co-researchers from Algoa Bay and no co-researchers from Mandeni participated in sharing reflections and co-authoring the paper. It is therefore important to note that the authors of this paper do not adequately represent the variety of ocean voices, knowledges, and perspectives that took part in the arts-based transdisciplinary research processes in Algoa Bay and Mandeni, and this influenced the results reported in this manuscript. For example, a limitation to this paper is the lack of reflections from subsistence fishers and traditional healers in both contexts, and local community members in Mandeni. As is further considered in the discussion, academic outputs such as peer-reviewed journal articles are not necessarily valuable to people outside of academia, and many co-researchers may therefore not see the value in contributing to this manuscript. Although we do not compare the two contexts, the results from the two different contexts are significant, as they show similar or diverging priorities, considerations, and lessons from transdisciplinary collaborations for more equitable approaches to ocean management.

Although the term “co-researchers” has been briefly introduced above, we find that this concept needs further elaboration in light of transdisciplinarity that is horizontal (Manuel-Navarrete et al. 2021), equitable, and collaborative from planning to outputs. When referring to horizontal transdisciplinary research, Manuel-Navarrete et al. (2021) argue that researchers need to establish partnerships with non-academic collaborators that avoid perpetuating “colonial patterns of behaviour” in academic practices and culture by contextually situating what and how they do research and pay attention and respond to existing power dynamics to ensure everyone can contribute equally and equitably. This is important to emphasize, as existing literature on transdisciplinary research often refers to “stakeholders” (e.g., Beier et al. 2016, Breckwoldt et al. 2021, Franke et al. 2022) instead of collaborators or co-researchers, insinuating a different hierarchy or power structure in terms of determining decisions about the research. Building on what Max-Neef (2005) calls “strong” transdisciplinarity, we argue that being a co-researcher should mean that you as an individual have agency and power to influence the research process or go in your own direction in terms of what you want to pursue and/or create in the process. Being a co-researcher should mean you feel empowered to ask questions of every step or decision made along the way, and that you shape the research according to your own needs and interests. We find that several necessary considerations for transdisciplinary research therefore involve trust building, learning, and blurring the invented boundaries between contributors to the research, all of which are presented in the results below.

RESULTS

The reflections of the authors, who represent various roles and contributions in the two focus areas, highlight important lessons of contextualizing arts-based participatory research methods in area-based ocean management in South Africa. Specifically, the co-authors highlight and reflect on (1) the importance of thorough scoping, building trust, and everyday ethics; (2) blurring and complicating the roles of contributors; (3) art as a powerful medium for storytelling and empathy; (4) learning from multiple ways of knowing the ocean; and (5) arts-based transdisciplinary research to find common ground.

The importance of thorough scoping, building trust, and everyday ethics

The reflections of contributors to the arts-based transdisciplinary research in both Algoa Bay and Mandeni emphasize the importance of slowing things down and respectfully listening to community members and co-researchers to build meaningful relationships (see Table 2). The arts-based transdisciplinary research process took more than a year in each context and involved several workshops and engagements. By working with a small group of co-researchers and spending quality time with them, the arts-based participatory research process provided opportunities to develop meaningful and strong relationships with co-researchers that were built on trust and respect. This resulted in co-researchers actively participating in all the engagements and workshops, with a safe space provided for people to share stories of ocean governance that often involved hard-to-tell experiences, exclusions, and lack of access. The inherent slowness, thorough scoping, and participatory aspect of the arts-based research process was paramount to nurturing a space that promoted an inclusive valuation of ocean knowledges, providing a safe and conducive space for co-researchers to share their stories and knowledges to elevate marginalized voices in ocean governance.

Developing meaningful relationships with contributors and collaborators in these processes proved crucial, as this meant people could freely share their expectations, hopes, and wishes of the research process, the objectives and outputs that contributed to a more collaborative endeavor. For example, in Mandeni there were already critical perceptions of researchers who had previously come to collect information and never returned, and the careful scoping with traditional leaders and community representatives prior to the collaborative shaping of the research was important for meaningful engagements. Furthermore, developing trust through slow and in-depth engagement processes meant that co-facilitators and co-researchers shared what was working and not working in the specific contexts and focus areas, and an important emerging reflection was how the engagements had to be tailored to the two specific contexts.

The above reflections from co-researchers and facilitators of the transdisciplinary research process highlight the importance of thorough, slow, and meaningful engagement with potential co-researchers, even prior to the commencement of the research. The co-researchers and co-facilitators emphasize the importance of continuous feedback and establishing connections with each other that translated into active engagement and excitement about the process by co-researchers.

Blurring and disrupting the roles of contributors

One of the most significant results emerging from the arts-based research processes in Algoa Bay and Mandeni, as emphasized through the reflections of various collaborators and co-researchers (Table 3), were the opportunities they provided in deconstructing the invented boundaries, or blurring the lines, between various contributors. The arts-based transdisciplinary research processes were useful in blurring and disrupting the invented roles of “researcher,” “research participant,” and “knowledge holders,” as people could self-determine how and what they wanted to share. This supports what Chilisa (2017:813) considers a precondition for decolonized transdisciplinary research, namely ensuring that the process “legitimise [Indigenous and local knowledge] holders, practitioners, and communities as scholars and authors of what they know and how it can be known.”

The research in Algoa Bay and Mandeni demonstrated that developing meaningful and beyond-science relationships with co-researchers could break down our current ways of doing research on communities rather than pursuing research with communities. Bringing various ocean decision-makers, managers, authorities, and Indigenous and local knowledge holders together at the exhibition also provided a space for people to engage directly and discuss their overlapping or diverging priorities of ocean governance.

The results of the arts-based transdisciplinary research in Algoa Bay and Mandeni highlight that a precondition for transdisciplinarity should be building sustainable knowledge-to-policy relationships that can outlive the life of projects and funding (Norström et al. 2020), which is an aspect of transdisciplinary research that demands further scrutiny.

The above reflections demonstrate the opportunities arts-based participatory research processes can provide in ensuring co-researchers and co-facilitators become more horizontal in their contributions and opening up a space for co-learning together and sharing experiences with each other. Some co-researchers also highlight the positive aspects of capacity building in conveying stories through photography and the importance of the iterative process, which made them claim greater ownership and benefit from the research. These reflections also speak to arts-based methods such as photography and storytelling as powerful conveyors, or mediums, in and of themselves, and the importance of facilitating a space in which knowledge holders can share their stories directly with decision-makers and other ocean practitioners.

Art as a powerful medium for storytelling and empathy

The findings also show the valuable role of the arts in sharing impactful stories and experiences, encouraging empathy with audiences, and creating a space for catharsis for what may be traumatic experiences and memories and for people to unlearn what they thought they knew (see Table 4). Firstly, the photography and storytelling aspects of the research collaborations opened up a space for people to share multidimensional stories of their experiences, connections, and interactions with the ocean and coast. The reflections highlight that arts-based methods can convey stories, feelings, and knowledges that may be difficult to capture through the written word (Castleden et al. 2008, Leavy 2020), and contributors found that engaging with other people’s stories evoked strong emotions in them. In two different contexts of ocean governance approaches where local coastal communities have felt excluded from decision-making processes, the importance of sharing these stories cannot be underestimated.

Secondly, we find that art can be a powerful medium and tool in transdisciplinary research as it can encourage empathy across lived experiences and realities, and allow people to rethink their inherent biases, knowledges, and viewpoints, a process that is necessary for social learning (Wals 2007). Art can provide a connection between people who otherwise may not have connected with each other and can bring together people of various ocean knowledges and priorities.

The above reflections highlight that the use of arts-based methods and communicating knowledge through photostories in an exhibition provides opportunities for co-researchers to meaningfully convey and engage with multiple ways of knowing the ocean. The photostories have power to stir emotions in people, creating opportunities for people who may have diverging opinions to connect over shared emotions, interests, and priorities. Furthermore, the arts-based methods contributed to a more inclusive and engaging knowledge-sharing process, where people felt safe to share difficult experiences, understand different viewpoints, and take part in inspiring dialogues.

Learning from multiple ways of knowing the ocean

The arts-based process provided a space for people to learn from each other, and from various ways of knowing the ocean (see Table 5). In both contexts, the group of co-researchers and co-facilitators represented multiple, sometimes diverging and sometimes converging, interests, values, and perspectives of the ocean. In a context of historical animosity between “resource users” and “resource managers” in ocean conservation and decision-making in South Africa, it is imperative to work through conflict to find more equitable and inclusive governance pathways (Strand et al. 2022b). The research process therefore prioritized time and space to discuss divergent views and conflicting priorities, particularly between people who form part of governance processes and people who feel excluded from these. The creation of a safe space to share ocean stories and multiple ocean perspectives led to learning instead of conflict, as people felt comfortable expressing critique or disagreement through photostories. Where some co-researchers depended on ocean resources for a living, others lived to conserve these ocean resources. Where some worked as marine educators, others barely spent time by the ocean owing to a lack of access. Where some loved the busiest beaches for their energetic life, others sought out the most remote places to enjoy solitude. The arts-based transdisciplinary research process, from the initial engagements to the multimedia exhibitions and multi-stakeholder workshops, therefore, provided an immersive opportunity for contributors to learn from each other without creating further tension and distance between knowledge holders.

Learning through knowledge co-creation processes is powerful, as it can shape the way we think of and engage with people and the environment around us (Wals 2007). Learning that we all depend on the ocean, although for differing reasons, for example, might make a difference in how some people interact with the ocean in the future (e.g., choosing not to litter, or sharing stories of the importance of the ocean with others). Knowing or experiencing something often means that we care more about it. Similarly, knowing or experiencing someone and their interests, priorities, and knowledges, might mean that we care more about them and their interests, priorities, and knowledges as well. The arts-based transdisciplinary research process was useful in bringing together people with a variety of connections to and interactions with the ocean and coast, which facilitated social learning processes by engaging deeply, meaningfully, and respectfully with each other (Wals 2007, Strand et al. 2022c).

Considering the reflections of the co-authors above, we find that the arts-based transdisciplinary research process provides opportunities for people to learn not only from each other but from a variety of ways of knowing, being with, relating to, understanding, and valuing the ocean and coast. Through meaningful engagements, conducive spaces for learning, and listening, the arts-based workshops and exhibition encourage people to see, understand, and learn from other ocean users, knowledges, connections, and interactions.

Arts-based transdisciplinary research to find common ground about the ocean

The results of engaging with contributors to the arts-based transdisciplinary research in Algoa Bay and Mandeni found that the process was helpful in finding common ground despite our different priorities, experiences, and knowledges (see Table 6). By learning from each other’s stories and experiences with the ocean, through meaningful, slow, and deep engagements, the process made it possible to look beyond our individual frames and perspectives and reflect on what our common goals and wishes for ocean governance were. A challenge for both equitable governance and knowledge co-production collaborations is the integration and coming together of various sectors, knowledges, and interests (Moon et al. 2021), but these transdisciplinary processes proved important in creating a starting point for inclusive collaborations by moving from individual to collective perspectives on ocean priorities.

Reflecting on the need to transform academic ecological research, specifically looking at ways of decolonizing practices, Trisos et al. (2021:1207) highlight how the use of art assists increased dialogue on “interlinked biological and cultural diversity.” Furthermore, they argue that “storytelling can help to facilitate knowledge exchange and support dialogue for conservation practices” as “going beyond text in this way enables more inclusive, detailed and careful attention to diverse representations of knowledge” (Trisos et al. 2021:1207). The results from the reflections emphasize the opportunities of arts-based research in communicating various stories and ocean connections all at once, and the emergence of overlapping priorities of people’s ocean connections that can assist people in finding common ground.

As highlighted by the former sections and themes, the arts-based approach to transdisciplinary research has opened up the space to learn from each other, and even unlearn certain aspects of ocean and coastal knowledge and values. Specifically, through our conversations and discussions, several of the co-authors unlearned the supposed incompatibility of cultural and ecological priorities of coastal areas, and the principal researcher has previously reflected on unlearning the myth of objectivity in research (Strand et al. 2022c). What these reflections point to is the opportunity arts-based research processes provide in finding commonalities despite different and sometimes conflicting ways of understanding, being with, knowing, and valuing the ocean. For example, the reflections highlight that we all depend on a healthy and clean ocean for well-being, whether it is for physical or mental health, spiritual connections, recreational activities, or livelihoods and food.

DISCUSSION

The above reflections provide several lessons and considerations from the arts-based transdisciplinary research processes specifically, and about transdisciplinary research more broadly. An important lesson and consideration for future research when it comes to co-developing outputs and communicating the research process has been developing pathways to avoid “academizing” and over-theorizing the results and discussion emerging from the different reflections. Too often, the concept of transdisciplinarity overemphasizes specific academic words and concepts and draws broad conclusions without paying enough attention to the important aspects of the process of co-producing knowledge with non-academic collaborators. These include ethical considerations; thorough, slow, and meaningful engagements; respect and understanding; careful listening; and learning from each other. Building on existing literature on transdisciplinary research (Beier et al. 2016, Norström et al. 2020, Breckwoldt et al. 2021), the influence of epistemologies on integrated marine research (Moon et al. 2021), and arts-based research (Leavy 2020), the following sections discuss some of the current barriers to collaborative transdisciplinary research, the value of arts-based participatory research for comprehensive transdisciplinarity, and opportunities for equitable valuation of various knowledge systems needed for deep transformations toward social-ecological sustainability.

Current barriers for (truly) collaborative transdisciplinary research

Fundamental to the “success” of transdisciplinary research is mindfully designing slow and meaningful engagements with potential co-researchers and collaborators prior to, during, and after a research project (Leavy 2017). The results emphasize that establishing trust and close relationships with co-researchers must be developed and nurtured to ensure they feel safe enough to take part in the conceptualization and development of the research as well as to question or critique elements of the process or change the direction of the process. This is often difficult in an academic context that is dependent on specific timelines, funding, and outputs (Breckwoldt et al. 2021). The results from Algoa Bay and Mandeni show that transdisciplinary research needs to consider building on existing relationships where possible and ensuring that research projects incorporate flexible and long-term implementation plans where co-researchers have opportunities to take part in deciding on the timeframes and outputs of the process (Norström et al. 2020). This requires time and resources and flexibility of funding, outputs, and timelines, which should be considered prior to and during transdisciplinary research collaborations.

Another barrier for truly collaborative, reflexive, and relational transdisciplinary collaborations are considerations of ethics and training in ethical engagements. Parachute science and helicopter research continues to be the reality in many marine science projects and programs, which can be defined as a process where researchers from different contexts study a community or area, extracting data and results, with little to no benefit for, recognition of, or engagement with the community, knowledge holders, or that area (de Vos 2020, Adame 2021, Woodall et al. 2021). Despite this, the concepts of co-design, co-creation, and co-production are increasingly used and applied in ocean governance and ocean sustainability research (Moallemi et al. 2020, Breckwoldt et al. 2021, Strand et al. 2022a), often without considering the practical limitations of working from a colonial and Western-centric academic perspective, within a Euro-centric favored worldview, through English-dominated communication, and apolitical approaches to science (Chilisa 2017, Trisos et al. 2021). In our research, we therefore openly discussed and considered ownership of knowledge and outputs. We also addressed power asymmetries and coloniality (continuing colonial structures that influence who decide what is being researched) inherent in knowledge production and academia (Ndlovu-Gatsheni 2019). At this point in time, with the increase of transdisciplinary research approaches, it becomes even more important to critically consider relevant ethical guidelines, developed by or with Indigenous and local communities within the specific context. For example, Chilisa (2019) provides several ethical guidelines and considerations for conducting research in African Indigenous contexts, and Wilson (2008) outlines what he refers to as the Three R’s of Indigenous methodologies: respect, reciprocity, and relationality.

Another challenge for horizontal and equitable partnerships is the continuous push to scale up transdisciplinary processes and approaches for “complex sustainability challenges” and “impactful” outputs and outcomes. We found that one of the shortcomings of our arts-based transdisciplinary research approaches was conflicting views of what counts as impactful outcomes and outputs. Every transdisciplinary research project needs to be carefully co-developed with co-researchers from the very start (Norström et al. 2020, Manuel-Navarrete et al. 2021), which involves discussing expectations throughout the project (Leavy 2020). The impact and objectives of the collaborative research therefore have to be iteratively developed throughout the journey, and this is a lesson for people supporting or funding transdisciplinarity; what may be impactful for the co-researchers may not be what is impactful according to the academy or funders. For example, in the arts-based transdisciplinary collaborations in Algoa Bay and Mandeni, some of the greater impacts were learning across various perspectives, disciplines, and lived experiences; forming new relationships, friendships and partnerships; as well as rich and generative conversations taking place that shifted points of view or frames (Strand 2023). These results, however, did not necessarily translate into quantitative or spatially delineated results that can easily be adapted to current ocean governance processes such as mapping and zonation (Rivers et al. 2023a), which is a challenge that has been experienced in other art-science collaborations (e.g., Brennan 2018).

The aspect of valuable outputs from transdisciplinary collaborations also calls for scrutinizing the inequity of academic publishing. One of the reflections emerging from the process of co-developing this academic paper for publication and attempting to publish this paper through peer review process is the inequity and barriers these processes pose to collaborations with non-academic co-researchers (Leavy 2020). The peer review process of this paper, for example, although we appreciate the very insightful and constructive feedback, has placed certain limitations on this paper from being truly co-created. This has also been our experience with former publications and has been emphasized by other scholars (Bunders et al. 2015, Hyland 2016). For example, some co-researchers do not have access to computers or Internet, nor time and budget to set aside for further contribution, making the revision process difficult. The rigid frameworks within which one is meant to communicate research through peer review processes leave very little room for innovation or new forms of communicating findings.

We need to question and consider how academic research and publications are valuable beyond researchers and scientists aiming to advance their status, career, or work within a specific discipline or line of thought. Leavy (2020) notes that most academic publications reach an extremely limited number of people, usually affiliated to universities or scientific organizations. If research and knowledge production seek to reach non-academic audiences as well as benefit non-academic collaborators, the academy should consider alternative knowledge outputs, such as exhibitions, workshops, and direct engagements. This is where arts-based methods prove useful, with opportunities to communicate and convey knowledges and stories beyond hierarchical, English-dominated, jargon-heavy journal articles and books.

Aspects of equitable communication of transdisciplinary research should therefore be considered at a broader scale. Questions such as “How have issues of ownership/copyright of artistic products been addressed and agreed upon?” (Leavy 2020:243), “Are the skills and outputs developed during the process still being used and implemented by the community of participants after the initial project is finished?” (Norström et al. 2020:187), and “How are you ensuring that not only the powerful will have a voice, leaving others without the opportunity to express their unbiased opinions?” (Breckwoldt et al. 2021:3) are worth asking even in the initial phases.

Opportunities for transdisciplinary arts-based research as “comprehensive” transdisciplinarity

Max-Neef (2005) differentiates between what he calls “weak” and “strong” transdisciplinarity, here considered as “partial” and “comprehensive” transdisciplinarity as considered in Strand (2024). Partial transdisciplinarity refers to processes where non-academic contributors are only involved in one particular aspect of the research process, such as the co-design of the project, or collecting or contributing to the data. Non-academic contributors often assume the role as “research participants,” despite the co-production aims of the research (Strand et al. 2022c). Comprehensive transdisciplinarity, however, is when non-academic co-researchers are involved in the whole process from ideation and shaping the objectives to disseminating the results. In this format of transdisciplinary research, non-academic and academic collaborators overlap in their roles, responsibilities, and contributions. The objectives, outputs, and even funding, are collaboratively organized, developed, and managed by the contributors as a team. What we refer to as “truly” collaborative transdisciplinary research can therefore be compared to what we refer to as “comprehensive” transdisciplinarity (Fig. 3), making sure all co-researchers have a conducive space to share, listen, and contribute to the research process as a whole (Leavy 2020, Norström et al. 2020, Breckwoldt et al. 2021). As mentioned in the previous section, this should also include co-developed and co-disseminated outputs.

In many ways, we therefore find that strong or comprehensive transdisciplinarity embraces some aspects of participatory research methods. Participatory research processes involve co-researchers in “some or all aspects of research design, process, dissemination and impact, with a focus on generating socially just change” (Banks and Brydon-Miller 2018). In this research, we have found that we have had to pay particular attention to trust and respect, ethical procedures, and ownership of knowledge outputs, which are emphasized by Leavy (2017) when reflecting on crucial aspects of participatory methods.

Max-Neef (2005) emphasizes that strong transdisciplinarity is not just a methodology or an approach to research, but an epistemology that involves a transformation of how we value and understand knowledge. Such conceptualization of transdisciplinarity embraces the complexity, messiness, and entanglement of knowing and being in the world (Haraway 2016, Escobar 2018). From this view, transdisciplinary research involves more than bringing together academic and non-academic collaborators (Moallemi et al. 2020, Chambers et al. 2021, Manuel-Navarrete et al. 2021) by performing and living out how knowledge is created, not separating the knower from what is known. Acknowledging situated and subjective knowledge claims, considering positionality, relationality, and humility, transdisciplinarity is rather an approach to knowledge production that shifts and questions the invented boundaries between knowing and being. Instead of seeing knowledge as something “objective” and separate from the knowledge holder, transdisciplinarity as an epistemology recognizes that our lived experiences, our emotions and feelings, our sense of community and our positionalities will influence and impact what we know, what we conceptualize as knowledge, and how we come to know something.

The reflections of the different contributors to the arts-based transdisciplinary research processes in Algoa Bay and Mandeni highlight that at the core of these processes is the opportunity it has created for learning from each other, finding common ground, and meaningfully engaging through listening to each other. As pointed out by Wals (2007), social learning is necessary for complex environmental issues and “stubborn practises” because it brings together multiple ways of knowing, valuing, and doing that can together inform more sustainable approaches. However, just like transdisciplinarity, social learning does not just happen, but has to be carefully planned and considered throughout the process. Although we cannot argue that these transdisciplinary collaborations have pursued all aspects of comprehensive transdisciplinarity, the use of arts-based participatory methods provided opportunities for academic and non-academic collaborators to sometimes overlap in their roles, centering learning and decentering power dynamics in the process and for knowledge outputs to be collaboratively shaped and shared. This was particularly shown through the ways in which co-researchers owned the process of self-representation (Iseke and Moore 2011), decided how they wanted to tell and share their own stories, how artists would take lead in organizing the creative workshops, and how co-researchers would facilitate their own field visits to ocean areas of significance. This was also emphasized in how the objectives of the research were continuously reframed (Strand et al. 2022c), and how the exhibitions were co-curated with both co-researchers and co-facilitators.

Time and resources play an important role in how transdisciplinarity can be approached, and the argument can be made that it is possible to move from partial to comprehensive transdisciplinarity within the same transdisciplinary research process or projects. Following this line of thought, partial transdisciplinarity can act as a vehicle to move toward more comprehensive approaches and equitable collaborations, and this should therefore not be discouraged in all contexts and situations. Drawing on lessons from the arts-based participatory transdisciplinary processes in Algoa Bay and Mandeni, we do, however, argue that there are some aspects that should always form part of equitable transdisciplinary collaborations beyond flexibility in how and when people want to contribute to the knowledge production process. These “non-negotiable” aspects of equitable collaborations include (1) outlining clear benefit to impacted and participating knowledge holders; (2) co-developing ethical guidelines or processes for everyday ethics; (3) clarifying expectations for and from each collaborator; (4) establishing continuous feedback cycles throughout the lifetime of the research, including the dissemination of results; and (5) ensuring collaborators feel a sense of ownership of the knowledge production process.

At his time of writing in 2005, Max-Neef (2005:5) identified that “[s]trong transdisciplinarity is still in the making, thus representing an unfinished scientific programme that offers fascinating possibilities for advanced reflection and research.” Viewing strong transdisciplinarity as a process rather than a methodology, we argue that this is still the case today. To advance equitable and horizontal collaborations in transdisciplinary research, we still have some work to do to ensure equitable valuation and “equal consideration is given to the contributions of different knowledges and ways of knowing” (Manuel-Navarrete et al. 2021:1).

Moving toward equitable valuation of various knowledge systems

The results emerging from the reflections of different co-researchers to the arts-based transdisciplinary research projects in Algoa Bay and Mandeni highlight both opportunities and challenges for collaborative arts-based methods in identifying, highlighting, and conveying multiple ways of knowing and relating to the ocean and coast. As emphasized by Chambers et al. (2021:983), this “collaborative weaving of research and practice” is necessary to “address complex sustainability challenges,” and a prerequisite to encourage deep transformations toward social-ecological sustainability. However, despite attempts at horizontal transdisciplinarity that results in co-design, co-creation, and co-production of knowledge, the colonial history and legacy of academic institutions continue to dominate how, what, and for whom knowledge is produced (Trisos et al. 2021). For example, in South Africa, academic biophysical marine data continue to dominate ocean decision-making over Indigenous knowledge systems and socio-cultural dimensions (Mann-Lang et al. 2021, Strand 2023). As pointed out by Mann-Lang et al. (2021:367), “[m]ost of the MPAs that were declared before 2019 did not include objectives directly related to people or their needs.” One of the primary advantages of the arts-based participatory research process has therefore been the exhibitions and workshops where all participants, including co-researchers, decision makers, Indigenous Peoples, conservation authorities, people from academia, and subsistence fishers recognized the importance of elevating formerly silenced and excluded ocean narratives such as Indigenous knowledge systems and spiritual connections to the ocean. This recognition was co-developed into a policy brief in Algoa Bay (Rivers et al. 2023b) and is being finalized for publication as a report in Mandeni.

Arts-based transdisciplinary research also provides opportunities in finding commonalities despite different and sometimes conflicting ways of understanding, being with, knowing, and valuing the ocean and coast. This is particularly important, as one of the primary challenges of advancing toward meaningful transformation for social-ecological sustainability and responding to complex sustainability challenges is the coming together of different knowledge systems, experiences, disciplines, and “considering interactions between diverse goals and sectors” (IPBES 2019:772, Biggs et al. 2021, Chambers et al. 2021, Moon et al. 2021). One of the strengths of arts-based methods is the emergence of multiple meanings that promote “deep engagement, critical thinking, and reflection” (Leavy 2020:290), and the results show that both co-facilitators and co-researchers experienced deep learning from engaging with each other’s stories and narratives through photography and storytelling. This was also the case for the wider audiences at the exhibitions and multi-stakeholder workshops, where one of the representatives involved in developing the MPA management plan said that the exhibition made them reflect on what they would feel if they suddenly did not have access to the ocean. We found that the arts-based participatory research process was valuable in helping us to reflect on ourselves in relation to our everyday practices and environment and encouraging empathy with people we did not necessarily know. By providing different frames and perspectives, the visual stories allowed people to think through different frames and feel through imaginary and sensory experiences. During the multi-stakeholder workshop in Mandeni, someone pointed out that the exhibition made them feel “sadness about access restrictions and inability to use the ocean” and “deep concern about limited access to the coast and beach.”

The recognition of multiple values of nature is something that is required for transformation in marine governance as well as environmental governance more broadly. The IPBES Media Release on their 2022 Assessment Report on the Diverse Values and Valuation of Nature argues that “there is a dominant global focus on short-term profits and economic growth, often excluding the consideration of multiple values of nature in policy decisions.” We find that the ocean is valued in a diversity of ways, which is not adequately recognized in current marine governance, conservation efforts, or coastal management in South Africa (Sowman and Sunde 2018, Muhl and Sowman 2020, Boswell and Thornton 2021, Mbatha 2022, Peer et al. 2022, Strand et al. 2022b, Strand et al. 2022c). This is extremely problematic, as emphasized by Trisos et al. (2021:1205) when they argue “if differences in cultural values or worldviews are ignored, social-ecological system approaches can actually damage people’s perceptions of well-being by emphasizing vulnerability and directing blame toward local communities.”

Following on from the exhibition with co-researchers from Algoa Bay in Gqeberha in March 2022, one of the most common forms of feedback the research team and co-researchers received was the way in which the stories allowed the audience to relate to each other, particularly when it came to their strong emotional connection to the ocean and coast. As has already been explored in existing literature (Castleden et al. 2008, Foster 2016, Budig et al. 2018, Capous-Desylla and Morgaine 2018, Leavy 2020), arts-based research methods such as photography and storytelling create the opportunity of opening up a space for people to “express themes and topics that may be difficult to articulate or speak openly about,” share personal experiences and stories that may be very sensitive, and “criticise the status quo without necessarily exposing or damaging one’s reputation” (Strand et al. 2022c:4). We find that the arts-based participatory research process provided important opportunities for people to share ocean knowledges that have been silenced, that may be in conflict with current ocean governance processes, and that are not easily expressed through writing, which is imperative for us to advance toward equitable valuation of various ways of knowing the ocean. This is particularly important in contexts of racial segregation and forced removals from the ocean and socioeconomic inequalities exacerbated by historical legacies of colonialism and apartheid in South Africa, which continue to impact people’s lack of access to the ocean and to ocean decision-making processes (Strand et al. 2022b).

In a rapidly changing social-ecological system and world, these honest and hard conversations are increasingly important, and necessary, not only to bridge the gap between policy makers and knowledge holders in contexts impacted by legacies of colonialism and apartheid, but also between people within research teams, and between co-researchers and co-facilitators. To ensure that knowledge production processes informing ocean governance are informed by people who are actually impacted by that governance, and to avoid knowledge extraction as discussed above, transdisciplinary collaborations will benefit from centering relationship-building in the specific context it is located. As emphasized by Norström et al. (2020:187), knowledge co-production processes should utilize, build upon, and strengthen “existing skills and relationships between participants already working in the context.” Equitable and meaningful transdisciplinary collaborations should therefore consider the longevity and sustainability of the projects and relationships that are initiated and pursued, and where relevant, address historical conflicts and animosity that may hinder or impact people’s opportunities to participate in collaboration and partnerships.

The results indicate that the arts-based research collaboration has been rewarding, enjoyable, empowering, extremely engaging, levelling, eye-opening, emotional, impactful, inspiring, inclusive, transformative, captivating, overwhelming, moving, powerful, insightful, deep, and personal. Similarly, Leavy (2020:289-90) argues that arts-based methods have the potential to be “emotional, evocative, provocative, illuminating, educational, and transformative.” The above reflections suggest that the arts-based research processes have succeeded, to some degree, in making sure people felt heard, empowered to share their stories, and recognized. In a context of significant conflict and animosity, the process also proved valuable in bridging differences and challenging assumptions amongst the co-researchers and contributors in the research process, but whether the photostories of the exhibition have elicited social change or impact with policy-makers and coastal managers is yet to be seen. Considering the aspects highlighted by Leavy (2020) and co-authors above, structures and mechanisms that enable and strengthen comprehensive transdisciplinary research using participatory arts-based methods are needed to disrupt and challenge dominant assumptions about sustainable and equitable ocean governance.

Moon et al. (2021:4) asks “Who accepts knowledge as ‘true’ and how?” This continues to be an aspect we need to further scrutinize in our transdisciplinary collaborations to disrupt existing hegemonies and hierarchies in knowledge production and valuation. Building on existing literature and proposed considerations for more meaningful transdisciplinary collaborations, we therefore outline a set of important questions to ask when planning, facilitating, and communicating arts-based transdisciplinarity research. We argue that these questions are relevant for anyone wanting to pursue more equitable collaborations in transdisciplinary research, as paying attention to these questions could contribute to more horizontal and inclusive processes that critically examine bias, power asymmetries, and how these influences the knowledge co-production processes (Table 7).

CONCLUSIONS

We cannot advance toward deep transformations in society and governance without prioritizing transdisciplinary research centering equitable collaborations. In the context of ocean governance, we need to emphasize relationality and finding common ground between marine decision-makers, scientists, industry, and Indigenous Peoples and coastal communities that depend on these marine social-ecological systems for survival, health, well-being, and cultural heritage. By providing a space for conveying multiple ways of knowing and valuing the ocean and sharing emotions and experiences related to ocean spaces and places, the arts-based transdisciplinary research processes have provided an opportunity for people to share their ocean knowledges and priorities that have historically been silenced or overlooked. We argue that this is necessary to disrupt invented differences between “knowledge” and “knowledge holders,” “researchers” and “research participants,” and challenge top-down, siloed, didactic, and sector-based approaches to ocean governance that continue to be prominent. Furthermore, by moving audiences through artworks and storytelling and encouraging relationality by establishing strong relationships built on trust, care, and understanding within research teams, arts-based transdisciplinary research approaches can promote more ethical and equitable practices in knowledge production. However, we still have a very long way to go, particularly in a context of ocean governance in South Africa where Indigenous and local communities continue to be excluded from decision-making.

The arts-based participatory research processes in Algoa Bay and Mandeni highlighted some inherent challenges to equitable collaborations between academic and non-academic co-researchers, including the inequity of academic publishing processes, the impact of coloniality and historical animosity on knowledge exclusion and valuation, and the time and resources it takes to develop meaningful relationships between collaborators. The research process has also raised questions of the continuum between what we call partial and comprehensive transdisciplinarity, and we conclude with some recommendations for academic institutions to better support researchers, co-researchers, and co-facilitators in pursuing more equitable collaborations. These recommendations include (1) providing adequate funding and resources for thorough scoping and relationship-building; (2) becoming more lenient with timelines for transdisciplinary projects; (3) supporting, prioritizing, and commending non-academic outputs; (4) providing training in ethical engagements; and (5) encouraging reflection on ownership of knowledge and outputs throughout the research process.

The research processes have emphasized that people depend on the ocean for various reasons; water is life, and life is water. The ocean is important for so much more than social and ecological aspects of sustainability, and contributes to identities, memories, cultures, community, heritage and co-existence, which cannot necessarily be collapsed under social-ecological perspectives for sustainability (Strand 2023). To ensure that transdisciplinary research processes promote multiple ways of knowing, being with, valuing, and understanding the ocean, we may rather conceptualize social-cultural-ecological perspectives to “sustainabilities” as an attempt to recognize and acknowledge that there is a diversity of ways of conceptualizing and thinking about sustainability, and that what is sustainable for some in one context may not be sustainable for others in another context. Arts-based transdisciplinary research approaches can provide an opportunity to co-produce and convey these complex and intricate interdependencies, but only if carried out with careful consideration of how the research process, from planning and design to outputs and dissemination, is continuously adapted to the interests and needs of co-researchers. This should be prioritized to advance comprehensive transdisciplinarity for deep transformations that are inclusive and equitable.

__________

^[1] In this paper, when we refer to co-researchers, we mean non-academic collaborators, whilst co-facilitators refer to artistic and academic collaborators in the transdisciplinary research team.

LITERATURE CITED

Adame, F. 2021. Meaningful collaborations can end ‘helicopter research.’ Nature. 29 June 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-01795-1

Banks, S., and M. Brydon-Miller, editors. 2018. Ethics in participatory research for health and social well-being. Routledge, New York, New York, USA.

Barone, T., and E. W. Eisner. 2012. Arts based research. SAGE, Los Angeles, California, USA. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230627

Beier, P., L. J. Hansen, L. Helbrecht, and D. Behar. 2017. A how-to guide for coproduction of actionable science. Conservation Letters 10:288-296. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12300

Bennett, N. J. 2022. Mainstreaming equity and justice in the ocean. Frontiers in Marine Science 9:873572. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2022.873572

Biggs, R., A. de Vos, R. Preiser, H. Clements, K. Maciejewski, and M. Schlüter. 2021. The Routledge handbook of research methods for social-ecological systems. Routledge, London, UK. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003021339

Blythe, J., J. Silver, L. Evans, D. Armitage, N. J. Bennett, M.-L. Moore, T. H. Morrison, and K. Brown. 2018. The dark side of transformation: latent risks in contemporary sustainability discourse. Antipode 50(5):1206-1223. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.12405

Boswell, R., and J. L. Thornton. 2021. Including the Khoisan for a more inclusive Blue Economy in South Africa. Journal of the Indian Ocean Region 17(2):141-160. https://doi.org/10.1080/19480881.2021.1935523

Breckwoldt, A., P. F. M. Lopes, and S. A. Selim. 2021. Look who’s asking—reflections on participatory and transdisciplinary marine research approaches. Frontiers in Marine Science 8:627502. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.627502

Brennan, R. E. 2018. Re-storying marine conservation: integrating art and science to explore and articulate ideas, visions and expressions of marine space. Ocean & Coastal Management 162:110-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.01.036

Budig, K., J. Diez, P. Conde, M. Sastre, M. Hernán, and M. Franco. 2018. Photovoice and empowerment: evaluating the transformative potential of a participatory action research project. BMC Public Health 18:432. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-018-5335-7

Bunders, J. F. G., A. E. Bunders, and M. B. Zweekhorst. 2015. Challenges for transdisciplinary research. Pages 17-50 in B. Werlen, editor. Global sustainability: cultural perspectives and challenges for transdisciplinary integrated research. Springer, Cham, Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16477-9_2

Capous-Desylla, M., and K. Morgaine. 2018. Creating social change through creativity: anti-oppressive arts-based research methodologies. Palgrave Macmillan, Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52129-9

Castleden, H., T. Garvin, and H. First Nation. 2008. Modifying Photovoice for community-based participatory Indigenous research. Social Science & Medicine 66(6):1393-1405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.11.030

Chaillou A., L. Roblin, and M. Ferdinand. 2020. Why we need a decolonial ecology. Green European Journal. 4 June 2020. https://www.greeneuropeanjournal.eu/why-we-need-a-decolonial-ecology/

Chambers, J. M., C. Wyborn, M. E. Ryan, R. S. Reid, M. Riechers, A. Serban, N. J. Bennett, C. Cvitanovic, M. E. Fernández-Giménez, K. A. Galvin, et al. 2021. Six modes of co-production for sustainability. Nature Sustainability 4:983-996. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00755-x

Chilisa, B. 2017. Decolonising transdisciplinary research approaches: an African perspective for enhancing knowledge integration in sustainability science. Sustainability Science 12:813-827. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0461-1

Chilisa, B. 2019. Indigenous research methodologies. Second edition. SAGE, Los Angeles, California, USA.

de Vos, A. 2020. The problem of ‘colonial science.’ Scientific American. 1 July 2020. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-problem-of-colonial-science/

Dorrington, R. A., A. T. Lombard, T. G. Bornman, J. B. Adams, H. C. Cawthra, S. H. Deyzel, W. S. Goschen, K. Liu, J. Mahler-Coetzee, G. F. Matcher, et al. 2018. Working together for our oceans: a marine spatial plan for Algoa Bay, South Africa. South African Journal of Science 114(3-4):6. http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/sajs.2018/a0247

Escobar, A. 2018. Designs for the pluriverse: radical interdependence, autonomy, and the making of worlds. Duke University Press, Durham, North Carolina, USA. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822371816

Foster, V. 2016. Collaborative arts-based research for social justice. Routledge, London, UK. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203077450

Franke, A., K. Peters, J. Hinkel, A.-K. Hornidge, A. Schlüter, O. Zielinski, K. H. Wiltshire, U. Jacob, G. Krause, and H. Hillebrand. 2022. Making the UN Ocean Decade work? The potential for, and challenges of, transdisciplinary research and real-world laboratories for building towards ocean solutions. People and Nature 5(1):21-33. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10412

Haraway, D. J. 2016. Staying with the trouble: making kin in the Chthulucene. Duke University Press, Durham, North Carolina, USA. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv11cw25q

Hau'ofa, E. 1998. The Ocean in us. The Contemporary Pacific 10(2):392-410. https://doi.org/10.22459/CSDP.04.2005.02

Hills, J. M., and P. N. Maharaj. 2023. Designing transdisciplinarity for transformative ocean governance. Frontiers in Marine Science 10:1075759. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2023.1075759

Hyland, K. 2016. Academic publishing: issues and challenges in the construction of knowledge. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). 2019. Global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany.

Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). 2022. Media release: IPBES values assessment - decisions based on narrow set of market values of nature underpin the global biodiversity crisis. IPBES Media Release. https://ipbes.net/media_release/Values_Assessment_Published

Iseke, J., and S. Moore. 2011. Community-based Indigenous digital storytelling with elders and youth. American Indian Culture and Research Journal 35(4):19-38.

Jacob, C., S. D. Diederichsen, L. Fullbrook, A. T. Lombard, S. E. Rees, N. Rivers, B. Snow, M. Strand, R. Zuercher, and H. J. Niner. 2023. A two way process - social capacity as a driver and outcome of equitable marine spatial planning. Marine Policy 149:105507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2023.105507

Jahn, S., J. Newig, D. J. Lang, J. Kahle, and M. Bergmann. 2021. Demarcating transdisciplinary research in sustainability science—five clusters of research modes based on evidence from 59 research projects. Sustainable Development 30(2):343-357. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2278

Leavy, P. 2017. Research design: quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, arts-based, and community-based participatory research approaches. Second edition. Guilford, New York, USA.

Leavy, P. 2020. Method meets art: arts-based research practice. Third edition. Guilford, New York, USA.

Lombard, A. T., J. Clifford-Holmes, V. Goodall, B. Snow, H. Truter, P. Vrancken, P. J. S. Jones, K. Cochrane, W. Flannery, C. Hicks, et al. 2023. Principles for transformative ocean governance. Nature Sustainability 6:1587–1599. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-023-01210-9

Mann-Lang, J. B., G. M. Branch, B. Q. Mann, K. J. Sink, S. P. Kirkman, and R. Adams. 2021. Social and economic effects of marine protected areas in South Africa, with recommendations for future assessments. African Journal of Marine Science 43(3):367-387. https://doi.org/10.2989/1814232X.2021.1961166

Manuel-Navarrete, D., C. N. Buzinde, and T. Swanson. 2021. Fostering horizontal knowledge co-production with Indigenous people by leveraging researchers’ transdisciplinary intentions. Ecology and Society 26(2):22. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12265-260222

Max-Neef, M. A. 2005. Foundations of transdisciplinarity. Ecological Economics 53(1):5-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.01.014

Mbatha, P. 2022. Unravelling the perpetuated marginalization of customary livelihoods on the coast by plural and multi-level conservation governance systems. Marine Policy 143:105143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2022.105143

Mignolo, W. D. 2000. Local histories, global designs: subaltern knowledges and border thinking. Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, USA.

Moallemi E. A., S. Malekpour, M. Hadjikakou, R. Raven, K. Szetey, D. Ningrum, A. Dhiaulhaq, and B. A. Bryan. 2020. Achieving the sustainable development goals requires transdisciplinary innovation at the local scale. One Earth 3(3):300-313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2020.08.006

Moon, K., C. Cvitanovic, D. A. Blackman, I. R. Scales, and N. K. Browne. 2021. Five questions to understand epistemology and its influence on integrative marine research. Frontiers in Marine Science 8:574158. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.574158

Muhl, E.-K., and M. Sowman. 2020. Rights, resources, rezoning and the challenges of governance in South Africa’s oldest marine protected area. Conservation and Society 18(4):366-377. https://doi.org/10.4103/cs.cs_19_154

Mulalap, C. Y., T. Frere, E. Huffer, E. Hviding, K. Paul, A. Smith, and M. K. Vierros. 2020. Traditional knowledge and the BBNJ instrument. Marine Policy 122:104103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104103

Ndlovu-Gatsheni, S. J. 2019. Provisional notes on decolonizing research methodology and undoing its dirty history. Journal of Developing Societies 35(4):481-492. https://doi.org/10.1177/0169796X19880417

Norström, A. V., C. Cvitanovic, M. F. Löf, S. West, C. Wyborn, P. Balvanera, A. T. Bednarek, E. M. Bennett, R. Biggs, A. de Bremond, et al. 2020. Principles for knowledge co-production in sustainability research. Nature Sustainability 3:182-190. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0448-2

Okafor-Yarwood, I., N. I. Kadagi, N. A. Miranda, J. Uku, I. O. Elegbede, and I. J. Adewumi. 2020. The blue economy–cultural livelihood–ecosystem conservation triangle: the African experience. Frontiers in Marine Science 7:586. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.00586

Peer, N., E.-K. Muhl, J. Janna, M. Brown, S. Zukulu, and P. Mbatha. 2022. Community and marine conservation in South Africa: are we still missing the mark? Frontiers in Marine Science 9:884442. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2022.884442

Pörtner, H.-O., R. J. Scholes, A. Arneth, D. K. A. Barnes, M. T. Burrows, S. E. Diamond, C. M. Duarte, W. Kiessling, P. Leadley, S. Managi, et al. 2023. Overcoming the coupled climate and biodiversity crises and their societal impacts. Science 380:eabl4881. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abl4881

Rasdien, N., S. Hendricks, and S. Abrahams. 2008. South End Museum celebrating the history of the Cape Malay Heritage in the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality. South End Museum, Port Elizabeth, South Africa.

Rivers, N., M. Strand, M. Fernandes, D. Metuge, A. Lemahieu, C. L. Nonyane, A. Benkenstein, and B. Snow. 2023a. Pathways to integrate Indigenous and local knowledge in ocean governance processes: lessons from the Algoa Bay Project, South Africa. Frontiers in Marine Science 9:1084674. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2022.1084674

Rivers, N., M. Strand, B. Snow, D. Metuge, A. Lemahieu, and A. Benkenstein. 2023b. Integrating Indigenous and local knowledge in marine spatial planning. South African Institute of International Affairs Policy Briefing 268. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.18277.06889

Rivers, N., H. J. Truter, M. Strand, S. Jay, M. Portman, A. T. Lombard, D. Amir, A. Boyd, R. L. Brown, H. C. Cawthra, et al. 2022. Shared visions for marine spatial planning: insights from Israel, South Africa, and the United Kingdom. Ocean and Coastal Management 220:106069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106069

Rogerson, J. M. 2017. ‘Kicking sand in the face of apartheid’: segregated beaches in South Africa. Bulletin of Geography, Socio-Economic Series 35:93-109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/bog-2017-0007

Roux, N. 2021. Remaking the urban: heritage and transformation in Nelson Mandela Bay. Manchester University Press, Manchester, UK. https://doi.org/10.7765/9781526140296.00009

Sowman, M., and J. Sunde. 2018. Social impacts of marine protected areas in South Africa on coastal fishing communities. Ocean and Coastal Management 157:168-179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.02.013

Strand, M. 2023. Arts-based participatory research for more equitable ocean governance in South Africa. Dissertation. Nelson Mandela University, Gqeberha, South Africa. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.19315.09765

Strand, M. 2024. How to be inclusive of community in research. In C. Khupe, editor. Sage research methods: diversifying and decolonizing research. SAGE, London, UK. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529690729

Strand, M., K. Ortega-Cisneros, H. Niner, M. Wahome, J. Bell, J. C. Currie, H. Hamukuaya, G. La Bianca, A. M. S. N. Lancaster, N. Maseka, et al. 2022a. Transdisciplinarity in transformative ocean governance research—reflections of early career researchers. ICES Journal of Marine Science 79(8):2163-2177. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsac165

Strand, M., N. Rivers, R. Baasch, and B. Snow. 2022c. Developing arts-based participatory research for more inclusive knowledge co-production in Algoa Bay. Current Research in Environmental Sustainability 4:100178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsust.2022.100178

Strand, M., N. Rivers, and B. Snow. 2022b. Reimagining ocean stewardship: arts-based methods to ‘hear’ and ‘see’ Indigenous and local knowledge in ocean management. Frontiers in Marine Science 9:886632. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2022.886632

Switzer, S. 2018. What’s in an image?: Towards a critical and interdisciplinary reading of participatory visual methods. Pages 189-207 in M. Capous-Desylla and K. Morgaine, editors. Creating social change through creativity: anti-oppressive arts-based research methodologies. Palgrave Macmillan, London, UK. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52129-9_11

Trisos, C. H., J. Auerbach, and M. Katti. 2021. Decoloniality and anti-oppressive practices for a more ethical ecology. Nature Ecology & Evolution 5:1205-1212. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01460-w

Turnhout, E., M. Stuiver, J. Klostermann, B. Harms, and C. Leeuwis. 2013. New roles of science in society: different repertoires of knowledge brokering. Science and Public Policy 40(3):354-365. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs114

UNESCO. 2020. The science we need for the ocean we want. The United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development (2021-2030). United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, New York, New York, USA.

Urai, A. E., and C. Kelly. 2023. Rethinking academia in a time of climate crisis. ELife 12:e84991. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.84991

Virapongse, A., S. Brooks, E. C. Metcalf, M. Zedalis, J. Gosz, A. Kliskey, and L. Alessa. 2016. A social-ecological systems approach for environmental management. Journal of Environmental Management 178:83-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.02.028

Wals, A. E. J. 2007. Social learning towards a sustainable world: principles, perspectives and praxis. Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, The Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-594-9

Wilson, S. 2008. Research is ceremony: Indigenous research methods. Fernwood Publishing, Nova Scotia, Canada.

Woodall, L. C., S. Talma, O. Steeds, P. Stefanoudis, M.-M. Jeremie-Muzungaile, and A. de Comarmond. 2021. Co-development, co-production and co-dissemination of scientific research: a case study to demonstrate mutual benefits. Biology Letters 17:20200699. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2020.0699

---