Convergence research: contributions from sustainable regional systems

INTRODUCTION

Convergence research is an emerging approach to navigating the complexity of rapidly changing ecological and social systems and the challenges they face (Angeler et al. 2020). As convergence becomes more widely practiced, there is a need to clarify its conceptual foundations and strengthen knowledge systems that support its application. While there is emerging scholarship in this field (Peek et al. 2020, Cravens et al. 2022, Sixt et al. 2022, Gajary et al. 2024) there remains a need to build theoretical frameworks and practical applications that advance convergence research. In this Special Feature, 10 manuscripts collectively advance the discussion on convergence research highlighting the work of the Intermountain West Transformation Network (Transformation Network or TN) and other teams funded by the Sustainable Regional Systems (SRS) program at the National Science Foundation (NSF).

The suite of manuscripts in this Special Feature provides theoretical considerations and tools for reaching convergence. Within the convergence literature, several challenges remain in order to put convergence research design into practice. One issue relates to how to amalgamate different methodological traditions and epistemologies across disciplines. Researchers, for example, have difficulty accommodating quantitative and qualitative approaches (Stoknes and Rockström 2018). Furthermore, there is a need to respect the knowledge that has been created with respect to standards in areas such as data collection and storage. Second, while convergence research emphasizes working with collaborators out of the academy, focus has been lacking on how community members, practitioners, and policy makers can be engaged meaningfully in the research process (Wyborn et al. 2019, Norström et al. 2020). Power dynamics and representation are important issues, as well as ensuring that local and Indigenous knowledge systems are embedded intentionally as part of co-production of knowledge and not invoked in performative or extractive ways. Third, convergence research frequently engages with phenomena that operate at different temporal and spatial scales. However, frameworks for working with these mismatches are not well established (Cash et al. 2006, Welsh et al. 2020). Finally, although this challenge has been identified, there have not been many tools or frameworks developed to enable communication across disciplinary boundaries (Thompson Klein 2021, Gajary et al. 2024). This involves taking the lead in developing shared vocabularies, conceptual frameworks, and visualization tools to make sense of the different ways of knowing complexity in systems within convergence research. Though this Special Feature is focused on convergence, the challenges presented here are relevant to other national and international efforts to accelerate research, development, and innovation to respond to societal challenges through cultivating cross-disciplinary problem-based policies and programs (Gajary et al. 2024).

After providing a brief summary of NSF’s approach to and investment in convergence research, this editorial introduces the Special Feature’s main elements. Several manuscripts (Ashton et al. 2024, Morgan et al. 2024, Morgan et al. 2025, Montoya et al. 2025) focus on how NSF SRS programs are advancing theoretical frameworks for approaching convergence research. Next are three manuscripts that demonstrate that the practice of convergence can include a variety of approaches, ranging from systems dynamics modeling to collaborative art programs (Lin et al. 2024, Lin et al. 2025, Webster et al. 2025). Finally, three case studies from both the Transformation Network and other teams describe approaches to convergence (Carr Kelman et al. 2024, Haines et al. 2024, Sjöstedt et al. 2025). Finally, we note the theme and connections within the manuscripts in this Special Feature, including how these manuscripts respond to the challenges noted in the literature above. Collectively, this Feature adds much needed specific examples to the literature on convergence. Questions explored through these manuscripts include: How is convergence research different from related fields, including transdisciplinary research and team science (Carr Kelman et al. 2024, Morgan et al. 2025)? What role does community engagement play in convergence research (Carr Kelman et al. 2024, Haines et al. 2024, Lin et al. 2024, Morgan et al. 2025)? What does successful convergence look like beyond engagement within STEM dominated fields (Ashton et al. 2024, Lin et al. 2024, Montoya et al. 2025)? What conceptual models and frameworks can be engaged to facilitate deep integration across disciplines (Morgan et al. 2024, Lin et al. 2025, Sjöstedt et al. 2025, Webster et al. 2025)?

CONVERGENCE RESEARCH AND THE FUTURE OF RESEARCH

The National Science Foundation’s investment in convergence

Two primary elements characterize NSF’s convergence research. First, it is research driven by a specific and compelling problem. It is “inspired by the need to address a specific challenge or opportunity, whether it arises from deep scientific questions or pressing societal needs” (NSF 2018a). Second, convergence research requires deep integration across disciplines. From its inception, the convergence paradigm intentionally brings together intellectually diverse researchers to develop effective ways of communicating across disciplines by adopting common frameworks and boundary objects, which may, in turn, involve taking on challenges in ways that develop novel ways of framing research questions and open new research vistas. A boundary object is anything that facilitates communication between people inhabiting different epistemic frameworks, i.e., a map, a theoretical concept, or a computer model, that creates the capacity for shared understanding and learning among people coming from disparate backgrounds (Morgan 2020).

In 2016, the NSF launched the idea of Growing Convergence Research (GCR) as part of its “10 Big Ideas” for catalyzing transformative scientific breakthroughs (Gropp 2016). This approach merges diverse disciplines and novel methodologies to address complex societal challenges through team-based, cross-sector collaboration. Central to its mission is the development of new research frameworks that transcend traditional disciplinary boundaries, fostering innovative solutions through integrated, problem-focused approaches. GCR is just one of many initiatives in NSF that advance convergence. Convergence research is baked into other NSF “big ideas” launched by NSF during this period, including “Understanding the Rules of Life” (NSF 2017a) and “The Quantum Leap”(NSF 2017b). Other key convergence-based programs include Navigating the New Arctic (NSF 2018b), Harnessing the Data Revolution (NSF 2017c), and Future of Work at the Human-Technology Frontier (NSF 2017d).

Numerous research reports include the concept of convergence as identified specifically by NSF (Roco 2002, Roco and Bainbridge 2013, Bainbridge and Roco 2015) with convergence as an element of the convergence-divergence cycle that operates as a core dynamic throughout scientific and technological evolution. They include strategies to enhance and accelerate convergence across scientific and technological fields (Roco 2016) and biomedical sciences (MIT 2011, Sharp et al. 2016).

A suite of National Research Council reports (National Research Council 2005a, 2005b, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2014) have addressed interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research topics. The most recent, Convergence: Facilitating Transdisciplinary Integration of Life Sciences, Physical Sciences, Engineering, and Beyond (National Research Council 2014), provides a framework for understanding convergence in relation to other research approaches like multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary methodologies. To date, NSFs investments in convergence research have primarily concentrated on cutting-edge innovation fields, including nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology, bioengineering, and cognitive sciences (Roco and Bainbridge 2002, Roco et al. 2013). This emphasis may explain why integration has largely occurred among medical disciplines, engineering, and physical sciences.

In the 2014 report, the National Research Council highlights the necessity to incorporate a wider array of academic disciplines and expanded partnerships among convergence practitioners from multiple fields in the life, physical, and engineering sciences, the economic, social, and behavioral sciences, and humanities research. This was further emphasized during the National Academy of Sciences’ Fostering the Culture of Convergence in Research workshop (2019). The NSF launched the Convergence Accelerator to accelerate more use-inspired convergence research that same year (NSF 2019a). In 2024, NSF announced plans to scale the Convergence Accelerator from a single national program to 10 regionally focused accelerators (NSF 2024a).

Convergence research in action was exemplified by the creation and evolution of NSF’s Sustainable Urban Systems (SUS) initiative. The initiative’s foundation was laid by the NSF Advisory Committee for Environmental Research and Education’s (AC-ERE) 2018 report Sustainable Urban Systems: Articulating a Long-Term Convergence Research Agenda (Ramaswami et al. 2018). That report placed convergence principles at the core of the SUS vision by urging the formation of interdisciplinary teams to pursue convergence research on complex urban sustainability challenges. Guided by this vision, NSF convened the research community in 2019 through a series of SUS community workshops to coalesce a convergence research network agenda for sustainable urban systems (NSF 2019b). These workshops underscored the importance of treating cities and their hinterlands as interconnected social-ecological-technological systems (SETS), reinforcing convergence principles that bridge disciplines and sectors. This community-driven process directly informed the launch of the SRS Research Networks program in 2020, which expanded the program’s scope beyond city boundaries to explicitly encompass urban-rural linkages and multi-scalar regional systems (NSF 2020). The SRS program carried forward the emphasis on convergence, supporting interdisciplinary teams of researchers and partners working collaboratively to address sustainability grand challenges across interconnected urban and rural systems. In moving from an urban focus to one emphasizing regional systems that include urban areas, NSF not only reaffirmed the centrality of convergence in addressing urban sustainability, but also broadened the scope to regional scales, recognizing that truly sustainable pathways require linking cities with their surrounding rural regions in integrated systems frameworks (NSF 2020).

In sum, NSF’s investment in convergence is substantial and growing through multiple, overlapping pathways. These include the Growing Convergent Research program with its emphasis on supporting multidisciplinary teams who are embracing convergence research as a means of developing highly innovative solutions to complex research problems (NSF 2024b), programs like Navigating the New Arctic and SRS that focus on specific societal challenges (NSF 2018b, NSF 2020) and the Convergence Accelerator with emphasis on putting use-inspired research into practice (NSF 2024a). This makes it critical to build theory and provide practitioners with shared frameworks from which they can compare experiences and create new capacities.

Building theory and design

Two teams fully funded with $15 million awards by NSF to take up the SRS approach were the Multiscale Resilient, Equitable, and Circular Innovations with Partnership and Education Synergies for Sustainable Food Systems (RECIPES) group and the Transformation Network. In this Special Feature, each of these teams shares insights. In Whither convergence? Co-designing convergence research and wrestling with its emergent tensions (Ashton et al. 2024), members of the RECIPES team offer their experiences implementing a convergence paradigm. They emphasize that addressing societal challenges requires greater integration of social sciences, with design playing a valuable role by combining social science foundations with creative arts to understand human interactions across socio-technical systems. Their work found that design, as boundary-crossing discipline, made significant contributions to the RECIPES project by cultivating a culture for convergence research that centers people’s diverse identities and perspectives, while navigating tensions between task completion, relationship building, and the need for deeper critical thinking.

Members of the Transformation Network contributed a total of seven manuscripts to this Special Feature, three of which focus on its research design and theoretical approach. In Convergence, transdisciplinarity, and team science: an interepistemic approach (Morgan et al. 2025), the team sets forth its approach to convergence research. A key element of the Transformation Network’s design is an “interepistemic” and “interontological” approach that builds both conceptual and quantitative models for working across different knowledge systems, allowing it to work across academic fields and with community partners. This manuscript unpacks the differences between transdisciplinary and convergence within the literature and explains how the Transformation Network incorporates elements of both into its approach, drawing from both schools of transdisciplinarity thought: the metaphysical approach of the Nicolescuian School and the more solution-focused Zürich School (Morgan et al. 2025). They include an example where Transformation Network faculty and students partner with members of the Navajo Nation to support the independence of Native American communities in the San Juan River Watershed through the implementation of small-scale sustainable, off-grid food-energy-water systems.

In Guided transformations for communities facing social and ecological change (Morgan et al. 2024), the team explains its theoretical framework of Guided Transformation. This framework combines elements from SETS theory, resilience theory, and sustainability transitions research to provide a conceptual framework with the capacity to translate new knowledge into action by incorporating diverse perspectives and values that prioritize community and environmental well-being. Guided Transformation emphasizes how to leverage change and identify lock-ins and path dependencies that keep communities on undesirable trajectories. Guided Transformation provides a way for communities facing continual change to identify windows of opportunity, conceptualize new trajectories, and drive innovation. Morgan et al. (2024) provide three case studies to illustrate the Guided Transformation framework based on their work in the Transformation Network and identify its potential for further work with community partners using a participatory approach.

Finally, the role of interepistemic engagement is further explored in Towards an incoherent convergence science: diverse economies, crises, and recoveries, and the hope for better futures (Montoya et al. 2025). This Transformation Network team argues for a critical approach to convergence that brings together diverse perspectives to solve contemporary crises. They opt for an “incoherent convergence” in which academics and other knowledge bearers embrace epistemological plurality without assuming a singular understanding or shared worldviews. Using recovery efforts from the 2022 Hermit’s Peak Calf Canyon Wildfire in Mora, New Mexico as a case study, Montoya et al. (2025) demonstrate how convergence research must engage with on-the-ground realities and perspectives that remain “illegible” within privileged scientific paradigms. Collectively, these manuscripts provide new theoretical tools and research designs for convergence insights into what those approaches look like in practice.

Tools for reaching convergence

To move the practice of convergence research forward, theoretical approaches must be partnered with practical tools and organizing frameworks. The Transformation Network invested in developing and testing such tools early in the research program, many of which are used across the research network today. Three manuscripts describe sets of tools for convergence research that connect directly to the theoretical approaches described above.

First, in Facilitating convergence research on water resource management with a collaborative, adaptive, and multi-scale systems thinking framework, Webster et al. (2025) apply several systems thinking tools within an integrated framework relating to a water resource system as a SETS. Systems thinking is a body of theory and methods that studies how systems behave by gaining a deeper understanding of their underlying structure. Although Morgan et al. (2025) articulate the promise of systems thinking as an approach for convergence research, Webster et al. (2025) go further to explore the challenges of its practical application for the study of complex systems. One major challenge is that the behavior of complex systems inherently plays out over multiple spatial and temporal scales, and yet most systems thinking methods do not consider cross-scale interactions. Webster et al. (2025) address this challenge by linking systems thinking methods suited for different spatial and temporal scales to more effectively synthesize existing knowledge about a complex system. This strategy also allowed integration of findings from different systems thinking approaches that appeal to different epistemic perspectives and was therefore able to integrate the knowledge and interests of an intellectually diverse research team.

Next, Lin et al. (2025) expand on the Transformation Network’s use of SETS theory in Fuzzy SETS: acknowledging multiple membership of elements within social-ecological-technological systems (SETS) theory. This theoretical approach advances convergence research by explicitly acknowledging and visualizing differences and similarities in how SETS elements are understood in research teams. SETS theory emphasizes deep integration across these system elements, but practically, such as in some modeling applications, system elements must sometimes be divided into these categories to describe subsystem dynamics. In doing so, team members’ understanding of the nature of an element as belonging to one or more categories may be violated. For example, a reservoir for water storage can be understood as partially technological and partially ecological, while the degree of membership in these categories may depend on disciplinary training and other epistemic differences. The fuzzy SETS framework evolved out of a larger project described in Webster et al. (2025) and draws on mathematical fuzzy sets theory and the SETS literature to facilitate conversations about system elements among members of the research team, and, in doing so, deepens shared understanding of the system. This work provides a model for resolving common sources of interepistemic conflict that can slow convergence research by honoring intellectual diversity, while still building sources of consensus that are needed for investigating complex systems.

While Lin et al. (2025) and Webster et al. (2025) focus on integrating intellectually diverse but still ultimately academic research teams, Lin et al. (2024) go a step further by providing a practical framework for how to include professional artists and public audiences in convergence research in Shared.Futures: fostering convergence and envisioning possible futures through ArtScience. Lin et al. (2024) articulate an urgent need to explore how the work of scientists and artists can inform one another and the public to address the types of compelling problems that motivate convergence research. In doing so, they effectively demonstrate how art-science collaboration can expansively and effectively broaden participation in convergence research. Though the approach of the Shared.Futures program is unique by virtue of its place-based and co-created structure, the authors (which include the organizers, scientists, and artists involved) take great care to provide enough detail about their framework to allow others to adopt it in other settings. Lin et al. (2024) thus provide a model for other convergence research teams to use art-science collaboration to further the transdisciplinary dimensions of convergence research. Combined, these provide a suite of methods-forward papers that share specific tools for reaching convergence.

Case studies in convergence

The flexibility of convergence approaches facilitates convergence applications across a variety of social and ecological settings. Because convergence work is dependent on community needs, the temporal and spatial scale over which it is applied can vary widely, making convergence approaches well suited to address a variety of social-ecological problems. In particular, three case studies of convergence research are included in this Special Feature.

First, in Water challenges at the U.S.-Mexico border: learning from community and expert voices, Haines et al. (2024) apply a convergence approach to better address social inequities in regional water planning along the U.S.-Mexico border. Whereas many long-term water policies emphasize ecosystem health and water supply, shorter-term human well-being and justice considerations are often deemphasized. Along the U.S.-Mexico border, this particularly includes issues related to water quality and flood hazards for local communities. Using methods that include a key-actor survey and socially diverse community workshops, Haines et al. (2024) illustrate “gaps in mechanisms of governance that may obscure short-term, urgently felt priorities of residents and activists working and living on both sides of the border.” The case study of Haines et al. (2024) demonstrates how social vulnerabilities can be explicitly considered within water planning frameworks, and the study has important implications for transbasin water policies in other countries.

Next, Sjöstedt et al. (2025) reveal how regional communities are economically interconnected at transboundary scales in the Western U.S. in Sustainability and resilience through connection: the economic metacommunities of the Western USA. By understanding which economies are interdependent across a variety of scales and spatial distributions, economic policies and management can better prepare for and recover from disturbances that are growing in intensity and scale. Sjöstedt et al. (2025) use a novel approach to identify overarching structures in the Western U.S. trade network. Specifically, their approach includes a unique application of ecological metapopulation theory to analyze economic networks (Levins 1969). Results “identified multiscale structures that are not present in other regional trade frameworks.” (Sjöstedt et al. 2025).

Finally, Convergence research as transdisciplinary knowledge coproduction within cases of effective collaborative governance of social-ecological systems is an examination of multiple case studies of collaborative governance (Carr Kelman et al. 2024). The authors show how knowledge co-production is successfully being implemented across a range of convergence research. Focusing specifically on collaborative governance of social-ecological systems, the authors studied seven case studies across four continents to understand the degree to which knowledge coproduction and convergence research was being used. The case studies ranged in governance settings and spanned water security to land use to energy production trade-offs. Using a descriptive research design that included an evaluation of key convergence research indicators and knowledge coproduction, Carr Kelman et al. (2024) found that knowledge coproduction processes were widely applied in all case studies. They also present a generalized model for how to implement collaborative governance in social-ecological systems. The model specifically includes stages that incorporate convergence of expertise in co-design, co-creation, and co-analysis. However, the authors highlight the collaborative governance that includes convergence research must be tailored to the specific needs of the communities and problem domains. These papers provide insights into what it looks like for teams who are both implementing and studying collaborative processes at a variety of scales. The lessons include integrating diverse stakeholder perspectives, adapting methodologies to community contexts, and the value of working across disciplinary boundaries.

Themes, connections, and research needs

Combined, these manuscripts address some of the key gaps in the existing literature noted above. Regarding the challenge of methodological integration, two manuscripts directly address this with new tools. Webster and her colleagues (2025) provide the Collaborative, Adaptive, and Multi-Scale (CAMS) systems thinking framework, which provides practical methods for integrating diverse methodological approaches within convergence research teams, and Lin and her colleagues (2025) propose Fuzzy SETS theory to acknowledge multiple membership of elements within complex systems, providing a conceptual framework for handling methodological ambiguity and integration challenges. It is worth noting that these two manuscripts were created in tandem by these two lead authors, who consider these manuscripts to be co-led by Webster and Lin. In addition to the tools-based manuscripts, Morgan et al. (2025) discuss approaches for the integration of multiple methodologies in the context of working with communities experiencing social and ecological change, utilizing systems theory for that integration.

Next, several manuscripts address the challenge of knowledge co-production and community engagement directly. Carr Kelman et al. (2024) present empirical data collected from seven global case studies that together demonstrate collaborative governance of social-ecological systems requires knowledge co-production, but more importantly, convergence research. Morgan et al. (2024) discuss a framework of “guided transformations,” where the community is at the center of the approach and are aware of and confronting knowledge power imbalances in the research partnership. Haines et al. (2024) describe community-centered convergence research in the context at the U.S.-Mexico border and describe the way they can authentically engage and respect research participants from marginalized communities. Morgan et al. (2025) discuss the importance of honoring different epistemologies and ontologies, using their work on the Navajo Nation as an example. Montoya et al. (2025) also advocated for focusing on diverse ways of being, discussing work in communities like Mora, New Mexico, in ways that respect and articulate local knowledge.

For the challenge of working across spatial and temporal scales, Webster et al. (2025) build their CAMS framework in a way that directly addresses multi-scale issues of water resource management and developed a set of specific tools to aid in actualizing working across scales. Lin et al. (2025) use Fuzzy SETS to examine intra-scale and inter-scale systems in which multiple systems simultaneously operate across multiple scales, recognizing that elements in those systems may partly belong to different scale-dependent categories. And Sjöstedt et al. (2025) describe an economic metacommunities framework that was specifically designed to build on discussions about scale mismatches by looking at economic relationships across spatial scales in the Western USA.

Turning to communication and translation across disciplines, Lin et al. (2024) explain the potential for ArtScience to act as powerful boundary objects for cross-disciplinary communication and shared understanding, through their Shared.Futures project. Ashton et al. (2024) describe how human-centered design methods can support collaboration and communication across disciplinary boundaries in convergence research. Finally, Webster et al. (2025) demonstrate how systems thinking approaches can serve as shared languages for interdisciplinary teams dealing with complex and interconnected water management issues.

CONCLUSION

Convergence research is the future of team science, focused on addressing complex challenges, including those involving sustainable regional systems. The manuscripts presented in this Special Feature collectively offer theoretical advancements and practical applications of convergence research, filling critical gaps in the literature by providing specific examples and frameworks that can guide future research and implementation efforts. The NSF’s continued investment in convergence research through programs like the SRS program reflects a growing recognition that traditional siloed approaches are insufficient.

Contributions in this Special Feature demonstrate the essential role of expanding convergence’s reach to engage diverse epistemologies, social sciences, humanities, and community-rooted knowledge systems. They provide valuable conceptual tools for researchers seeking not only to integrate across disciplines, but to do so in ways that are equitable, accountable, and just. The case studies illustrate how convergence approaches can be effectively tailored to different contexts and scales. Although convergence research must be problem-driven and context-specific, the future lies in embracing epistemological plurality, prioritizing reciprocity, and co-developing methodologies that can translate across disciplinary boundaries. By doing so, convergence research can fulfill its promise of generating transformative approaches to our most pressing societal challenges.

LITERATURE CITED

Angeler, D. G., C. R. Allen, and A. Carnaval. 2020. Convergence science in the Anthropocene: navigating the known and unknown. People and Nature 2(1):96-102. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10069

Ashton, W. S., A. Sungu, L. Davis, V. Agarwalla, M. Burke, E. Duhart Benavides, S. Espat, K. Harper, A. Knight, N. Labruto, M. Shea, S. Verba, and N. L. W. Wilson. 2024. Whither convergence? Co-designing convergent research and wrestling with its emergent tensions. Ecology and Society 29(4):26. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-15319-290426

Bainbridge, W. S., and M. C. Roco. 2015. Handbook of science and technology convergence. Springer, Cham, Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04033-2

Carr Kelman, C., J. Srinivasan, T. Lorenzo Bajaj, A. B. Raschke, R. N. Brown-Wood, E. Kellner, M. Ahn, R. W. Kariuki, M. Simeone, and M. Schoon. 2024. Convergence research as transdisciplinary knowledge coproduction within cases of effective collaborative governance of social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society 29(4):23. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-15534-290423

Cash, D. W., W. N. Adger, F. Berkes, P. Garden, L. Lebel, P. Olsson, L. Pritchard, and O. Young. 2006. Scale and cross-scale dynamics: governance and information in a multilevel world. Ecology and Society 11(2):8. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-01759-110208

Cravens, A. E., M. S. Jones, C. Ngai, J. Zarestky, and H. B. Love. 2022. Science facilitation: navigating the intersection of intellectual and interpersonal expertise in scientific collaboration. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 9:256. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01217-1

Gajary, L. C., S. Misra, A. Desai, D. M. Evasius, J. Frechtling, D. A. Pendlebury, J. D. Schnell, G. Silverstein, and J. Wells. 2024. Convergence research as a ‘system-of-systems’: a framework and research agenda. Minerva 62:253-286. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-023-09503-1

Gropp, R. E. 2016. NSF: time for big ideas. BioScience 66(11):920. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biw125

Haines, K., O. Temby, J. Heyman, M. J. Brown, F. Forman, C. Fuller, D. Kim, A. S. Mayer, and A. Racelis. 2024. Water challenges at the U.S.-Mexico border: learning from community and expert voices. Ecology and Society 29(4):35. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-15632-290435

Levins, R. 1969. Some demographic and genetic consequences of environmental heterogeneity for biological control. Bulletin of the Entomological Society of America 15(3):237-240. https://doi.org/10.1093/besa/15.3.237

Lin, Y. C., M. C. Meyer-Driovínto, T. Q. Casuse-Driovínto, A. B. Stone, A. R. Apodaca-Sparks, N. DeLay, A. B. Granath, A. Haskamp Buchanan, L. Hurst, M. King, S. Luévano, M. Morgan, R. Mukerji, A. Mulchandani, M. J. Rain Song, and M. C. Stone. 2024. Shared.Futures: fostering convergence and envisioning possible futures through ArtScience. Ecology and Society 29(4):44. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-15551-290444

Lin, Y. C., A. J. Webster, C. E. Scruggs, R. J. Bixby, D. Cadol, L. J. Crossey, P. de Lancer Julnes, K. Huang, A. Johnson, M. Morgan, A. Mulchandani, A. B. Stone, and M. C. Stone. 2025. Fuzzy SETS: acknowledging multiple membership of elements within social-ecological-technological systems (SETS) theory. Ecology and Society 30(1):22. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-15764-300122

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). 2011. The third revolution: the convergence of the life sciences, physical sciences, and engineering. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. https://www.aplu.org/wp-content/uploads/MITwhitepaper.pdf

Montoya, M. R., R. Ehrenfeucht, M. Walsh-Dilley, B. P. Warner, and C. A. Tawse-Garcia. 2025. Towards an incoherent convergence science: diverse economies, crises, and recoveries, and the hope for better futures. Ecology and Society 30(1):30. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-15810-300130

Morgan, M. 2020. Conservation-reliant species as a boundary object for interdisciplinary engagements. Idaho Law Review 56:83-116.

Morgan, M., Y. C. Lin, M. Walsh-Dilley, A. J. Webster, A. B. Stone, K. Chief, N. G. Estrada, K. Ayers, H. Love, P. A. Townsend, S. A. Hall, R. R. Rushforth, R. R. Morrison, J. Boll, and M. C. Stone. 2025. Convergence, transdisciplinarity, and team science: an interepistemic approach. Ecology and Society 30(1):3. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-15492-300103

Morgan, M., A. J. Webster, J. C. Padowski, R. R. Morrison, C. G. Flint, K. Simmons-Potter, K. Chief, B. Litson, B. Neztsosie, V. Karanikola, M. Kacira, R. R. Rushforth, J. Boll, and M. B. Stone. 2024. Guided transformations for communities facing social and ecological change. Ecology and Society 29(4):20. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-15448-290420

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2019. Fostering the Culture of Convergence in Research: Proceedings of a Workshop. A. Arnold and K. Bowman, editors. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., USA.

National Research Council. 2005a. Catalyzing inquiry at the interface of computing and biology. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., USA. https://doi.org/10.17226/11480

National Research Council. 2005b. Mathematics and 21st century biology. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., USA. https://doi.org/10.17226/11315

National Research Council. 2008. Inspired by biology: from molecules to materials to machines. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., USA. https://doi.org/10.17226/12159

National Research Council. 2010. Research at the intersection of the physical and life sciences. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., USA. https://doi.org/10.17226/12809

National Research Council. 2011. Toward precision medicine: building a knowledge network for biomedical research and a new taxonomy of disease. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., USA. https://doi.org/10.17226/13284

National Research Council. 2014. Convergence: facilitating transdisciplinary integration of life sciences, physical sciences, engineering, and beyond. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., USA. https://doi.org/10.17226/18722

National Science Foundation (NSF). 2017a. Dear colleague letter: rules of life (RoL): forecasting and emergence in living systems (FELS). (NSF 18-031). National Science Foundation, Alexandria, Virginia, USA. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2018/nsf18031/nsf18031.jsp

National Science Foundation (NSF). 2017b. Dear colleague letter: RAISE on enabling quantum leap: transformational advances in quantum systems. (NSF 18-035). National Science Foundation, Alexandria, Virginia, USA. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2018/nsf18035/nsf18035.jsp

National Science Foundation (NSF). 2017c. Dear colleague letter: growing convergence research at NSF (NSF 17-065). National Science Foundation, Alexandria, Virginia, USA. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2017/nsf17065/nsf17065.jsp

National Science Foundation (NSF). 2017d. Dear colleague letter: Joint NSF/ENG and AFOSR funding opportunity: supporting fundamental research in the quantitative representation of microstructures (QRM). (NSF 18-018). National Science Foundation, Alexandria, Virginia, USA. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2018/nsf18018/nsf18018.jsp

National Science Foundation (NSF). 2018a. Dear colleague letter: growing convergence research (NSF 18-058). National Science Foundation, Alexandria, Virginia, USA. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2018/nsf18058/nsf18058.jsp

National Science Foundation (NSF). 2018b. Dear colleague letter: Stimulating Research Related to navigating the new Arctic (NNA), one of NSF's 10 big ideas. (NSF 18-048). National Science Foundation, Alexandria, Virginia, USA. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2018/nsf18048/nsf18048.jsp

National Science Foundation (NSF). 2019a. Dear colleague letter: NSF convergence accelerator pilot (NSF 19-050). National Science Foundation, Alexandria, Virginia, USA. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2019/nsf19050/nsf19050.jsp

National Science Foundation (NSF). 2019b. Sustainable urban systems conference and workshop awards. National Science Foundation, Alexandria, Virginia, USA. https://www.nsf.gov/oia/advisory-committee-environmental-research/communities-in-the-21st-century/sus-conference-and-workshop-awards

National Science Foundation (NSF). 2020. Sustainable regional systems research networks (SRS RNs). National Science Foundation, Alexandria, Virginia, USA. https://www.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/srs-rns-sustainable-regional-systems-research-networks/505707/nsf20-611/solicitation

National Science Foundation. 2024a. Program expansion overview - convergence accelerator. National Science Foundation, Alexandria, Virginia, USA. https://www.nsf.gov/funding/initiatives/convergence-accelerator/program-expansion-overview

National Science Foundation. 2024b. Growing convergence research (GCR). Program solicitation. National Science Foundation, Alexandria, Virginia, USA. https://www.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/gcr-growing-convergence-research/nsf24-527/solicitation

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, B. M. Campbell, J. G. Canadell, S. R. Carpenter, C. Folke, E. A. Fulton, O. Gaffney, S. Gelcich, J. B. Jouffray, M. Leach, M. Le Tissier, B. Martín-López, E. Martínez-Harms, C. Meya, D. Meek, Ö. Nagendra, and H. Österblom. 2020. Principles for knowledge co-production in sustainability research. Nature Sustainability 3:182-190. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0448-2

Peek, L., J. Tobin, R. M. Adams, H. Wu, and M. C. Mathews. 2020. A framework for convergence research in the hazards and disaster field: the natural hazards engineering research infrastructure CONVERGE facility. Frontiers in Built Environment 6:110. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2020.00110

Ramaswami, A., L. Bettencourt, A. Clarens, S. Das, G. Fitzgerald, E. Irwin, D. Pataki, S. Pinceti, K. Seto, and P. Waddell. 2018. Sustainable urban systems: articulating a long-term convergence agenda. A Report by the Advisory Committee for Environmental Research and Education, Alexandria, Virginia, USA.

Roco, M. C. 2002. Coherence and divergence of megatrends in science and engineering. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 4(1):9-19. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020157027792

Roco, M. C. 2016. Principles and methods that facilitate convergence. Pages 3-15 in W. S. Bainbridge and M. C. Roco, editors. Handbook of science and technology convergence. Springer, Cham, Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07052-0_2

Roco, M. C., and W. S. Bainbridge, editors. 2002. Converging technologies for improving human performance: nanotechnology, biotechnology, information technology, and cognitive science. National Science Foundation, Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Roco, M. C., and W. S. Bainbridge. 2013. The new world of discovery, invention, and innovation: convergence of knowledge, technology, and society. Journal of Nanoparticle Research 15:1946. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11051-013-1946-1

Roco, M. C., W. S. Bainbridge, B. Tonn, and G. Whitesides, editors. 2013. Convergence of knowledge, technology and society: beyond convergence of nano-bio-info-cognitive technologies. Springer, Cham, Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02204-8

Sharp, P. A., R. Langer, B. Alberts, K. Anderson, S. Bhatia, J. Collins, J. Dear, J. Elias, D. Fambrough, M. Ferrari, S. Friend, J. Gertner, M. Heller, T. Jacks, K. Jain, D. Kim, R. Levine, E. Moniz, H. Moses, A. Murray, J. Rothberg, P. Schultz, D. Silverman, N. Tilahun, M. Turner, H. Westwick, K. Yamamoto, and F. Zhang. 2016. Convergence: the future of health. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/632c9df5490c364ddc05461c/t/66354e9aa5c83960782480c5/1714769562530/Convergence-The-Future-of-Health-2016-Report.pdf

Sixt, G. N., M. Hauser, N. T. Blackstone, A. Engler, J. Hatfield, S. L. Hendriks, S. Ihouma, C. Madramootoo, R. J. Robins, P. Smith, L. H. Ziska, and P. Webb. 2022. A new convergent science framework for food system sustainability in an uncertain climate. Food and Energy Security 11(4):e423. https://doi.org/10.1002/fes3.423

Sjöstedt, E. C., K. F. Fowler, R. R. Rushforth, R. A. McManamay, and B. L. Ruddell. 2025. Sustainability and resilience through connection: the economic metacommunities of the Western USA. Ecology and Society 30(1):4. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-15676-300104

Stoknes, P. E., and J. Rockström. 2018. Redefining green growth within planetary boundaries. Energy Research and Social Science 44:41-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2018.04.030

Thompson Klein, J. 2021. Beyond interdisciplinarity: boundary work, communication, and collaboration. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197571149.001.0001

Webster, A. J., Y. C. Lin, C. E. Scruggs, R. J. Bixby, L. J. Crossey, K. Huang, A. Johnson, P. de Lancer Julnes, C. A. Kremer, M. Morgan, A. Mulchandani, L. Rotche, A. B. Stone, L. M. Tsinnajinnie, and M. C. Stone. 2025. Facilitating convergence research on water resource management with a collaborative, adaptive, and multi-scale systems thinking framework. Ecology and Society 30(1):23. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-15586-300123

Welsh, K., L. Keesecker, R. Hill, T. Joyal, J. Boll, N. A. Bosque-Pérez, B. Cosens, and A. K. Fremier. 2020. Scale mismatch in social-ecological systems: a Costa Rican case study of spring water management. Sustainable Water Resources Management 6:40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40899-020-00398-4

Wyborn, C., A. Datta, J. Montana, M. Ryan, P. Leith, B. Chaffin, C. Miller, and L. van Kerkhoff. 2019. Co-producing sustainability: reordering the governance of science, policy, and practice. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 44:319-346. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-101718-033103