| 1 |
Network size |
Number of individuals in the study population. |
This indicator can be used to assess whether the number of individuals involved in the participatory process of collaboration changes during the research. |
| 2 |
Diversity of groups of actors |
Number of groups of individuals. Groups are defined according to attributes shared by their members. The attributes used to determine the groups must be defined according to the relevant theoretical framework and the objectives of the study. If the study focuses on transdisciplinary collaboration, for example, groups of actors will be defined according to their academic disciplines as well as other forms of knowledge. |
The diversity of groups of actors is positively associated with participation and transdisciplinarity. The greater the diversity of these groups in the collaboration network, the greater the representativeness of the various interests and priorities in the participatory process and the more disciplines and knowledge involved in the transdisciplinary process. |
| 3 |
Average number of relationships per individual |
Total number of relationships in the network, divided by the total number of individuals. |
A high average number of relationships per individual indicates a more intense collaborative process. It indicates strengthening of the collaborative process. |
| 4 |
Number of components and isolated individuals |
Number of components, that is, groups of individuals connected directly or indirectly by other individuals. If the network has multiple components, it is considered fragmented. The component has a minimum size of two individuals. Isolated individuals are those without any relationship. |
Negatively associated with collaborative participation and transdisciplinarity. To participate in the collective collaborative process, the several groups of actors must be connected. A fragmented network and/or with many isolated individuals represents a fragile collaboration. |
| 5 |
Relative size of groups of actors |
Number of individuals in different groups (defined according to certain attributes), divided by the total number of individuals in the network. |
A homogeneous distribution of group sizes indicates equity of participation in the collaborative process. A heterogeneous distribution indicates that one or a few groups may be controlling the collaboration process. Balance between the sizes of the groups of actors of various disciplines and knowledge should favor the transdisciplinary collaborative process. |
| 6 |
Distribution of the number of relationships of individuals |
The distribution of the number of relationships is defined as the relative frequency of individuals with 0, 1, 2, 3, etc. relationships, that is, the number of individuals with one count of relationships divided by the total number of individuals in the network. |
A homogeneous distribution of the number of relationships, in which most individuals have a similar number of collaborative relationships, is an indicator of a horizontal collaborative process, in which the various actors can contribute to knowledge generation. A heterogeneous distribution of the number of relationships, in which most individuals have few relationships and few individuals have many relationships, is an indicator of a hierarchical and centralized collaborative process, in which some actors can control and direct knowledge generation. |
| 7 |
Average number of bonding ties per individual |
Bonding ties are the links between individuals in the same group (defined according to certain attributes). These relationships are generally associated with trust and reciprocity, favor the establishment of shared norms, and increase the ability to reach consensus and manage conflicts. The average number of bonding ties is estimated between the individuals belonging to each group. |
In transdisciplinary research, bonding ties correspond to collaboration between academics of the same discipline or between actors of the same category, such as the public sector or civil society. These relationships are relevant because quality transdisciplinary research is anchored in the disciplinary roots of each researcher involved in the process. Bonding ties allow each group to develop their own knowledge. However, a very high density of ties can also homogenize views and isolate and place groups in rigid positions. |
| 8 |
Average number of bridging ties per individual |
Bridging ties are links between individuals of different groups (defined according to certain attributes). These relationships are generally associated with new opportunities, facilitating access to innovative ideas, favoring dialogue between different perspectives, and increasing the mobilization of resources not available in the group. The average number of bridging relationships per individual is estimated relative to each of the other groups separately. |
Indicator positively associated with transdisciplinarity. Bridging relationships correspond to collaborative relationships between researchers from different disciplines and non-academic actors, such as members of civil society, the community, or the public sector. These relationships favor mutual learning and the integration of knowledge around multidimensional problems. They favor the generation of research results which are relevant to society and more easily translated into concrete actions. |
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
Thumbnail
