Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Questions abound over how universities should teach and prepare the next generation of researchers to confront current and future wicked problems. With so much focus on curriculum and training, it is crucial that we step back and reflect on higher education’s capabilities to foster solution-oriented, collaborative research. What do the institutional incentive structures in higher education support, in terms of practices and outputs related to scholarship? And are those structures felt evenly across the academy? Those doing research in these spaces—in terms of title, autonomy, power, privilege, and status—vary widely by their institutional locations as well as in terms of their ties to broader disciplinary norms. To assess whether these dynamic, contested institutional landscapes afford so-called wicked problem scholarship, this paper draws from survey and interview data collected from 44 researchers working at the nexus of food, energy, and water systems at Carnegie Research 1 universities in the United States. Findings point to an uneven institutional landscape, which is shown to shape in different ways the type of solutions-oriented, collaborative scholarship fostered across the five positions examined. The paper concludes by reflecting on the paper’s findings, particularly in terms of what the data tell us about higher education as a place that fosters wicked problems scholarship, while also highlighting the study’s limitations.
Michael Carolan (Sat,) studied this question.