Table 4. Disciplinary bridges and barriers to integrated interdisciplinary research.


Unique language/jargon, more technical background necessary  
  Common or easy-to-understand language/jargon, less technical background necessary
Lack of understanding of different paradigms or single-paradigm bias  
  Understanding of different paradigms or accepting multiple-paradigms
Scales and units

Poor match between extent of variables or processes  
Spatial scale
  Good match between extent of variables or processes
Poor match between "speed" of variables or processes  
Temporal scale
  Good match between "speed" of variables or processes
Few common units, standards, measurements  
  Common units, standards, measurements
Disjointed data gathering seasons  
  Coordinated data gathering seasons
Models and frameworks

No current models  
Examples of interdisciplinary work
  Existing examples of models that include relevant disciplines and data; predictive or descriptive
Lack of necessary disciplines  
Team make-up
  Good fit to context of local problem
Focus theme

Disciplines on team have incommensurabilities that make answering management/conservation questions difficult  
Problem centered/applied results
  Disciplines on team can combine to answer management/conservation questions
Diverse or multiple systems, policies, programs or process  
Topical/systematic focus
  Single system, crop, policy, program, or process
No unifying theme  
Unifying theme/focus
  Unifying theme, such as spatial (GIS based) or social (management/conservation), that links research
Different audiences  
  Common audiences