Sustainability science

Mode 2 Knowledge Production

A model of research that is transdisciplinary, application-oriented and socially distributed — contrasted with traditional disciplinary ("Mode 1") science.

Established · Version 0.1

Definition

Mode 2 knowledge production, a concept introduced by Gibbons and colleagues in The New Production of Knowledge (1994), describes knowledge generated in the context of application: transdisciplinary rather than disciplinary, carried out by heterogeneous, transient teams inside and outside universities, socially accountable and reflexive, and judged by a wider range of quality criteria than Mode 1 academic science.

References

Overview

What it means

In Mode 2, problems are defined by the context of use — a watershed, a city, a supply chain — rather than by a discipline, and practitioners, communities and policymakers co-produce both questions and answers.

How it is used

Sustainability science, transdisciplinary research programmes and citizen science invoke Mode 2 to justify co-design with stakeholders and integration of local and indigenous knowledge alongside academic expertise.

Why it matters

Sustainability problems are systemic and place-based; Mode 2 provides the theoretical licence for the collaborative research approaches those problems demand.

Review

Public comments appear only after editor acceptance. Draft comments stay in the review queue.

0
How people contribute

Reviewers choose the definition or an overview paragraph, leave a comment or replacement, and attach evidence or a source link.

How comments are used

Editors compare reviewer cards side by side. AI may help find agreement, conflicts, unsupported claims and possible source issues.

What gets published

Only an editor-accepted synthesis changes the public page. Reviewer identities are shown only with consent and an editorial decision to attribute them.

No editor-accepted reviews yet

Submitted reviews stay private until an editor decides whether to accept and attribute them.

Contribute to this entry

Help improve this definition

Your contribution is private while it is checked. Nothing changes on this page unless an editor accepts it.

How review works

Loading verified endorsements… Endorsements are not votes and never determine publication.

Endorse this definition

Endorse the exact version shown here. This is not a vote, and publication remains an editorial decision.

v0.1

Sign-in supplies your email for necessary follow-up; it is not displayed publicly. We do not ask you to enter it again.

Sign in to your account before submitting.

Review board

Comment on a specific line. Each reviewer stays separate until an editor accepts a merged draft.

1Separate reviewer cards

Each person comments on the definition or overview in their own draft card, with role, evidence and suggested wording kept together.

2AI comparison

AI can compare comments against the current text, flag conflicting claims, surface missing evidence and identify where reviewers agree.

3Editor synthesis

An editor merges compatible suggestions into a draft change, checks sources, records disagreements and decides what can be published.

Text to reviewChoose the exact definition or overview paragraph.
Reviewer commentDraft only. Not public until editor accepted.
Definition
Reviewer identityYour signed-in account identifies the submission. We use its email only for verification and necessary follow-up, and never display it publicly.
Before you submit

This proposal follows the editorial and AI-assistance rules. The live definition will not change until an editor accepts it.

  • Add the proposed wording or note.
  • Explain why the change is needed.
  • Ready
  • Ready

Sign in to your account before submitting.

You can still save a draft, but completing these items makes editorial review faster. Multiple reviewers can suggest changes on the same text. Editors compare, merge, accept or decline them before any public change.