Grant giving: Global funders to focus on interdisciplinarity

hree arguments are often made in favour of interdisciplinary research. First, complex modern problems such as climate change and resource security are not amenable to single-discipline investigation; they often require many types of expertise across the biological, physical and social disciplines. Second, discoveries are said to be more likely on the boundaries between fields, where the latest techniques, perspectives and insights can reorient or increase knowledge1. The influence of big-data science on many disciplines is a good example. Third, these encounters with others benefit single disciplines, extending their horizons.

The arguments against interdisciplinary work are also familiar. Devotees of normalized citation measures often contend that interdisciplinary research is inferior. Some fear that it drains funds, time and energy from 'core' disciplines. Research funders often hear complaints that schemes targeted at interdisciplinarity distract researchers. There is a persistent argument that 'you can't have inter-disciplines without disciplines'.

According to proponents of interdisciplinarity, obstacles abound. Academic institutions' budgets, governance and promotion arrangements are usually organized around single disciplines, as are processes at many granting bodies and journals. Interdisciplinary research struggles for prestige – as measured by quantitative metrics that favour single disciplines – and it is trickier to peer review. Thus early-stage researchers are often advised that starting on an interdisciplinary trajectory is not a smart move.