Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40646832›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2025

Applying Transdisciplinary Thinking to Pastoral Livelihoods and Environments.

Keith Woodford, Xiaomeng Lucock, Derrick Moot

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Keith WoodfordDepartment of Land Management and Systems, Faculty of Agribusiness and Commerce, Lincoln University, Lincoln 7647, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0001-6732-4366
Xiaomeng LucockDepartment of Agribusiness and Markets, Faculty of Agribusiness and Commerce, Lincoln University, Lincoln 7647, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-3648-7987
Derrick MootDepartment of Agricultural Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture & Life Sciences, Lincoln University, Lincoln 7647, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-5691-4915

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transdisciplinary thinking lies at one end of a continuum within system thinking, with discipline-based approaches at the other end. Interdisciplinarity and multidisciplinarity are intermediate domains within this continuum. Transdisciplinary thinking is unique in always starting with problem-structuring related to contexts, in which people, typically with multiple and competing objectives, interact with a biophysical world. As such, transdisciplinary thinking is particularly relevant to pastoral systems where livelihoods and environmental issues intersect, and where multiple stakeholders are the norm. Integration, both within transdisciplinary thinking and consequent action, is particularly challenging. This is because there is no quantitative methodology that can capture the complex essence of transdisciplinary issues that encompass both human and biophysical disciplines. Nevertheless, a transdisciplinary approach provides a framework for civilised debate and communication within a broad framework of policy generation. We illustrate these issues with two highly contrasting studies, these being pastoralism at the country level in New Zealand and at the county level in Qinghai on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau in Western China. Both case studies are characterised by complex property rights within a dynamic resource-constrained environment, in which environmental issues have planetary implications that extend well beyond the bounds of the pastoral system itself.

Indexed as

pastoral systemssystem thinkingtransdisciplinary thinking

Identifiers

PMID40646832
PMCPMC12249158

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.