Who does not wish research outputs to be efficient? Especially when dealing with climate change, the clock is not with us and we have to be very efficient. That is why Dr. Christian Hof warns to keep research findings apart which actually belong together, because they are interdependent.
When it comes to the prediction of the impact of climate change on biodiversity, climate change, land-use, physiology and species mobility (dispersal) are more than worth one look each. They are all key factors. But since almost 80,000 publications do assess the impact of climate change on biodiversity, only 591 studies integrate land-use, physiology and species mobility in one research scenario. Christian explains: “‘The research field of physiology appears to be more separated from the other studies than those dealing with dispersal and land-use change.”
In order to bridge the gap between the different fields, he suggests holistic solutions as well: Decreasing funding boundaries. A broader acceptance of interdisciplinary research by journals. And, of course, a more interdisciplinary approach to education. That actually sounds pretty fun. And promising, with regard to tackling the ever ongoing demands of a complex subject matter as climate change.
The special issue of the Journal of Experimental Biology features a review article of Christian, which discusses this issue on a much deeper level. We hope you enjoy the read!
