Water research is introduced from the combined perspectives of natural and social science and cases of citizen and stakeholder coproduction of knowledge. Using the overarching notion of transdisciplinarity, we examine how interdisciplinary and participatory water research has taken place and could be developed further. It becomes apparent that water knowledge is produced widely within society, across certified disciplinary experts and noncertified expert stakeholders and citizens. However, understanding and management interventions may remain partial, or even conflicting, as much research across and between traditional disciplines has failed to integrate disciplinary paradigms due to philosophical, methodological, and communication barriers. We argue for more agonistic relationships that challenge both certified and noncertified knowledge productively. These should include examination of how water research itself embeds and is embedded in social context and performs political work. While case studies of the cultural and political economy of water knowledge exist, we need more empirical evidence on how exactly culture, politics, and economics have shaped this knowledge and how and at what junctures this could have turned out differently. We may thus channel the coproductionist critique productively to bring perspectives, alternative knowledges, and implications into water politics where they were not previously considered; in an attempt to counter potential lock‐in to particular water policies and technologies that may be inequitable, unsustainable, or unacceptable. While engaging explicitly with politics, transdisciplinary water research should remain attentive to closing down moments in the research process, such as framings, path‐dependencies, vested interests, researchers’ positionalities, power, and scale. WIREs Water 2016, 3:369–389. doi: 10.1002/wat2.1132

中文翻译：

---

水研究的跨学科描述。

从自然科学和社会科学以及公民和利益相关者共同生产知识的案例的角度出发，介绍了水研究。使用跨学科性的总体概念，我们研究了跨学科和参与性水研究是如何进行的，并可以进一步发展。显然，水的知识是在社会上广泛产生的，包括经过认证的学科专家，未经认证的专家利益相关者和公民。然而，由于哲学，方法论和沟通上的障碍，传统学科之间和之间的大量研究未能整合学科范式，因此理解和管理干预措施可能仍然是部分甚至冲突的。我们主张建立更激烈的关系，从而有效地挑战认证和非认证知识。这些应包括对水研究本身如何嵌入和嵌入社会环境以及进行政治工作的研究。尽管存在关于水知识的文化和政治经济学的案例研究，但我们需要更多的经验证据来证明文化，政治和经济学如何准确地塑造了这一知识，以及在什么时候以及如何转变的情况。因此，我们可能会富有成效地传播对联合生产主义者的批评，以将观点，替代知识和启示带入水政治中，而此前人们从未考虑过这些观点，替代知识和启示。试图对付可能不公平，不可持续或不可接受的特定水政策和技术的潜在锁定。电线水杂志，2016，3：369-389。doi：10.1002 / wat2.1132