Researchers are increasingly working in large, integrated science programmes. This is supposed to lead to several benefits, including creating and enhancing synergies amongst projects, improving collaboration and knowledge exchanges amongst researchers from different disciplines, and generating a higher return on investments in R&D. In practice, though, these benefits are often not fully realised, and large-scale integrated programmes can become frustrating for researchers. Additionally, they can result in insufficient integration and collaboration, and incur high overhead costs. In the present paper, the authors share their experience and insights on how to structure, manage and govern integrated programmes more competently. They do so by reflecting on their own practical experience in designing an integrated programme, and by drawing valuable insights from the literature on governance, management studies and organisational economics. The authors suggest that many problems can be linked to the implementation of programme management systems and coordination mechanisms that are poorly aligned with the unique characteristics of integrated programmes. They provide guidelines for programme managers to use systems that are a better fit, which can help researchers collaborate in a more engaging and productive manner while reducing the overhead costs associated with programme administration.

To solve complex problems, researchers are increasingly working in large, integrated research programmes. Integration of projects within a single programme rather than supporting a range of individual, more autonomous projects, is supposed to lead to several benefits, including: creating and enhancing synergies amongst projects, improving collaboration and knowledge exchanges amongst researchers from different disciplines, realizing efficiency gains, and generating a higher return on investments in R&D. However, often these advantages are insufficiently realized in practice and large-scale integrated programs instead incur high overhead costs, frustrate researchers, and realize insufficient integration and collaboration. Why do integrated programmes sometimes fail to realize their lofty ambitions? In the present paper, we use the literature on governance, management studies, and organizational economics to analyse several key problems plaguing integrated programmes. We argue that these problems can be linked to the implementation of programme management systems and coordination mechanisms that are poorly aligned with the unique characteristics of integrated programmes. We develop guidelines for funding agencies and programme managers to implement systems and mechanisms that are a better fit for purpose and that enhance collaboration.

Systemic risks are potentially harmful events, that could severely disrupt an entire industry or economy. Examples include the bankruptcy of keystone companies and biosecurity incursions. According to the United Nations, detecting and managing systemic risk represents one of the main challenges of the 21st century. Due to increasing complexity and interconnectedness of today's social-technological-biophysical systems, stakeholders relying on individual disciplines to systemic risk detection, or a combination of disciplines that are not well coordinated, will fail to promptly identify key early warning signals of threats. Our paper argues that transdisciplinary approaches are required to make comprehensive and integrative assessments of complex systems. To support stakeholders undertaking such assessments, we propose a framework that will assist them in: (1) better understanding their system and the risks to which it is exposed; (2) selecting complementary disciplines, theories and methods that are relevant to the system and risks in question; and (3) integrating knowledge from these different disciplines to detect a wide range of early warning signals of systemic risk. The framework can be used as a foundation to build transdisciplinary approaches to risk detection.

Over the last decade, transparency schemes have started to undergo a radical transformation. This transformation is driven by advancements in cloud computing, cryptography and automated measurement technology, which have made it possible to develop shared information management systems (SIMS). These SIMS form the backbone of the latest, state-of-the-art in the transparency space: hyper-transparency schemes. These new transparency schemes and associated SIMS offer companies, both small and large, the opportunity to redesign their supply chains and to establish more direct relationships with their second- and third-tier trading partners, as well as with the consumer. However, the companies also face various challenges in implementing and operating such hyper-transparency schemes. There are legitimate concerns about privacy, ownership and access to data and, related to this, who controls the SIMS. The present paper discusses the ongoing development of a SIMS. The objective of this SIMS is to: (1), help empower smallholders in agri-food supply chains to establish more direct connections with the consumer; and (2), help empower consumers to get more direct insight into the manner in which their food stuff is being produced. The paper presents the design of the SIMS and discusses its transdisciplinary development processes.

The system concept has existed for several decades now, but is still a viable concept to be used to denote a problem area and to adopt a holistic view. The essence of a system is that it consists of elements and relationships between these elements, and that it exerts a function in its environment, provided it is an open system. A system can be defined at different layers of abstraction consisting of subsystems, which themselves may consist of subsystems again. Themost complex level includes human beings. The system concept is adopted in Systems Engineering (SE) in which not only the engineering system under development is modeled, but also the development process itself in which many different disciplines need to be involved depending on the (lifecycle) requirements in focus. In this introductory chapter we draw the way we have paved to provide this book from the first idea on. The system concept, the origins, the goals and the expected audience of this book are roughly described. Finally, we give the first insight in the structure of this book and themutual interdependence of the chapters. This book contains many different contributions in the area of SE, categorized into 4 parts: an introduction to the concept, methods and tools, applications, and challenges.

Innovative products and services are key success factors for the manufacturing industry. Development of such products and services usually takes place in partnerships in which the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) distributes the development of new products to many locations in several countries across the world. Suppliers, especially first-tier suppliers (FTSs) are involved in the development process as early as possible, because they have knowledge that is strategically important for developing the new product and services. Historically, the OEM-supplier relationship is characterized by a sequential interaction whereby the OEM gives product and production requirements to the supplier and the supplier delivers his product or service to the OEM. However, collaboration between FTS and OEM is essential to fruitfully use the knowledge of the FTS, anticipate potential downstream errors, and reduce costs and risks. The paper presents recent developments in this part of the supply chain with particular attention to the design of a shared platforms, which is part of an OEM-supplier ecosystem. The development process of such an ecosystem can be seen as a transdisciplinary engineering process, because not only IT engineers are needed to build such a platform-base ecosystem but also people with knowledge of supply chain organization and coordination, especially in product development processes.

Transdisciplinary processes have been the subject of research since several decades already. Transdisciplinary processes are aimed at solving ill-defined and socially relevant problems. Many researchers have studied transdisciplinary processes and have tried to understand the essentials of transdisciplinarity. Many engineering problems can be characterised as ill-defined and socially relevant, too. Although transdisciplinary engineering cannot widely be found in the literature yet, a transdisciplinary approach is deemed relevant for many engineering problems. With this paper we aim to present an overview of the literature on research into transdisciplinary processes and investigate the relevance of a transdisciplinary approach in engineering domains. After a brief description of past research on transdisciplinarity, implications for engineering research, engineering practice, and engineering education are identified. In all three areas, the current situation is described, while challenges are identified that still exist. The paper ends with a research agenda for transdisciplinary engineering.