Critical Social Science Concepts

This glossary explains key ideas behind our work. Understanding these concepts helps make sense of our tools and approaches. Each term is defined according to how our research team understands and applies it in practice.

We use power as the overarching framework through which we connect and interpret the following core concepts, considering how each relates to or counterbalances power.

Power & Forms of Power

Agency

Power is the ability to influence change. It can be obvious—like laws or rules—or hidden, like social norms and ideas. Power exists in relationships, systems, and structures, and it often works best when it goes unnoticed.

We look at different types of power:

Structural power: Who sets the rules and how decisions are made.
Discursive power: How language and stories shape what people believe is possible or important.

We use these ideas to examine how behaviors or actions either challenge or support existing power systems.

Agency means people’s ability to make choices and take action. Even when systems limit what we can do, we all have some power to act and shape the world around us.

People can act alone (individual agency) or together (collective agency), like in social movements. Our identity—such as our race, gender, class, or age—can affect our ability to act. That’s why we also consider how overlapping identities (see Intersectionality) shape people’s experiences.

Inclusion

Inclusion means making sure everyone—especially those who are often left out—can take part in decisions and actions that affect their lives.

We distinguish between:

Active inclusion: Creating real opportunities for everyone to contribute.
Passive inclusion: Allowing participation on paper, but not addressing deeper barriers or inequalities.

Diversity

Diversity is about having different people, experiences, and viewpoints in a group.

In research, diversity helps create more useful and relevant results. But just having diversity isn’t enough—it needs to come with inclusion and equity. Working with diverse teams can also be hard, so reflection and good communication are key to success.

Intersectionality

Intersectionality helps us understand how different forms of discrimination—like racism, sexism, or ableism—can overlap and reinforce each other.

This idea shows that people’s experiences aren’t shaped by one identity (like gender, class, race, etc.), but by a combination of them. These overlapping identities can create intersecting oppression/ disadvantages or privileges, depending on the situation.

Hegemony and Governmentality

Hegemony means one group’s ideas and ways of thinking become seen as “normal” or “common sense,” often without people realizing it. This happens not just through force but by winning agreement from others.

These dominant ideas can hide inequalities and make it harder to imagine different ways of living or organizing society.

Governmentality is a concept that helps to understand how hegemonies form and remain stable. Developed by Michel Foucault, governmentality refers to how governments subtly shape people's behavior, values, and beliefs—not just through laws or force, but through education, rewards, and cultural influence—so that certain ways of thinking and acting come to seem natural or normal.

Epistemic Identity

Epistemic identity is about how we understand ourselves through the knowledge we value. For example, a scientist might see their identity in the kind of research they do and how they approach problems.

This identity is shaped by the field or discipline we work in, and it affects what kind of knowledge is seen as valid or important. Being aware of this can help us work better across different fields and knowledge systems.

Pluralism and Pluralization

Pluralism is the belief that multiple perspectives, values, and ways of knowing should coexist and be respected. Pluralization extends this to include previously excluded knowledge systems, such as those of Indigenous peoples, local communities, and practitioners.

In research, pluralization means:

1. Using different methods and traditions.

2. Accepting different goals and values.

3. Including a wide range of people—both researchers and community members.

Pluralization pushes back against the idea that there is only one “right” way to think or do things.

Transformative Learning

Transformative learning is a process where people reflect deeply, question their assumptions, and change how they see the world.

It often starts with a challenging or uncomfortable experience that makes people rethink what they believe. This can lead to personal growth and new ways of acting in the world.

In our work, transformative learning helps people unlearn harmful systems, recognize power, and become part of meaningful change.

Power & Forms of Power

Power is a broad and multifaceted concept that operates in both visible and subtle ways to affect the actions of others within and through personal relationships, communities, and societal structures and institutions. It both shapes these various relational levels of society and is shaped by the interactions among them. Its definition, form, and functioning have been the center of academic debates for centuries. According to Lukes (2005), who summarizes these debates, power is often most effective when it is least observable. At its core, power is best understood as a capacity rather than a direct practice. It represents the potential to bring about, receive, or resist change, rather than (only) being an action or a relationship itself. This means power can exist without ever being actively exercised.

We build on recent scholarship (Arias-Arévalo et al. 2023) that highlights how different forms of power play a crucial role in stifling or driving transformative change. These forms of power are illustrated below and include:

Structural power, such as operational power and rule-making power
Discursive power, including framing power

In our toolbox, we use this framework (Arias-Arévalo et al. 2023) to reflect on which forms of power are addressed by each tool. Below, we provide a brief overview of other key concepts related to power that inform our tools.

Agency

Conceptualized by Anthony Giddens (1984) in his structuration theory, agency is understood as the capacity of individuals to act independently, make decisions, initiate action, and shape their lives and social structures and institutions. Rather than previous understandings of individuals as passive recipients of social forces, Giddens thus highlighted individuals’ abilities to actively contribute to the shaping and reproduction of social structures and institutions. For Giddens, this ability to act independently and make choices exists even within the constraints imposed by prevailing structures. Kimberlé Crenshaw’s (1991) theory of intersectionality challenges and complicates this understanding of agency by emphasizing how individuals' capacity for action is indeed shaped by intersecting social identities, including race, ethnicity, gender, class, age, and ability. Our tool The Power of Representation introduces encourages exploration of these constraints.

Beyond individual agency, collective agency—often manifesting in social movements—demonstrates how groups of individuals collaborate to challenge and reshape social structures and institutions (Crossley 2022). It underscores the transformative potential of collective action in contesting dominant norms, advocating for justice, and driving structural change. By emphasizing both individual and collective agency, this perspective highlights how agency functions as a mechanism for challenging centralized power and promoting the redistribution of influence within society.

Inclusion

Inclusion involves the active integration of diverse and particularly marginalized voices into all aspects of society, including its institutions and especially decision-making processes. By fostering equitable participation in decision-making, inclusion helps offset operational power imbalances and promotes social justice (Arias-Arévalo et al. 2023; Fraser 2007).

In our The Power of Inclusion tool, we distinguish between active inclusion—deliberate efforts to dismantle or surmount structural barriers to enable meaningful participation in society, institutions and decision-making processes—and passive inclusion, where participation exists on a superficial level through formally acknowledging or allowing participation of underrepresented groups to participate, but without meaningful efforts to address systemic barriers, power imbalances, or structural inequalities.

Diversity

In a research collaboration context, diversity refers to variety, such as the presence of different identities, perspectives, and experiences within a group, which serves as a counterbalance to dominant structures. It disrupts homogeneity and encourages the incorporation of alternative viewpoints in decision-making and governance. Diversity is seen both epistemologically (what counts as knowledge) and ontologically (what constitutes reality) (Keestra, 2024). Keestra (2024) also argues that theoretical and methodological pluralism, where multiple theories and methods coexist, strengthens the robustness of scientific results. Interdisciplinary research thus benefits from diverse approaches whereby transdisciplinary research, involving non-academic stakeholders, further enriches results and ensures broader societal relevance.

In social justice contexts, diversity is inherently linked to inclusion and equity, emphasizing not only the presence of difference but also the meaningful participation and empowerment of diverse groups. Diversity encompasses multiple dimensions, including race, ethnicity, gender, age, socioeconomic status, disability, sexual orientation, and cultural background (Vertovec, 2012; Shore et al., 2011). However, mere representation is insufficient; for diversity to be truly impactful, all individuals must have the opportunity to actively contribute and thrive within their respective environments. At the same time, this may lead to challenges in collaborations (Keestra, 2024) as different approaches, epistemologies, and ontologies can lead to divergence and incoherence within a project or team. To address these challenges, effective collaboration requires understanding one's thought processes as well as those of other team members. This (self-)reflection is key to navigating the complexities of diversity and maintaining a productive, cohesive research environment. Our tools The Power of Truth and Picture This: Seeing through epistemic lenses encourage these processes.

Intersectionality

The concept of intersectionality, introduced by Kimberlé Crenshaw (1991), provides a critical framework for understanding how multiple forms of oppression — such as racism, sexism, classism, and other social inequalities — intersect and mutually reinforce one another, rather than functioning as distinct or isolated structures. This concept highlights the interdependence of various social categories in shaping experiences of marginalization as well as privilege. It also underscores how systems of inequality based on gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, class, and other axes of social differentiation converge to create overlapping and compounding structures of oppression (Crenshaw, 1991). Expanding on this framework, Valentine (2007) introduces the notion of fluidity, emphasizing that intersectionality and individuals’ experiences of belonging are dynamic and contingent upon spatial, temporal, and situational contexts. Addressing intersectionality challenges power by exposing hidden inequalities. Our tool The Power of Inclusion offers a starting point to explore some of these inequalities.

Hegemony and Governmentality

Hegemony is intimately tied to power. In the Gramscian sense, it refers to the dominance of the perspectives and worldviews of one social group over others, achieved not just through coercion or force, but through the construction of consent from subordinate groups and the formation of alliances among different social classes that contribute to and support a dominant (political) perspective or economic system (Joseph, 2014; Laitin, 1986). These alliances help to maintain the status quo, even when there are inherent inequalities within the system. According to Gwyn Williams (1960, p. 587), hegemony refers to “an order in which a certain way of life and thought is dominant, in which one concept of reality is diffused throughout society”. Gramsci’s paradigm of hegemony shows how power operates, emphasizing the importance of cultural and ideological leadership in sustaining dominant power structures.

The concept of governmentality is closely related to hegemony. First proposed by Michel Foucault in his Collège de France lectures (see Foucault 2008), ‘governmentality’ (a.k.a. ‘art of government’ or ‘conduct of conduct’) refers to the ways in which governments shape the values, norms, and behaviors of its subjects through various techniques. For example, aside from top-down forceful ‘sovereign’ techniques, governments may also employ external incentives such as monetary rewards, internal incentives through, for example, educational programs that introduce and reinforce particular norms, and incentives through the invocation of religious texts and teachings. Through various combinations of these techniques, governance often becomes so subtle as to be barely visible, despite continually (re)shaping values, norms, and behaviors. As a result, hegemonies are formed and reinforced and the perspectives and worldviews of the dominant social class come to be seen as ‘natural’ or ‘just the way things are’ (Joseph, 2014). Out tool The Power of Truth offers a first dive into the role of governmentality and hegemony in shaping “truth”.

Epistemic Identity

Epistemic identity refers to how individuals align with particular knowledge systems and ways of understanding the world. This identity is reflected in affinities to specific epistemic groups, shaping shared values, beliefs, and research practices. It often requires conformity to disciplinary norms, which define what is considered valid or rigorous inquiry. As a result, epistemic identity plays a crucial role in shaping perceptions of good research practices and determining the authority of different knowledge systems.

Crucially, epistemic identity can either facilitate or hinder collaboration and innovation. A more flexible epistemic identity fosters inter- and transdisciplinary problem-solving, enabling creative approaches and stronger cooperation in research. Furthermore, the concept highlights the role of discursive power in defining whose knowledge is valued and legitimized in different contexts. Our tool Picture This: Seeing through epistemic lenses encourages exploration of various epistemic identities to enhance researchers’ capacities for epistemic flexibility.

Pluralism

Pluralism is a normative concept that affirms the value of coexisting perspectives, values, and knowledge systems in both society and research. It extends beyond merely acknowledging diversity (the existence of multiple viewpoints) or plurality (an actual condition of variation) to actively embracing and maintaining this multiplicity as a desirable state (Sauzet, 2024). Pluralism resists the dominance of a single ideology or method, fostering tolerance, interdisciplinary dialogue, and democratic engagement. Pluralization extends pluralism to include previously ignored or marginalized worldviews (Connolly, 2020). In this sense, the two together represent the corrective for hegemony. All of our tools aim to move towards pluralization by revealing the various power dynamics that prevent it from being realized.

Scientific pluralization thus argues for diversity in both what and how science examines. In inter- and transdisciplinary contexts, pluralization can be considered in three key ways:

Pluralization in systems of practice: Different knowledge systems must be acknowledged and held in parity.
Pluralization in values and context: Acceptance of diverse objectives of research.
Pluralization in actors: The inclusion of diverse stakeholders from different disciplines as well as non-academic actors for transdisciplinary perspectives.

Transformative Learning

Transformative Learning (TL) is a theory of adult learning that emphasizes critical reflection, the questioning of assumptions, and shifts in worldviews. Originally developed by Jack Mezirow (2018) in the late 1970s, TL is rooted in a social constructionist perspective, focusing on how individuals reinterpret their experiences to drive both personal and social change (Balsiger 2024).

TL has had a profound impact on education for sustainable development, promoting critical engagement with historical, social, and institutional structures that contribute to unsustainability. At the heart of transformative learning are disorienting dilemmas: Experiences that challenge an individual’s existing worldview (Balsiger, 2024). TL can also be described as a process of unlearning previously held knowledge and perspectives in order to address issues of power and agency (McLeod et al. 2020). This process often involves discomfort as individuals confront their ingrained beliefs and societal structures and may lead to feelings of guilt or shame as they recognize their complicity in unjust systems. However, Förster et al. (2019) elaborate that stepping out of one's comfort zone and experiencing discomfort, referred to as a liminal state, is crucial for transformation. All of our tools encourage various levels of TL, which will be different for each individual.

Literature

Arias-Arévalo, Paola, Elena Lazos-Chavero, Ana S Monroy-Sais, Sara H Nelson, Agnieszka Pawlowska-Mainville, Arild Vatn, Mariana Cantú-Fernández, Ranjini Murali, Barbara Muraca, and Unai Pascual (2023). “The Role of Power in Leveraging the Diverse Values of Nature for Transformative Change.” Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 64: 101352. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2023.101352.

Balsiger, J. (2024). "124. Transformative learning". In Elgar Encyclopedia of Interdisciplinarity and Transdisciplinarity. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035317967.ch124

Crossley, N. (2022). A Dependent Structure of Interdependence: Structure and Agency in Relational Perspective. Sociology, 56(1), 166-182. https://doi.org/10.1177/00380385211020231

Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039

Deutsch, S., R. Keller, C.B. Krug, and A.H. Michel (2023). Transdisciplinary transformative change: An analysis of best practices and barriers, and the potential of critical social science in getting us there. Biodiversity and Conservation 32, 3569–3594. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-023-02576-0

Fraser, N. (2007). Re-framing justice in a globalizing world. In (Mis) recognition, social inequality and social justice (pp. 29-47). Routledge. Pdf available at: https://revistaseug.ugr.es/index.php/acfs/article/download/1028/1211/0

Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. University of California Press.

IPBES (2019). Global assessment report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Brondízio, E. S., Settele, J., Díaz, S., Ngo, H. T. (eds). IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany. Download available at: https://zenodo.org/records/6417333/files/202206_IPBES%20GLOBAL%20REPORT_FULL_DIGITAL_MARCH%202022.pdf?download=1

Joseph, J. (2014). Combining Hegemony and Governmentality to Explain Global Governance. Spectrum: Journal of Global Studies, 6(1), 1-15. Pdf available at: https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/417076

Keestra, M. (2024). "42: Diversity". In Elgar Encyclopedia of Interdisciplinarity and Transdisciplinarity. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035317967.ch42

Laitin, D.D. and Watkins IV, J.T. (1986). Hegemony and culture: Politics and religious change among the Yoruba. University of Chicago Press.

McLeod, K., Thakchoe, S., Hunter, M.A., Vincent, K., Baltra-Ulloa, A.J., MacDonald, A. (2020). Principles for a pedagogy of unlearning. Reflective Pract. 21, 183–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2020.1730782

Mezirow, J. (2018). Transformative learning theory. In Contemporary theories of learning (pp. 114-128). Routledge.

Osbeck, L. M., & Nersessian, N. J. (2024). "46: Epistemic identity". In Elgar Encyclopedia of Interdisciplinarity and Transdisciplinarity. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035317967.ch46

Ritzer, G. (2011). Sociological theory (8th ed). McGraw-Hill.

Lukes, S. (2005). Power: A radical view (2nd ed.). Palgrave Macmillan.

Sauzet, R. (2024). "82: Pluralism". In Elgar Encyclopedia of Interdisciplinarity and Transdisciplinarity. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035317967.ch82

Shore, L. M., Randel, A. E., Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., Ehrhart, K. H., & Singh, G. (2011). Inclusion and diversity in work groups: A review and model for future research. Journal of Management, 37(4), 1262–1289. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920631038

Valentine, G. (2007). Theorizing and Researching Intersectionality: A Challenge for Feminist Geography*. The Professional Geographer, 59(1), 10–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9272.2007.00587.x

Vertovec, S. (2012). Diversity and the social imaginary. European Journal of Sociology, 53(3), 287-312. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000397561200015X

CONTACT

Dr. Sierra Deutsch

sierra.deutsch@geo.uzh.ch

Space, Nature and Society

University of Zurich
Department of Geography

Winterthurerstrasse 190
CH-8057 Zurich, Switzerland

Critical Social Science Concepts

Power & Forms of Power

Structural power, such as operational power and rule-making power

Discursive power, including framing power

​ In our toolbox, we use this framework (Arias-Arévalo et al. 2023) to reflect on which forms of power are addressed by each tool. Below, we provide a brief overview of other key concepts related to power that inform our tools.​

Agency

Inclusion

Diversity

Intersectionality

Hegemony and Governmentality

Epistemic Identity

Pluralism

Transformative Learning

Literature

CONTACT

Dr. Sierra Deutsch

In our toolbox, we use this framework (Arias-Arévalo et al. 2023) to reflect on which forms of power are addressed by each tool. Below, we provide a brief overview of other key concepts related to power that inform our tools.