We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings. Learn more about our Privacy Notice... [opens in a new tab]
This community is part of Research Directions - a journal collection based around cutting edge research questions.

Adapting Structured Literature Reviews for Biodesign Research: Bridging Interdisciplinary Knowledge

27 May 2025, Version 1
This content is an early or alternative research output and has not been peer-reviewed by Cambridge University Press at the time of posting.
This item is a response to a research question in Biotechnology Design
Q. Bio-futures for transplanetary habitats

Abstract

Biobased design and biotechnology have seen significant growth, intertwining biology, design, and technology to develop materials and products using biobased organisms like algae, bacteria, fungi, and organic byproducts. However, the lack of established frameworks for interdisciplinary research, particularly in creative fields like design, hinders progress in biodesign. This study explores adapting Structured Literature Reviews (SLRs) in biodesign to improve interdisciplinary knowledge synthesis, particularly for developing biobased materials. SLRs are effective tools for systematically gathering and analyzing information to understand complex topics and trends. Despite their expansion into various fields, conducting SLRs in interdisciplinary areas like biodesign remains challenging due to differing terminologies and research practices. In order to support comprehensive research in the biodesign field, this study maps alternative sources, concepts, and strategies relevant to the field and proposes guidelines for conducting SLRs in biodesign research. The study does this by interviewing 14 experienced biodesign practitioners and researchers from various backgrounds, including design, architecture, engineering, biology, and chemistry, and discussing these different topics based on a proposed list of elements. The study builds upon the ROSES reporting guidelines, known for their adaptability to different fields, to provide detailed and transparent reporting standards. The findings highlight key differences in how disciplines approach information sources, terminology, and methodologies in biodesign research. Recognizing these distinctions is crucial for comprehensive understanding and effective cross-disciplinary collaboration. By promoting inclusive knowledge integration, this study aims to support transdisciplinary partnerships and facilitate the integration of creative disciplines’ contributions to the biodesign field.

Keywords

Biodesign
Mixed-Method Research
Structured Literature Reviews
Transdisciplinary Research
Interdisciplinary Research
Biotechnology
Sustainable Materials
Biofabrication

Comments

Comments are not moderated before they are posted, but they can be removed by the site moderators if they are found to be in contravention of our Commenting and Discussion Policy [opens in a new tab] - please read this policy before you post. Comments should be used for scholarly discussion of the content in question. You can find more information about how to use the commenting feature here [opens in a new tab] .
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy [opens in a new tab] and Terms of Service [opens in a new tab] apply.