02110nas a2200229   4500008004100000022001400041245007600055210006900131260004200200300001000242490000600252520138600258653002201644653002501666653002501691653002601716653002701742653003101769100002101800700002101821856003801842       2018                        eng d  a1927-032100aTransdisciplinary Research in the Built Environment: A Question of Time0 aTransdisciplinary Research in the Built Environment A Question o  aOttawabTalent First Networkc08/2018  a27-400 v83 aIn this article, we reflect on 14 years of experience with transdisciplinary research in the built environment. We critically consider challenges and pitfalls in relation to normative definitions of transdisciplinary research derived from the literature. Our experiences from five transdisciplinary research projects are presented with a focus on each project’s aim, size, organization of work, and funding. Results show that different kinds of transdisciplinary research approaches co-exist and that these can serve different purposes and situations. In most cases, transdisciplinary projects lead to raised levels of awareness of the complexity of real-world problems among participating partners. In some cases, the outcome is a useful innovation, in order to support such innovation, a focus on real cases is encouraged. However, there might be a trade-off between the focused attention on a real case and the maintained interest among diverse participants in a larger project. An important insight is that innovation and knowledge development through transdisciplinary settings take time. It is favourable for the development of networks, common visions, trust, and innovation if consecutive transdisciplinary projects can be arranged with the same partners. We conclude the article by providing practical guidelines to support the management of transdisciplinary projects. 10abuilt environment10aconsecutive projects10ainnovation processes10apractical experiences10asustainable renovation10atransdisciplinary research1 aFemenías, Paula1 aThuvander, Liane  uhttps://timreview.ca/article/1176