Environmental governance research (EGR) aims to provide reliable, cumulative knowledge that facilitates scientific progress and supports evidence-informed public decision-making to address mounting sustainability problems. Even though significant challenges in achieving cumulative knowledge are increasingly recognized, no systematic assessment is available, nor has knowledge cumulation been measured empirically.

This study presents the first systematic effort to conceptualize and empirically assess knowledge cumulation. For an empirically-informed understanding of the potentials for knowledge cumulation in EGR, we focus on the ‘Earth System Governance’ research community – the largest within the broader field of EGR, known for its interdisciplinary nature and its regular international conferences. We analysed the body of Earth System Governance research through publications emerging from its first seven conferences, resulting in 362 journal articles.

Our findings indicate limited potentials for knowledge cumulation both by individual publications and across the studied body of literature. We observe a heterogeneous journal landscape, a disconnect between core and peripheral authors, a relative absence of meta-analyses, a lack of data sharing, infrequent use of theories and frameworks, a shortage of clear definitions for key concepts and of reflections on limitations, and a paucity of studies sharing similar research questions, phenomena, and variables.

These findings raise important questions on the cumulability of knowledge in interdisciplinary (social science) research, and scientific fields more broadly. It prompts us to reflect on the conditions of knowledge cumulation, and – ultimately – on the desirability of knowledge cumulation against calls for "disruptive" research.