In response to the climate and biodiversity crisis, the number of transdisciplinary research projects in which researchers partner with sustainability initiatives to foster transformative change is increasing globally. To enable and catalyze substantial transformative change, transformative transdisciplinary research (TTDR) is urgently needed to provide knowledge and guidance for actions. We review prominent discussions on TTDR and draw on our experiences from research projects in the Global South and North. Drawing on this, we identify key gaps and stimulate debate on how sustainability researchers can enable and catalyze transformative change by advancing five priority areas: clarify what TTDR is, conduct meaningful people-centric research, unpack how to act at deep leverage points, improve engagement with diverse knowledge systems, and explore potentials and risks of global digitalization for transformative change.

Understanding and building resilience is critical to responding to the deepening polycrisis. Pathway diversity is a promising approach to resilience that combines individual and systems perspectives, but so far has only been applied to idealized cases. Here, we use a rich case study from the mosaic landscape of Västra Harg, Sweden, to test and advance pathway diversity. Mosaic landscapes can simultaneously produce food, support biodiversity, and provide space for recreation, but these benefits require multiple actors to collectively and individually respond to changing circumstances. Our results indicate that, although the mosaic landscape provides many options for actors, forestry strategies are generally more resilient than agricultural strategies due to higher risks of abandonment in agriculture. We also found that supporting a specific strategy may create lock-in and undermine livelihood resilience overall. The study contributes toward developing a practical method for assessing resilience that can inform governance of complex social-ecological systems.

Food is essential to people and is one of the main ways in which people are connected to the world’s ecosystems. However, food systems often cause ecosystem degradation and produce ill-health, which has generated increasing calls to transform food systems to be more sustainable. The Swedish food system is currently undergoing substantial change. A varied set of local actors have created alternative sustainability initiatives that enact new ways of doing, thinking, and organizing. These actors can increase the transformative impact of their initiatives through multiple actions and a variety of amplification processes. We analyzed the actions adopted by 29 food initiatives active in the Stockholm region using information available online. We conducted 11 interviews to better understand the amplification processes of speeding up (i.e., accelerating impact), scaling up (i.e., influencing higher institutional levels), and scaling deep (i.e., changing values and mind-sets). Our results indicated that the initiatives mainly seek to stabilize and grow their impact while changing the awareness, values, and mind-sets of people concerning the food they consume (scaling deep). However, these approaches raise new questions about whether these actions subvert or reinforce current unsustainable and inequitable system dynamics. We suggest there are distinct steps that local and regional governments could take to support these local actors via collaborations with coordinated forms of initiatives, and fostering changes at the municipality level, but these steps require ongoing, adaptive approaches given the highly complex nature of transformative change and the risks of reinforcing current system dynamics. 

The draft Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework commits to achievement of equity and justice outcomes and represents a “relational turn” in how we understand inclusive conservation. Although “inclusivity” is drawn on as a means to engage diverse stakeholders, widening the framing of inclusivity can create new tensions with regard to how to manage protected areas. We first offer a set of tensions that emerge in the light of the relational turn in biodiversity conservation. Drawing on global case examples applying multiple methods of inclusive conservation, we then demonstrate that, by actively engaging in the interdependent phases of recognizing hybridity, enabling conditions for reflexivity and partnership building, tensions can not only be acknowledged but softened and, in some cases, reframed when managing for biodiversity, equity, and justice goals. The results can improve stakeholder engagement in protected area management, ultimately supporting better implementation of global biodiversity targets.

The centrality of food to human flourishing combined with how food is currently a source of many social and environmental problems means that many of the broader sustainability challenges can be addressed by fundamental changes to the production, distribution, and consumption of food. Such changes are central to what has been referred to as food system transformations. Transformations require significant changes in multiple dimensions of society. History shows us that crises can create openings for transformation. This project aims to learn from the Covid-19 crisis and support the enabling of capacities for transforming Swedish food systems to promote health, equity, sustainability and resilience of people and the planet. We did this through a Rapid Transition Lab. The lab identified risks and opportunities emerging in the Swedish food systems due to the Covid-19 pandemic through a co-creative process with public, private and civil food system actors. Since the war in Ukraine started, the initial focus on the pandemic expanded during the project to encompass multiple crises. The lab has developed understanding and articulated strategic options for Swedish food system actors to engage in a rapid transition, while navigating multiple crises.

In a complex and turbulent world, there is heightened interest in managing for resilience. However, resilience guides, particularly those used in the development field, often lack a theoretical grounding in complex adaptive systems. There is a demand for guidance on how to operationalize complexity in applications of resilience, such as resilience assessment and planning. This study synthesizes lessons from how twelve cases of social-ecological resilience practice are engaging with complexity. We assessed how each case engaged with complexity, according to a framework of six features of complex adaptive systems. The cases are situated in a diversity of contexts, that include rural villages in Tajikistan, a Swedish municipality, Australian catchment management authorities, a Canadian coastal fishery, and the Arctic council. Our results revealed two main ways of engaging with complexity: capturing and making sense of the complexity of a social-ecological system (system complexity) and embodying complexity into the participatory process (process complexity). Our comparison demonstrates that resilience practice provides a useful approach to address system complexity by, for example, conceptualizing social-ecological interactions, identifying interactions across scales, and assessing system dynamics. Strategies related to understanding the adaptive and emergent features of complex systems were less developed and widespread. The study also revealed a set of strategies to address process complexity, such as facilitating dialogue, building networks, and designing a flexible and iterative process, showing how complexity can be embedded into the resilience assessment process. The more participatory and embedded cases of resilience practice were stronger in these process-oriented strategies. The complexity framework we used and the identified practical strategies provide a theoretically-grounded resource for managers, decision-makers, and researchers on how to engage with complexity when applying resilience in a variety of contexts, including development and landscape management.

Transdisciplinary research that bridges science and society is needed to address the complex social-ecological sustainability challenges we are facing. However, many transdisciplinary researchers grapple with balancing the competing demands of scientific rigour and excellence, societal impact and engagement, and self-care. This is especially evident in the growing literature by early-career researchers describing the challenges of pursuing a transdisciplinary research career in social-ecological sustainability research. To guide discussion and reflection towards a flourishing transdisciplinary research practice, we synthesized our own and other researchers' experiences of using a transdisciplinary approach and formulated the heuristic of the 'Triple-S': caring for Science, Society and Self. This heuristic adds the frequently overlooked personal aspects of transdisciplinary research. Current dominant academic structures, cultures and metrics of success are not supporting a balanced and flourishing transdisciplinary research practice, but rather creating and exacerbating the trade-offs between these three aspects. As an example of a solutions-oriented approach, we developed a theory of change to address the changes we see are necessary to enable a transdisciplinary research practice in line with the Triple-S. We hope that this will foster academic environments where transdisciplinary research practice can flourish and the next generation of researchers are not burnt-out, but empowered.

Globally, food systems face multifaceted sustainability challenges and the need for food system transformation is increasingly acknowledged. However, there is still a lack of knowledge on the pathways for transformation and how they will play out in diverse regional social-ecological contexts. We explored transformation towards more sustainable and resilient food systems in a specific regional context - the Stockholm city-region in Sweden. The approach we used is based on a new methodology for bottom-up, participatory narrative scenarios that has been developed in the international sustainability science project Bright Spots: Seeds of the Good Anthropocene. Through a workshop and a survey with a diverse set of regional actors, we developed a vision of a positive food future and identified conflicts and opportunities for moving towards it. The vision highlights four components from across different sectors and represents a significant change from the current situation. The direction of change aligns with global goals of sustainable and healthy diets and promotes increased diversity in crops and landscapes that could strengthen the resilience of regional food systems. However, potential trade-offs between local diversity and global resource efficiency need to be better understood. While the approach revealed barriers in existing economic and socio-cultural mechanisms of global food systems, it also allowed us to identify several opportunities for local initiatives to expand the regional niche, for example by using the leverage of actors situated between producers and consumers. The Seeds of Good Anthropocene scenario methodology helped to understand more of the cross-scale dynamics in a transformation process in a specific social-ecological context and can be useful to navigate food system change in other places as well.

This thesis investigates the application of resilience thinking in different real-world settings and research-practice interfaces, for example in the context of natural resource management, local government planning and food systems. The number of cases of resilience practice are growing, including resilience assessments, planning and action, but there are still few scientific studies and even less synthesis across cases. This thesis describes existing cases of resilience practice, in natural resource management in Australia (Paper I) and across different international cases (Paper II), and experiments with new methods and approaches for improving resilience practice, based on pilot projects of co-production in Sweden (Paper III and Paper IV). The results confirm that resilience practice can contribute to the understanding and adaptive governance of complex social-ecological systems, but is weak in addressing the need for transformations, particularly for the sake of the resilience of Earth systems and global sustainability. The results also highlight practical strategies for engaging with complexity and novel approaches to enhance the potential of local-regional resilience practice to align with global sustainability concerns. The thesis as a whole sheds light on the field of resilience practice, by outlining different approaches, contexts and purposes and contributes to building transdisciplinary networks and relationships in multiple arenas.

Resilience thinking has frequently been proposed as an alternative to conventional natural resource management, but there are few studies of its applications in real-world settings. To address this gap, we synthesized experiences from practitioners that have applied a resilience thinking approach to strategic planning, called Resilience Planning, in regional natural resource management organizations in Australia. This case represents one of the most extensive and long-term applications of resilience thinking in the world today. We conducted semi-structured interviews with Resilience Planning practitioners from nine organizations and reviewed strategic planning documents to investigate: 1) the key contributions of the approach to their existing strategic planning, and 2) what enabled and hindered the practitioners in applying and embedding the new approach in their organizations. Our results reveal that Resilience Planning contributed to developing a social-ecological systems perspective, more adaptive and collaborative approaches to planning, and that it clarified management goals of desirable resource conditions. Applying Resilience Planning required translating resilience thinking to practice in each unique circumstance, while simultaneously creating support among staff, and engaging external actors. Embedding Resilience Planning within organizations implied starting and maintaining longer-term change processes that required sustained multi-level organizational support. We conclude by identifying four lessons for successfully applying and embedding resilience practice in an organization: 1) to connect internal entrepreneurs to interpreters and networkers who work across organizations, 2) to assess the opportunity context for resilience practice, 3) to ensure that resilience practice is a learning process that engages internal and external actors, and 4) to develop reflective strategies for managing complexity and uncertainty.