Gender equality is a key target for conservation but is often treated as a women's issue with limited attention to the roles of men and masculinities in perpetuating unequal gender relations. This paper provides a qualitative systematic review of academic literature on “masculinities”—actions, norms, and values associated with men—in the conservation sector and synthesizes the reported effects of masculinities on conservation science, policy, and practice. We adopt a performative and intersectionality-inspired approach, recognizing that masculinities may be performed by men, women, nonbinary, and gender-diverse people, and that gender interacts with other dimensions of identity such as race, age, and (dis)ability. We found that the current literature primarily reports conservation masculinities performed by White men in Global North and settler-colonial contexts. The most common actions and norms were the exercise of control/authority, rationalism, and strength, and the most common effects were the marginalization of others, prioritization of natural sciences over other knowledge, and support for policies such as protected areas and militarization. Explicitly addressing the dominance of such masculinities, as well as the conditions through which their dominance is enabled and rewarded, may contribute towards gender equality and to more just and effective forms of conservation. 

Global Environmental Assessments (GEAs) are intended to gather expert knowledge on a topic of global importance and present it in a useful format to those who could use the knowledge in decision-making. GEAs have disseminated new knowledge, influenced environmental policy, changed the evolution of science, and furthered many careers. The GEA community has always adapted to changing circumstances, often by increasing the complexity of the assessment process. The current level of complexity of most GEAs, alongside today’s increasingly polarized societies, changes in international trade, biophysical changes to the planet, greater interest in cross-sectoral problems and solutions, enhanced technological capacity, and increasingly contested nature of some aspects of environmental science may indicate that we’ve reached a point where further adaptation cannot be achieved merely by adding more complexity. It may be time for more fundamental changes to the GEA scope, process, and delivery. We use the MA as a touchstone in exploring how GEAs have evolved, considering both challenges and possible paths forward to retain legitimacy, credibility, and salience in a changing world. One strong possibility is for GEAs to reorient to serve as support structures for a broader diversity of levels and types of decision-making and a broader array of decision-making actors. In a rapidly changing world, a diverse ecosystem of assessment approaches is likely to be more robust, have more impact, and evolve more quickly. Continuing to experiment with different models for delivering multi-scale environmental information will help GEAs fit the needs of the 21st century.

Participatory approaches are put forward to ensure that governance for the well-being of humans and nature is legitimate and effective, particularly responding to global challenges of ecosystem degradation and climate change. As model areas for sustainable development with explicit goals of participation, the UNESCO World Network of Biosphere Reserves can provide insights on participatory governance arrangements, outcomes of participation, and obstacles for participation. Through a literature review, we found that transparent communication and fair distribution of benefits and trade-offs enhance participation. Early involvement, skilled facilitation, and the capacity to develop shared values among diverse interests improve outcomes. Project-driven participation, deficient capacity to handle conflicting interests, and mechanisms of exclusion hinder participation. Biosphere Reserves (BRs) can leverage already existing actor initiatives, local knowledge, and practices. We identified a need for studies of causal links between participation and BR outcomes, including unpacking the meaning of different modes of participation.

Underpinned by systemic thinking, social-ecological systems (SES) research has emerged as a critical field for addressing the challenges of the Anthropocene, marked by a cross-scale focus, inter-and transdisciplinary approaches, and a strong emphasis on place-based work. Thanks to the efforts of many networks and institutes, the field has advanced new theoretical and methodological approaches, fostered dedicated journals, and spurred educational programs. It has also significantly influenced sustainability initiatives and policy from local to global scales, and has richly informed place-based efforts. Despite this progress, SES research faces persistent challenges, including conceptual and methodological fragmentation, difficulty in scaling localized insights to global frameworks (and vice versa), and capturing cross-scale connections and processes while retaining contextual relevance. Inclusivity also remains a critical issue, with regional, Indigenous, and local contributions often underrepresented, as there is still a reliance on short-term, inequitably distributed grant funding for much of the research in the field. This paper introduces the Society for Social-Ecological Systems (SocSES), a global platform designed to build on and connect to the rich legacy of SES networks. SocSES aims to advance and support SES–based research, practice, and action toward a just and sustainable future. We outline how SocSES will provide a home for SES institutes, networks, researchers, and practitioners working at the science-practice-policy interface to connect and amplify existing efforts through thematic streams, regional hubs, an institutional hub, an early-career professionals hub, and synthesis groups. The society will provide a stable infrastructure to foster interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary collaboration, enhance the generalizability and policy relevance of SES research, bolster education, research, and knowledge co-production, and support the next generation of SES professionals. By addressing the persistent challenges facing the field and fostering transformative spaces and communities for innovation and action, SocSES aspires to support and leverage SES knowledge as a cornerstone of global sustainability science. In line with the society’s commitment to linguistic diversity and equitable access, this abstract has been translated into 12 languages by authors of this paper and additional contributors. These translations are available in Appendix 2 and at https://socses.org/about/paper.

Increasing the supply and human consumption of grain legumes is one important strategy to orient food systems towards healthy and sustainable diets. This requires well-performing value chains and collaboration among a diverse set of actors, from governments to farmers. Using Sweden as an illustrative case, this study explores actors’ perceptions of influence over actions identified to have leverage to change grain legume consumption and production, and examines system structures that support or hinder these actions. Semi-structured interviews with value chain actors and information from organizational websites were used to map the grain legume value chain and agricultural knowledge and innovation system in Sweden, and to elicit actors’ perceptions. Social network analysis was used to examine structures of interaction among actors based on their roles in the food system. The findings indicate most value chain actors attribute influence to actor roles other than their own, with the national government named the most frequently. However, actors perceive influence differently over actions to change production and consumption. Fostering dialogues with actors across the value chain, especially within large grain legume projects, may help develop new models of interaction in support of healthy and sustainable diets.

Food production and consumption need to substantially change to meet global environmental and public health goals. Increasing grain legume consumption in most countries is key to providing nourishing food for all while contributing to cropping system sustainability with relatively low environmental impact. But what actions have the potential to increase such consumption? The wide knowledge of how to cultivate grain legumes among Swedish farmers, low current consumption in most of the population, and prior shifts in dietary patterns make Sweden an interesting context for studying the potential increase of grain legumes in diets. We identify system-level actions in peer-reviewed and grey literature with the potential to increase grain legume consumption and apply the leverage points framework to evaluate the transformative potential of these actions for the food system in Sweden. Our findings show that most actions suggested in the literature so far focus on increased production, while fewer suggestions integrate production and consumption. Few actions address the deeper leverage points with most transformative potential compared with those with less transformative potential. We qualitatively analyze the actions and develop a chain of leverage illustrating how several actions together could be combined to support change at the deepest leverage point, creating social norms for the consumption of healthy foods. The chain includes developing new tools, facilities and products; changing standards; building feedback loops; changing the food environment; building new information flows between actors; and reforming the value chain. To implement the actions identified in this analysis, a range of value chain actors and supportive policies at the national and European Union levels will be needed.

1. Generating actionable knowledge to meet current sustainability challenges re- quires unprecedented collaboration across scales, geographies, cultures and knowledges. Intergovernmental programmes and place -based knowledge- action networks have much potential to mobilize sustainability transformation. Although many research fields have benefited from research networks and comparative sites, the potential of site -based research networks for generating knowledge at the people- nature interface has yet to be fully explored.2. This article presents the World Network of biosphere reserves (WNBR) of UNESCO's Man and Biosphere Programme, intentionally established for generating actionable knowledge through comparative sites envisioned as learning spaces for sustainable development. Drawing on experiences over five decades, and we offer six categories of insights. Our intent is to share the story of this network widely, distil the learnings from the network to enhance its potential to support both knowledge coproduction and collaborative action for sustainability and inform wider efforts to establish place -based sustainability networks aimed at improving human- environment relations through knowledge and action.3. The WNBR has generated insights on the challenges of creating and supporting an international and inter-governmental sustainability network to generate and mobilize place -based interdisciplinary knowledge in the long term. Despite the challenges, site-and place -based research facilitated by this network has been fundamental in creating space for sustainability science, knowledge coproduction and transdisciplinary research at the human- nature interface.4. We share insights on pathways to the implementation of global sustainability agendas through local networks, and the role of research in supporting learning and experimentation in local sites as they work to adapt global sustainability goals. Research in the WNBR has generated deeper understanding on social- ecological complexity and resilience in place -based sustainability initiatives, and how collaborative platforms might facilitate collective action across landscapes. The network continues to offer a fundamental learning space on operationalizing pluralistic approaches to biodiversity conservation, for example, through its focus on biocultural diversity, offering a key opportunity for the implementation of the post -2020 Global Biodiversity Framework.5. We conclude by arguing that WNBR, and similar place -based knowledge- action networks, can support interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research related to human- nature relationships and provide opportunities for comparative research that may yield more explanatory power than individual case studies.

Purpose – This article seeks to broaden how researchers in supply chain management view supply chain resilience by drawing on and integrating insights from other disciplines – in particular, the literature on the resilience of social-ecological systems.

Design/methodology/approach – Before the authors import new notions of resilience from outside the discipline, the current state of the art in supply chain resilience research is first briefly reviewed and summarized. Drawing on five practical examples of disruptive events and challenges to supply chain practice, the authors assess how these examples expose gaps in the current theoretical lenses. These examples are used to motivate and justify the need to expand our theoretical frameworks by drawing on insights from the literature on social-ecological systems.

Findings – The supply chain resilience literature has predominantly focused on minimizing the consequences of a disruption and on returning to some form of steady state (often assumed to be identical to the state that existed prior to the disruption) implicitly assuming the supply chain behaves like an engineered system. This article broadens the debate around supply chain resilience using literature on social-ecological systems that puts forward three manifestations of resilience: (1) persistence, which is akin to an engineering-based view, (2) adaptation and (3) transformation. Furthermore, it introduces seven principles of resilience thinking that can be readily applied to supply chains.

Research limitations/implications – A social-ecological interpretation of supply chains presents many new avenues of research, which may rely on the use of innovative research methods to further our understanding of supply chain resilience.

Practical implications – The article encourages managers to think differently about supply chains and to consider what this means for their resilience. The three manifestations of resilience are not mutually exclusive. For example, while persistence may be needed in the initial aftermath of a disruption, adaptation and transformation may be required in the longer term.

Originality/value – The article challenges traditional assumptions about supply chains behaving like engineered systems and puts forward an alternative perspective of supply chains as being dynamic and complex social-ecological systems that are impossible to entirely control.

Landscapes and their management are at the center of many of the sustainability challenges that we face. Landscapes can be described as social-ecological systems shaped by a myriad of human activities and biophysical processes, interacting across space and time. Managing them sustainably requires considering this complexity. Resilience thinking offers ways to address complexity in decision-making. In this paper, we analyse the learning and impact on a diverse group of local actors from participating in a participatory resilience assessment. The assessment, focused on sustainable landscape management in the Helge a catchment, Sweden, produced concrete knowledge outputs, describing ecosystem service bundles, a future vision, conceptual system models, and a strategic action plan. Follow-up interviews indicate that the process and its outputs supported the participants' learning process and helped them to articulate complexity thinking in practice. The outputs, and the exercises to produce them, emerged as complementary in supporting this articulation. Furthermore, they helped build participants' capacity to communicate the diverse values of the landscape to others and to target leverage points more strategically. Thus, it supported the application of resilience thinking in landscape management, especially by generating learning and fostering complex adaptive systems thinking.

The biosphere crisis requires changes to existing business practices. We ask how corporations can become sustainability leaders, when constrained by multiple barriers to collaboration for biosphere stewardship. We describe how scientists motivated, inspired and engaged with ten of the world’s largest seafood companies, in a collaborative process aimed to enable science-based and systemic transformations (2015–2021). CEOs faced multiple industry crises in 2015 that incentivized novel approaches. New scientific insights, an invitation to collaborate, and a bold vision of transformative change towards ocean stewardship, created new opportunities and direction. Co-creation of solutions resulted in new knowledge and trust, a joint agenda for action, new capacities, international recognition, formalization of an organization, increased policy influence, time-bound goals, and convergence of corporate change. Independently funded scientists helped remove barriers to cooperation, provided means for reflection, and guided corporate strategies and actions toward ocean stewardship. By 2021, multiple individuals exercised leadership and the initiative had transitioned from preliminary and uncomfortable conversations, to a dynamic, operational organization, with capacity to perform global leadership in the seafood industry. Mobilizing transformational agency through learning, collaboration, and innovation represents a cultural evolution with potential to redirect and accelerate corporate action, to the benefit of business, people and the planet.