Narrow views of systemic sustainability risks can result in ecological concerns being neglected, as well as giving rise to unequal distribution and exploitation of natural resources, creating injustice. Given recent advancements in integrating justice with the safe space environmentally, as defined by the planetary boundaries, now is a critical moment for business ethics researchers to deepen the conversation on managing systemic sustainability risks to create a safe and just operating space. We argue that the social-ecological systems approach, that views humans as embedded in and dependent on the natural environment, provides a foundation for business ethics scholars to deepen the conversation. We build on two key dimensions from the social-ecological systems approach, social-ecological connectivity and cross-scale dynamics to develop a framework that illustrates four ways for business ethics scholars to research systemic sustainability risks. We demonstrate the relevance of these dimensions for understanding systemic sustainability risks, discuss their ethical implications, and outline opportunities for future research.

This article contributes to critical policy analysis scholarship from a post-structuralism perspective. Employing the ‘What’s the problem represented to be’ (WPR) framework, a Foucault-influenced post-structural approach, we investigate what is the problem of Gender Inequality (GI) represented to be in development in Burkina Faso. Based on systematic analysis of selected (inter)national development policy documents and in-depth stakeholder interviews, our results show two main categories of problem representations: a) local culture/ informal structures that strengthen and are strengthened by patriarchy, and b) women’s weak agency that undermine their effective participation. These problem representations are framed from two different but overlapping standpoints: rights and development. Furthermore, the informal structures are presented as the source of the problem of GI while formal structures are portrayed as the solution. The underlying assumptions ignore the gendered impacts of history, colonial legacies, the interconnectedness and often-conflicting state policies and globalisation. Consequently, the problem of GI is depoliticised, rendered local, technical, and static. This deflects responsibility in solving the problem, limits local agency and the exploration of effective cultural and bottom-up policy responses. Alternatively, GI could be represented as a problem of structural unequal power relations – rather than a simplistic blame of local culture.

We examine social-environmental justice in forest governance by asking who is problematized as drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. We adapt Bacchi’s “What is the problem represented to be” approach to the community forest (CAF) model in Burkina Faso and the Payment for Forest Environmental Services (PFES) in Vietnam and examine the implementation of these policies in specific sites through disaggregated focus group discussions (men, women, youth, ethnic minorities). We delve into the discursive, lived and subjectification effects of the policies’ problematizations, highlighting tensions and contestations relating to forest access and benefits. For both countries, what is left unproblematized in the implicit policy focus on the local is a “communal fix” of indigeneity tied to idealized and collective governance of fixed areas of land and exclusionary processes for those that do not fit the ideal. We argue that market-oriented approach in policies such as CAF and PFES absent of the wider underpinnings of the political and historical forest will only exacerbate social-environmental injustices.

Gender equality in natural resource management is a matter of sustainability and democracy for Sweden’s government, however the country’s forest remains a highly gender-segregated sector. We examine how gender inequality is problematized within Swedish forest and rural policy documents using the What’s the problem represented to be? (WPR) approach. We build on previous efforts to investigate gender inequality in the forest sector by expanding the critical analysis to rural development policy. We conduct interviews with forest experts, owners, and practitioners to shed light on where there are gaps within the policy representations and uncover alternative policy options that are presented. Our findings corroborate that gender inequality is represented to be a technical problem, with policy measures aiming to increase the number of women within a forest sector that continues to maintain rigid conceptions about forestry production values. While there are claims of success in the increase of women within the sector in aggregate, there is little change in the numbers of women in decision-making positions. Forest policy relies upon women to bring growth and sustainability to the forest industry, while rural policy expects women to halt rural population decline. Our findings suggest that merely trying to fit more women into a mold that has been shaped for and by inflexible forestry and masculine values is an impediment not only to gender equality but also to the inclusion of other social groups and ideas in the changing rural landscapes of Sweden.

The United Nations' 2030 Agenda for sustainable development calls for meeting the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through local action and integrated approaches. We here describe a method developed to understand how local (un-)sustainable processes in coupled social-ecological systems contribute to or hinder meeting SDGs at the target-level in coupled social-ecological systems (SES). The steps include:

• The construction of a causal-loop diagram (CLD) of the social-ecological processes that shape system dynamics
• CLD simplification for the purpose of the SDG analysis,
• Steps of the SDG analysis.

The methods combine and build on published examples of CLD and SDG analyses and includes instructions for the transparent documentation of the analyses to support review and further development of SDG-target analyses in complex social-ecological systems. A template for the documentation and analysis is provided in the supplementary materials.

In 2006, Walker et al. published an article titled, “A Handful of Heuristics and Some Propositions for Understanding Resilience in Social-ecological Systems.” The article was incorporated into the Ecology and Society special feature, Exploring Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems. Walker et al. identified five heuristics and posed 14 propositions for understanding resilience in social-ecological systems. At the time, the authors hoped the paper would promote experimentation, critique, and application of these ideas in resilience and social-ecological systems research. To determine the extent to which these propositions have achieved the authors’ hopes, we reviewed the scientific literature on social-ecological systems since the article was published. Using Scopus, we identified 627 articles that cited the Walker et al. article. We then identified and assessed the articles relative to each proposition. In addition, we conducted a more general Scopus review for articles that did not cite the Walker et al. article specifically but incorporated a proposition’s concepts. Overall, articles often cite Walker et al. as a reference for a definition of a heuristic or ecological resilience generally and not to reference a specific proposition. Nonetheless, every proposition was at least mentioned in the literature and used to advance resilience scholarship on social-ecological systems. Eleven propositions were tested by multiple articles through application of case studies or other research, and 7 of the 11 propositions were substantially discussed and advanced. Finally, three propositions were heavily critiqued either as concepts in resilience literature or in their application.

Natural hazards can trigger disasters that lead to the collapse and reorganization of social-ecological systems. This reorganization can involve systems transitioning to more positive trajectories. The Panarchy framework, which conceptualizes social-ecological systems as dynamic interrelated adaptive cycles, is a common conceptual framework for understanding system reorganization. However, it is unclear how inequalities, social mechanisms known to influence disaster recovery outcomes, shape a system's adaptive cycle post-disaster. Understanding the roles of inequalities can help develop social-ecological models to identify processes that build resilience into disaster recovery. We applied the Panarchy framework to inform propositions describing how inequalities can influence the reorganization of social-ecological systems after disasters triggered by natural hazards. We qualitatively analyzed a selection of case studies that discussed inequalities pre-and post-disasters and related these to adaptive-cycle system characteristics (i.e., potential, connectedness, and resilience). We identified three propositions: 1) The ability of groups to reorganize after a disaster varies across the inequality spectrum; 2) The reorganizing abilities of groups across the inequality spectrum impact one another; and 3) The presence of inequalities affect connectedness within the system. Incorporating these propositions into social-ecological system modeling can improve our understanding of how inequalities impact system reorganization. This information can support disaster recovery plans that strengthen a system's ability to enter a more positive trajectory post-disaster.

Several safe boundaries of critical Earth system processes have already been crossed due to human perturbations; not accounting for their interactions may further narrow the safe operating space for humanity. Using expert knowledge elicitation, we explored interactions among seven variables representing Earth system processes relevant to food production, identifying many interactions little explored in Earth system literature. We found that green water and land system change affect other Earth system processes strongly, while land, freshwater and ocean components of biosphere integrity are the most impacted by other Earth system processes, most notably blue water and biogeochemical flows. We also mapped a complex network of mechanisms mediating these interactions and created a future research prioritization scheme based on interaction strengths and existing knowledge gaps. Our study improves the understanding of Earth system interactions, with sustainability implications including improved Earth system modelling and more explicit biophysical limits for future food production.

Crop residue burning in Indian Punjab emits particulate matter with detrimental impacts on health, climate and that threaten agricultural production. Though legal and technological barriers to residue burning exist – and alternatives considered more profitable to farmers – residue burning continues. We review black carbon (BC) emissions from residue burning in Punjab, analyse social-ecological processes driving residue burning, and rice and wheat value-chains. Our aims are to a) understand system feedbacks driving agricultural practices in Punjab; b) identify systemic effects of alternatives to residue burning and c) identify companies and financial actors investing in agricultural production in Punjab. We find feedbacks locking the system into crop residue burning. The Government of India has greatest financial leverage and risk in the current system. Corporate stakeholders have little financial incentive to enact change, but sufficient stakes in the value chains to influence change. Agricultural policy changes are necessary to reduce harmful impacts of current practices, but insufficient to bringing about sustainability. Transformative changes will require crop diversification, circular business models and green financing. Intermediating financial institutions setting sustainability conditions on loans could leverage these changes. Sustainability requires the systems perspective we provide, to reconnect production with demand and with supporting environmental conditions.

The United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are described as integrated and indivisible, where sustainability challenges must be addressed across sectors and scales to achieve global-level sustainability. However, SDG monitoring mostly focuses on tracking progress at national-levels, for each goal individually. This approach ignores local and cross-border impacts of national policies and assumes that global-level progress is the sum of national, sector-specific gains. In this study, we investigate effects of reforestation programs in China on countries supplying forest and agricultural commodities to China. Using case studies of rubber and palm oil production in Southeast Asian countries, soy production in Brazil and logging in South Pacific Island states, we investigate cross-sector effects of production for and trade to China in these exporting countries. We use a threestep multi-method approach. 1) We identify distal trade flows and the narratives used to justify them, using a telecoupling framework; 2) we design causal loop diagrams to analyse social-ecological processes of change in our case studies driven by trade to China and 3) we link these processes of change to the SDG framework. We find that sustainability progress in China from reforestation is cancelled out by the deforestation and cross-sectoral impacts supporting this reforestation abroad. Narratives of economic development support commodity production abroad through unrealised aims of benefit distribution and assumptions of substitutability of socioecological forest systems. Across cases, we find the analysed trade supports unambiguous progress on few SDGs only, and we find many mixed effects - where processes that support the achievement of SDGs exist, but are overshadowed by counterproductive processes. Our study represents a useful approach for tracking global-level impacts of national sustainability initiatives and provides cross-scale and cross-sectoral lenses through which to identify drivers of unsustainability that can be addressed in the design of effective sustainability policies.