A relational turn for sustainability science? Relational thinking, leverage points and transformations

References

• Abson DJ, Fischer J, Leventon J, Newig J, Schomerus T, Vilsmaier U, von Wehrden H, Abernethy P, Ives CD, Jager NW, et al. 2017. Leverage points for sustainability transformation. Ambio. 46(1):30–39. doi:10.1007/s13280-016-0800-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aldrich RM. 2008. From complexity theory to transactionalism: moving occupational science forward in theorizing the complexities of behavior. J Occup Sci. 15(3):147–156. doi:10.1080/14427591.2008.9686624.
   Google Scholar
• Altman I, Rogoff B. 1987. World views in psychology: trait, interactional, organismic and transactional perspectives. In: Stokols D, Altman I, editors. Handbook of environmental psychology (Vol. 1). New York: Wiley; p. 1–40.
   Google Scholar
• Asafu-Adjaye J, Blomquist L, Brand S, Brook BW, Defries R, Ellis E, Foreman C, Keith D, Lewis M, Lynas M, et al. 2015. An ecomodernist manifesto. doi:10.13140/RG.2.1.1974.0646.
   Google Scholar
• Barad KM. 2007. Meeting the Universe halfway: quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham (NC): Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barnes E. 2010. Ontic vagueness: A guide for the perplexed 1. Noûs. 44(4):601–627. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0068.2010.00762.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartels K, Turnbull N. 2019. Relational public administration: a synthesis and heuristic classification of relational approaches. Public Manag Rev. doi:10.1080/14719037.2019.1632921
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bennett J. 2010. Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C. eds. 2003. Navigating social-ecological systems: building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bettencourt LMA, Kaur J. 2011. Evolution and structure of sustainability science. Proce Nat Acad Sci. 108(49):19540–19545. doi:10.1073/pnas.1102712108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blythe J, Silver J, Evans L, Armitage D, Bennett NJ, Moore M-L, Morrison TH, Brown K. 2018. The dark side of transformation: latent risks in contemporary sustainability discourse. Antipode. 50(5):1206–1223. doi:10.1111/anti.12405.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bodin Ö, Ramirez-Sanchez S, Ernstson H, Prell C. 2011. A social relational approach to natural resource governance. In: Bodin Ö, Prell C, editors. Social networks and natural resource management: uncovering the fabric of environmental governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; p. 3–28.
   Google Scholar
• Boonstra WJ. 2016. Conceptualizing power to study social-ecological interactions. Ecol Soc. 21(1):21. doi:10.5751/ES-07966-210121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brattland C, Kramvig B, Verran H. 2018. Doing indigenous methodologies: toward a practice of the ‘careful partial participant. ab-Original. 2(1):74–96. doi:10.5325/aboriginal.2.1.0074.
   Google Scholar
• Braun B. 2015. THE 2013 ANTIPODE RGS-IBG LECTURE new materialisms and neoliberal natures. Antipode. 47(1):1–14. doi:10.1111/anti.12121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Briassoulis H. 2017a. Response assemblages and their socioecological fit: conceptualizing human responses to environmental degradation. Dial Human Geog. 7(2):166–185. doi:10.1177/2043820617720079.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Briassoulis H. 2017b. Why I fell for assemblages: A response to comments. Dial Human Geog. 7(2):212–220. doi:10.1177/2043820617720096.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler J. 1988. Performative acts and gender constitution: an essay in phenomenology and feminist theory. Theatre J. 40(4):519–531. doi:10.2307/3207893.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caillon S, Cullman G, Verschuuren B, Sterling EJ. 2017. Moving beyond the human–nature dichotomy through biocultural approaches: including ecological well-being in resilience indicators. Ecol Soc. 22(4):27. doi:10.5751/ES-09746-220427.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castree N. 2003a. Geographies of nature in the making. In: Anderson A, Domosh M, Pile S, Thrift N, editors. Handbook of cultural geography. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage. pp. 168-183.
   Google Scholar
• Castree N. 2003b. Environmental issues: relational ontologies and hybrid politics. Prog Hum Geogr. 27(2):203–211. doi:10.1191/0309132503ph422pr.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan KMA, Balvanera P, Benessaiah K, Chapman M, Diaz S, Gomez-Baggethun E, Gould R, Hannah N, Jax K, Klain S, et al. 2016. Opinion: why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proce Nat Acad Sci. 113(6):1462–1465. doi:10.1073/pnas.1525002113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan KMA, Gould RK, Pascual U. 2018. Editorial overview: relational values: what are they, and what’s the fuss about? Curr Opi Environ Sustai. 35:A1–A7. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2018.11.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chapin III, Power FS, Pickett ME, Freitag STA, Reynolds A, Jackson JA, Lodge RB, Duke DM, Collins C, PowerA.G SL, et al. 2011. Earth Stewardship: science for action to sustain the human-earth system. Ecosphere. 2(8):1–20. doi:10.1890/ES11-00166.1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charmaz K. 2006. Constructing grounded theory. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Christie M. 2013. Generative and ‘ground-up’ research in aboriginal Australia. Learn Commun. 13:3–12.
   Google Scholar
• Clark N. 2014. Inhuman Nature: sociable life on a dynamic planet. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Clark WC, Dickson NM. 2003. Sustainability science: the emerging research program. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 100(14):8059–8061. doi:10.1073/pnas.1231333100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark WC, van Kerkhoff L, Lebel L, Gallopin GC. 2016. Crafting usable knowledge for sustainable development. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 113(17):4570–4578. doi:10.1073/pnas.1601266113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clarke S, Hahn H, Hoggett P. 2007. Object relations and social relations: the implications of the relational turn in psychoanalysis. Abingdon (UK): Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Connolly WE. 2011. A world of becoming. Durham & London: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cook SDN, Wagenaar H. 2012. Navigating the eternally unfolding present: toward an epistemology of practice. Am Rev Pub Adm. 42(1):3–38. doi:10.1177/0275074011407404.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooke B, West S, Boonstra W. 2016. Dwelling in the biosphere: exploring an embodied human-environment connection in resilience thinking. Sustain Sci. 11(3):831–843. doi:10.1007/s11625-016-0367-3.
   Google Scholar
• Coole D, Frost S. eds. 2010. New materialisms: ontology, agency, and politics. Durham & London: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Country B, Suchet-Pearson S, Wright S, Lloyd K, Burarrwanga L. 2013. Caring as Country: towards an ontology of co-becoming in natural resource management. Asia Pac Viewp. 54(2):185–197. doi:10.1111/apv.12018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dacks R, Ticktin T, Mawyer A, Caillon S, Claudet J, Fabre P, Jupiter SD, McCarter J, Mejia M, Pascua P, et al. 2019. Developing biocultural indicators for resource management. Conser Sci Prac. 1(6):e38. doi:10.1111/csp2.38.
   Google Scholar
• Daly HE. 1987. A.N. Whitehead’s fallacy of misplaced concreteness: examples from economics. J Interdiscip Econ. 2(2):83–89. doi:10.1177/02601079X8700200202.
   Google Scholar
• Daniel TC, Muhar A, Arnberger A, Aznarc O, Boyd JW, Chan KMA, Costanza R, Elmqvist T, Flint CG, Gobster PH, et al. 2012. Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 109(23):8812–8819. doi:10.1073/pnas.1114773109.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darnhofer I. 2020. Farming from a process-relational perspective: making openings for change visible. Sociol Ruralis. 60(2):505–528. doi:10.1111/soru.12294.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darnhofer I, D’Amico S, Fouilleux E. 2019. A relational perspective on the dynamics of the organic sector in Austria, Italy, and France. J Rural Stud. 68:200–212. doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2018.12.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darnhofer I, Lamine C, Strauss A, Navarrete M. 2016. The resilience of family farms: towards a relational approach. J Rural Stud. 44:111–122. doi:10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.01.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de la Cadena M. 2015. Earth beings: ecologies of practice across andean worlds. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• de Vries BJM. 2013. Sustainability Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Debaise D. 2017. Nature as event: the lure of the possible. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• DeLanda M. 2006. A new philosophy of society: assemblage theory and social complexity. London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Deleuze G, Guattari F. 1988. A thousand plateaus: capitalism and Schizophrenia. London: Athlone.
   Google Scholar
• Dépelteau F, ed. 2018. The Palgrave handbook of relational sociology. Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-66005-9
   Google Scholar
• Dewey J. 1958. Experience and Nature. New York: Dover.
   Google Scholar
• Dwiartama A, Rosin C. 2014. Exploring agency beyond humans: the compatibility of Actor-Network Theory (ANT) and resilience thinking. Ecol Soc. 19(3):28. doi:10.5751/ES-06805-190328.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elias N. 1978. What is sociology? Trans. by Mennell, S., and Morrissey, G. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Emirbayer M. 1997. Manifesto for a relational sociology. Am J Sociol. 103(2):281–317. doi:10.1086/231209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enqvist JP, West S, Masterson VA, Haider LJ, Svedin U, Tengö M. 2018. Stewardship as a boundary object for sustainability research: linking care, knowledge and agency. Landsc Urban Plan. 179:17–37. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.07.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ernstson H, Sörlin S. 2013. Ecosystem services as technology of globalization: on articulating values in urban nature. Ecolog Econ. 86:274–284. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.09.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fairhead J, Leach M, Scoones I. 2012. Green Grabbing: a new appropriation of nature? J Peasant Stud. 39(2):237–261. doi:10.1080/03066150.2012.671770.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farrell KN. 2020. Untrol: post-truth and the new normal of post-normal science. Social Epistemol. 34(4):330–345. doi:10.1080/02691728.2019.1706117.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feola G. 2015. Societal transformation in response to global environmental change: A review of emerging concepts. Ambio. 44(5):376–390. doi:10.1007/s13280-014-0582-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer J, Gardner TA, Bennett EM, Balvanera P, Biggs R, Carpenter S, Daw T, Folke C, Hill R, Hughes TP, et al. 2015. Advancing sustainability through mainstreaming a social–ecological systems perspective. Curr Opi Environ Sustai. 14:144–149. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2015.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer J, Riechers M. 2019. A leverage points perspective on sustainability. People Nature. 1(1):115–120. doi:10.1002/pan3.13.
   Google Scholar
• Folke C, Jansson Å, Rockström J, Olsson P, Carpenter SR, Chapin FS, Westley F. 2011. Reconnecting to the biosphere. Ambio. 40(7):719–738. doi:10.1007/s13280-011-0184-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gillard R, Gouldson A, Paavola J, Van Alstine J. 2016. Transformational responses to climate change: beyond a systems perspective of social change in mitigation and adaptation. WIREs Clim Change. 7:251–265. doi:10.1002/wcc.384
   Google Scholar
• González-Márquez I, Toledo VM. 2020. Sustainability science: a paradigm in crisis? Sustainability. 12(2802):1–18. doi:10.3390/su12072802.
   Google Scholar
• Guerrero AM, Bennett NJ, Wilson KA, Carter N, Gill D, Mills M, Ives CD, Selinske MJ, Larrosa C, Bekessy S, et al. 2018. Achieving the promise of integration in social-ecological research: a review and prospectus. Ecol Soc. 23(3):38. doi:10.5751/es-10232-230338.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guerry AD, Polasky S, Lubchenco J, Chaplin-Kramer R, Daily GC, Griffin R, Ruckelshaus M, Bateman IJ, Duraiappah A, Elmqvist T, et al. 2015. Natural capital and ecosystem services informing decisions: from promise to practice. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 112(24):7348–7355. doi:10.1073/pnas.1503751112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hacking I. 1983. Representing and intervening: introductory topics in the philosophy of natural science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Haider J, Boonstra WJ, Peterson GD, Schlüter M. 2018b. Traps and sustainable development in rural areas: a review. World Dev. 101:311–321. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.05.038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haider L, Neusel B, Peterson GD, Schlüter M. 2019a. Past management affects success of current joint forestry management institutions in Tajikistan. Environ Dev Sustai. 21(5):2183–2224. doi:10.1007/s10668-018-0132-0.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haider LJ, Boonstra WJ, Akobirshoeva A, Schlüter M. 2019b. Effects of development interventions on biocultural diversity: a case study from the Pamir Mountains. Agric Human Values. doi:10.1007/s10460-019-10005-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haider LJ, Hentati-Sundberg J, Giusti M, Goodness J, Hamann M, Masterson VA, Meacham M, Merrie A, Ospina D, Schill C, et al. 2018a. The undisciplinary journey: early-career perspectives in sustainability science. Sustain Sci. 13(1):191–204. doi:10.1007/s11625-017-0445-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haider LJ, Quinlan AE, Peterson GD. 2012. Interacting traps: resilience assessment of a pasture management system in northern Afganistan. Plan Theory Prac. 13(2):299–333.
   Google Scholar
• Haider LJ, van Oudenhoven FJW. 2018c. Food as a daily art: ideas for its use as a method in development practice. Ecol Soc. 23(3):art 14. doi:10.5751/ES-10274-230314.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamann M, Berry K, Chaigneau T, Curry T, Heilmayr R, Henriksson PJG, Hentati-Sundberg J, Jina A, Lindkvist E, Lopez-Maldonado Y, et al. 2018. Inequality and the biosphere. Annu Rev Environ Resour. 43(1):61–83. doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-102017-025949.
   Google Scholar
• Haraway DJ. 2016. A cyborg manifesto: science, technology, and socialist-feminism in the late twentieth century. In: Haraway DJ, editor. Manifestly Haraway. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press; p. pp.3–90.
   Google Scholar
• Hartig T. 1993. Nature experience in transactional perspective. Landsc Urban Plan. 25(1–2):17–36. doi:10.1016/0169-2046(93)90120-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Häyhä T, Lucas PL, van Vuuren DP, Cornell SE, Hoff H. 2016. From planetary boundaries to national fair shares of the global safe operating space — how can the scales be bridged? Global Environ Change. 40:60–72. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2016.06.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayles NK. 1999. How we became posthuman: virtual bodies in cybernetics, literature, and informatics. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Heikkurinen P, Clegg S, Pinnington AH, Nicolopoulou K, Alcaraz JM. 2019. Managing the anthropocene: relational agency and power to respect planetary boundaries. Organ Environ. 108602661988114. doi:10.1177/1086026619881145
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heise UK, Christensen J, Niemann M. 2017. The Routledge companion to the environmental humanities. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hertz T, Mancilla Garcia M, Schlüter M. 2020. From nouns to verbs: how process ontologies enhance our understanding of social-ecological systems understood as complex adaptive systems. People Nature. doi:10.1002/pan3.10079
   Google Scholar
• Holling CS, Meffe GK. 1996. Command and control and the pathology of natural resource management. Conser Biol. 10(2):328–337. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1996.10020328.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horcea-Milcu A-I, Martín-López B, Lam DPM, Lang DJ. 2020. Research pathways to foster transformation: linking sustainability science and social-ecological systems research. Ecol Soc. 25(1):13. doi:10.5751/ES-11332-250113.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horlings LG, Nieto-Romero M, Pisters S, Soini K. 2020. Operationalizing transformative sustainability science through place-based research: the role of researchers. Sustain Sci. 15:467–484. doi:10.1007/s11625-019-00757-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hukkinen JI. 2014. Model of the social-ecological system depends on model of the mind: contrasting information-processing and embodied views of cognition. Ecolog Econ. 99:100–109. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.01.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ingold T. 2000. The perception of the environment: essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill. London & New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Ingold T. 2004. Beyond biology and culture. The meaning of evolution in a relational world. Social Anthropol. 12(2):209–221. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8676.2004.tb00102.x.
   Google Scholar
• Ingold T. 2011. Being alive: essays on movement, knowledge and description. Abingdon (UK): Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• IPBES (2019): Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. S. Díaz, J. Settele, E. S. Brondízio E.S., H. T. Ngo, M. Guèze, J. Agard, A. Arneth, P. Balvanera, K. A. Brauman, S. H. M. Butchart, K. M. A. Chan, L. A. Garibaldi, K. Ichii, J. Liu, S. M. Subramanian, G. F. Midgley, P. Miloslavich, Z. Molnár, D. Obura, A. Pfaff, S. Polasky, A. Purvis, J. Razzaque, B. Reyers, R. Roy Chowdhury, Y. J. Shin, I. J. Visseren-Hamakers, K. J. Willis, and C. N. Zayas (eds.). Bonn, Germany: IPBES secretariat; p. 56. doi:10.5281/zenodo.3553579
   Google Scholar
• Ives CD, Abson DJ, von Wehrden H, Dorninger C, Klaniecki K, Fischer J. 2018. Reconnecting with nature for sustainability. Sustain Sci. 13(5):1389–1397. doi:10.1007/s11625-018-0542-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson S, Palmer LR. 2015. Reconceptualizing ecosystem services: possibilities for cultivating and valuing the ethics and practices of care. Prog Hum Geogr. 39(2):122–145. doi:10.1177/0309132514540016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jarosz L. 2011. Nourishing women: toward a feminist political ecology of community supported agriculture in the United States. Gender, Place Culture. 18(3):307–326. doi:10.1080/0966369X.2011.565871.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jax K, Calestani M, Chan KMA, Eser U, Keune H, Muraca B, O’Brien L, Potthast T, Voget K, Wittmer H. 2018. Caring for nature matters: a relational approach for understanding nature’s contributions to human well-being. Curr Opi Environ Sustai. 35:22–29. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2018.10.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson AF, Lidström S. 2018. The balance between concepts and complexity in ecology. Nature Ecol Evol. 2(4):585–587. doi:10.1038/s41559-018-0507-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones M. 2009. Phase space: geography, relational thinking, and beyond. Prog Hum Geogr. 33(4):487–506. doi:10.1177/0309132508101599.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaaronen RO. 2018. Reframing tacit human-nature relations: an inquiry into process philosophy and the philosophy of Michael Polanyi. Environ Values. 27(2):179–201. doi:10.3197/096327118X15162907484466.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kabeer N. 1999. Resources, agency, achievements: reflections on the measurement of women’s empowerment. Dev Change. 30:435–464. doi:10.1111/1467-7660.00125
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kajikawa Y, Tacoa F, Yamaguchi K. 2014. Sustainability science: the changing landscape of sustainability research. Sustain Sci. 9(4):431–438. doi:10.1007/s11625-014-0244-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kates RW, ed. 2010. Readings in sustainability science and technology. CID Working Paper No. 213. Center for International Development, Harvard University. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University. http://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/cid/publications/faculty-working-papers/cid-working-paperno.-213
   Google Scholar
• Kates RW, Clark WC, Corell R, Hall JM, Jaeger CC, Lowe I, McCarthy JJ, Schellnhuber HJ, Bolin B, Dickson NM, et al. 2001. Sustainability science. Science. 292(5517):641–642. doi:10.1126/science.1059386.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klain SC, Olmsted P, Chan KMA, Satterfield T. 2017. Relational values resonate broadly and differently than intrinsic or instrumental values, or the new ecological paradigm. PLoS ONE. 12(8):e0183962. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0183962.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kramer DB, Hartter J, Boag AE, Jain M, Stevens K, Nicholas KA, McConnell WJ, Liu J. 2017. Top 40 questions in coupled human and natural systems (CHANS) research. Ecol Soc. 22(2):44. doi:10.5751/es-09429-220244.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langley A, Tsoukas H. eds. 2017. The Sage handbook of process organization studies. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Lansing JS, Thurner S, Chung NN, Coudurier-Curveur A, Karakas C, Fesenmyer KA, Chew LY. 2017. Adaptive self-organization of Bali’s ancient rice terraces. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 114(25):6504–6509. doi:10.1073/pnas.1605369114.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Latour B. 1993. We have never been modern. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour B. 1999. Do you believe in reality?’ – news from the trenches of the Science Wars. In: Latour B, editor. Pandora’s hope: essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press; p. 1–23.
   Google Scholar
• Latour B. 2004. Politics of nature: how to bring the sciences into democracy. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour B. 2005. Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Law J. 2004. After method: mess in social science research. London & New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Law J 2007. Actor network theory and material semiotics. http://www.heterogeneities.net/publications/Law2007ANTandMaterialSemiotics.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Law J, Lin W. 2010. Cultivating disconcertment. Sociol Rev. 58(2):135–153. doi:10.1111/j.1467-954X.2011.01966.x.
   Google Scholar
• Leach M, Reyers B, Bai X, Brondizio ES, Cook C, Diaz S, Espindola G, Scobie M, Stafford-Smith M, Subramanian SN. 2018. Equity and sustainability in the Anthropocene: a social-ecological systems perspective on their intertwined futures. Global Sustain. 1(e13):1–13. doi:10.1017/sus.2018.12.
   Google Scholar
• Lejano R. 2019. Relationality and social-ecological systems: going beyond or behind sustainability and resilience. Sustainability. 11:2760. doi:10.3390/su11102760
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lenton TM, Held H, Kriegler E, Hall JW, Lucht W, Rahmstorf S, Schellnhuber HJ. 2008. Tipping elements in the Earth’s climate system. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 105(6):1786–1793. doi:10.1073/pnas.0705414105.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levin S, Xepapadeas T, Crépin A-S, Norberg J, de Zeeuw A, Folke C, Hughes T, Arrow K, Barrett S, Daily G, et al. 2013. Social-ecological systems as complex adaptive systems: modeling and policy implications. Environ Dev Econ. 18:111–132. doi:10.1017/S1355770X12000460
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levin SA, Clark WC 2010. Toward a science of sustainability. Report from Toward a Science of Sustainability Conference. Airlie Center, Warrenton, Virginia, Nov 29th – Dec 2nd.
   Google Scholar
• Liu J, Dietz T, Carpenter SR, Alberti M, Folke C, Moran E, Pell AN, Deadman P, Kratz T, Lubchenco J, et al. 2007. Complexity of coupled human and natural systems. Science. 317(5844):1513–1516. doi:10.1126/science.1144004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lövbrand E, Beck S, Chilvers J, Forsyth T, Hedren J, Hulme M, Lidskog R, Vasileiadou E. 2015. Who speaks for the future of Earth? How critical social science can extend the conversation on the Anthropocene. Global Environ Change. 32:211–218. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.03.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahmoud Y, Jerneck A, Kronsell A, Steen K. 2018. At the nexus of problem-solving and critical research. Ecol Soc. 23(4):40. doi:10.5751/ES-10458-230440.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mancilla Garcia M, Hertz T, Schlüter M. 2020a. Towards a process epistemology for the analysis of social-ecological systems. Environ Values. 29(2):221–239. doi:10.3197/096327119X15579936382608.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mancilla Garcia M, Hertz T, Schlüter M, Prieser R, Woermann M. 2020b. Adopting process-relational perspectives to tackle the challenges of social-ecological systems research. Ecol Soc. 25(1):29. doi:10.5751/ES-11425-250129.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marston SA, Jones JP III, Woodward K. 2005. Human geography without scale. Trans Ins British Geograp. 30(4):416–432. doi:10.1111/j.1475-5661.2005.00180.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin K, Mirraboopa B. 2003. Ways of knowing, being and doing: A theoretical framework and methods for indigenous and indigenist re‐search. J Aus Stud. 27(76):203–214. doi:10.1080/14443050309387838.
   Google Scholar
• McGowan KA, Westley F, Fraser EDG, Loring PA, Weathers KC, Avelino F, Sendzimir J, Chowdhury RR, Moore M-L. 2014. The research journey: travels across the idiomatic and axiomatic toward a better understanding of complexity. Ecol Soc. 19(3):37. doi:10.5751/ES-06518-190337.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meadows D. 1999. Leverage Points: places to Intervene in a System. Hartland (VT): The Sustainability Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Merçon J, Vetter S, Tengö M, Cocks M, Balvanera P, Rosell JA, Ayala-Orozco B. 2019. From local landscapes to international policy: contributions of the biocultural paradigm to global sustainability. Global Sustain. 2(e7):1–11. doi:10.1017/sus.2019.4.
   Google Scholar
• Mesle CR. 2008. Process-relational philosophy: an introduction to Alfred North whitehead. West Conshohocken (PA): Templeton Foundation Press.
   Google Scholar
• Milkoreit M, Moore M-L, Schoon M, Meek CL. 2015. Resilience scientists as change-makers – growing the middle ground between science and advocacy? Environ Sci Policy. 53( Part B):87–95. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2014.08.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller TR, Wiek A, Sarewitz D, Robinson J, Olsson L, Kriebel D, Loorbach D. 2014. The future of sustainability science: a solutions-oriented research agenda. Sustain Sci. 9(2):239–246. doi:10.1007/s11625-013-0224-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell SA, Aron L. eds. 1999. Relational psychoanalysis: the emergence of a tradition. New York & London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mol A. 2008. The logic of care: health and the problem of patient choice. New York & London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Moon K, Blackman DA, Adams VM, Colvin RM, Davila F, Evans MC, Januchowski-Hartley SR, Bennett NJ, Dickinson H, Sandbrook C, et al. 2019. Expanding the role of social science in conservation through an engagement with philosophy, methodology, and methods. Methods Ecol Evol. 10(3):294–302. doi:10.1111/2041-210X.13126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morseletto P. 2017. Analyzing the influence of visualisations in global environmental governance. Environ Sci Policy. 78:40–48. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2017.08.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muraca B. 2011. The map of moral significance: a new axiological matrix for environmental ethics. Environ Values. 20(3):375–396. doi:10.3197/096327111X13077055166063.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muraca B. 2016. Relational values: a whiteheadian alternative for environmental philosophy and global environmental justice. Balkan J Philos. 8(1):19–38. doi:10.5840/bjp2016813.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murdoch J. 2006. Post-structuralist geography: a guide to relational space. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson SH. 2014. Resilience and the neoliberal counter-revolution: from ecologies of control to production of the common. Resilience. 2(1):1–17. doi:10.1080/216932932014.872456.
   Google Scholar
• Nicholson DJ, Dupré J. eds. 2018. Everything flows: towards a processual philosophy of biology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Norgaard RB. 1994. Development betrayed: the end of progress and a coevolutionary revisioning of the future. London & New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Norström A, Cvitanovic C, Löf MF, West S, Wyborn C, Balvanera P, Bednarek AT, Bennett EM, Biggs R, de Bremond A, et al. 2020. Principles for knowledge co-production in sustainability research. Nat Sustain. 3(3):182–190. doi:10.1038/s41893-019-0448-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NRC. 1999. Our common journey: a transition toward sustainability. Washington (DC):The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Österblom H, Jouffray J-B, Folke C, Rockström J. 2017. Emergence of a global science-business initiative for ocean stewardship. Proc Nat Acad Sci. 201704453. doi:10.1073/pnas.1704453114
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostrom E. 2009. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science. 325(5939):419–422. doi:10.1126/science.1172133.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Panelli R. 2010. More-than-human social geographies: posthuman and other possibilities. Prog Hum Geogr. 34(1):79–87. doi:10.1177/0309132509105007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pellizzoni L. 2015. Ontological politics in a disposable world: the new mastery of nature. London & New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Pickering A. 1995. The mangle of practice: time, agency, and science. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Plumwood V. 1993. Feminism and the mastery of nature. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Prigogine I. 1980. From being to becoming: time and complexity in the physical sciences. New York: W.H. Freeman.
   Google Scholar
• Puig de la Bellacasa M. 2015. Matters of care: speculative ethics in more than human worlds. Minneapolis (MN): University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Raudsepp-Hearne C, Peterson GD, Tengö M, Bennett EM, Holland T, Benessaiah K, MacDonald GK, Pfeifer L. 2010. Untangling the environmentalist’s paradox: why is human well-being increasing as ecosystem services degrade? BioScience. 60(8):576–589. doi:10.1525/bio.2010.60.8.4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raymond CM, Giusti M, Barthel S. 2017a. An embodied perspective on the co-production of cultural ecosystem services: toward embodied ecosystems. J Environ Plan Manage. 61(5–6):778–799. doi:10.1080/09640568.2017.1312300.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raymond CM, Kyttä M, Stedman R. 2017b. Sense of place, fast and slow: the potential contributions of affordance theory to sense of place. Front Psychol. 8:1674. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01674
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raymond CM, Singh G, Benessaiah K, Bernhard JR, Levine J, Nelson H, Turner NJ, Norton B, Tam J, Chan K. 2013. Ecosystem services and beyond: using multiple metaphors to understand human–environment relationships. Bioscience. 63(7):536–546. doi:10.1525/bio.2013.63.7.7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Resilience Alliance. 2010. Assessing resilience in social-ecological systems: workbook for practitioners. Version 2.0. http://www.resalliance.org/3871.php
   Google Scholar
• Riechers M, Balázsi Á, Llorente G, Loos J. In press. Human-nature connectedness as a leverage point for sustainability transformations. Ecosys People.
   Google Scholar
• Rocha JC, Peterson G, Bodin Ö, Levin S. 2018. Cascading regime shifts within and across scales. Science. 362(6421):1379–1383. doi:10.1126/science.aat7850.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K, Persson Å, Chapin III FS, Lambin EF, Lenton TM, Scheffer M, Folke C, Schellnhuber HJ 2009a. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature. 461:472–475. doi:10.1038/461472a
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rockström J 2010. Let the environment guide our development [Video file]. https://www.ted.com/talks/johan_rockstrom_let_the_environment_guide_our_development/up-next?language=en
   Google Scholar
• Sala JE, Torchio G. 2019. Moving towards public policy-ready science: philosophical insights on the social-ecological systems perspective for conservation science. Ecosys People. 15(1):232–246. doi:10.1080/26395916.2019.1657502.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sayles JS, Mancilla Garcia M, Hamilton M, Alexander SM, Baggio JA, Fischer AP, Ingold K, Meredith GR, Pittman J. 2019. Social-ecological network analysis for sustainability sciences: a systematic review and innovative research agenda for the future. Environ Res Lett. 14(9):093003. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ab2619.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schlüter M, Haider LJ, Lade SJ, Lindkvist E, Martin R, Orach K, Wijermans N, Folke C. 2019. Capturing emergent phenomena in social-ecological systems: an analytical framework. Ecol Soc. 24(3):11. doi:10.5751/ES-11012-240311.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider A, Hinton J, Collste D, González TS, Calderon SVC, Aguiar AP. in press. In press. Matters arising: can transnational corporations leverage systemic change towards a “sustainable” future? Nature Ecol Evol. Preprint available online at https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/c4ak5/
   Google Scholar
• Schoon M, Van der Leeuw S. 2015. The shift towards social-ecological systems perspectives: insights into the human-nature relationship. Nature Sci SoC. 23:166–174. doi:10.1051/nss/2015034
   Google Scholar
• Schulz C, Martin-Ortega J. 2018. Quantifying relational values — why not? Curr Opi Environ Sustai. 35:15–21. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2018.10.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scoones I. 1999. New ecology and the social sciences: what prospects for a fruitful engagement? Annu Rev Anthropol. 28(1):479–507. doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.28.1.479.
   Google Scholar
• Scoones I, Stirling A, Abrol D, Atela J, Charli-Joseph L, Eakin H, Ely A, Olsson P, Pereira L, Priya R, et al. 2020. Transformations to sustainability: combining structural, systemic and enabling approaches. Curr Opi Environ Sustai. 42:65–75. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2019.12.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seibt J. 2018. Process Philosophy. In. Zalta ENed. Stanford Encyclopedia Philos. URL:https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/process-philosophy/
   Google Scholar
• Selg P. 2016. Two faces of the ‘relational turn. Pol Sci Pol. 49(1):27–31. doi:10.1017/S1049096515001195.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sismondo S. 2017. Post-truth? Soc Stud Sci. 47(1):3–6. doi:10.1177/0306312717692076.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spivak GC. 1990. The post-colonial critic: interviews, strategies, dialogues Harasym, S., ed. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Stålhammar S, Pedersen E. 2017. Recreational cultural ecosystem services: how do people describe the value? Eco Ser. 26:1–9. doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.05.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stålhammar S, Thorén H. 2019. Three perspectives on relational values of nature. Sustain Sci. 14(5):1201–1212. doi:10.1007/s11625-019-00718-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steffen W, Richardson K, Rockstrom J, Cornell SE, Fetzer I, Bennett EM, Biggs R, Carpenter SR, de Vries W, de Wit CA, et al. 2015. Planetary boundaries: guiding human development on a changing planet. Science. 347(6223):1259855. doi:10.1126/science.1259855.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stengers I. 2010. Cosmopolitics I. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stenseke M. 2018. Connecting ‘relational values’ and relational landscape approaches. Curr Opi Environ Sustai. 35:82–88. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2018.10.025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sterling E, Filardi C, Toomey A, Sigouin A, Betley E, Gazit N, Newell J, Albert S, Alvira D, Bergamini N, et al. 2017. Biocultural approaches to well-being and sustainability indicators across scales. Nature Ecol Evol. 1(12):1798–1806. doi:10.1038/s41559-017-0349-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stirling, A. 2010. Keep it complex. Nature 468:1029–1031. doi:10.1038/4681029a
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stirling A. 2016. Knowing Doing Governing: realizing Heterodyne Democracies. In: Voß JP, Freeman R, editors. Knowing Governance. Palgrave Studies in Science, Knowledge and Policy. London: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 259-289. doi:10.1057/9781137514509_12
   Google Scholar
• Swyngedouw E, Ernstson H. 2018. Interrupting the anthropo-obscene: immuno-biopolitics and depoliticizing ontologies in the anthropocene. Theory, Culture Soc. 35(6):3–30. doi:10.1177/0263276418757314.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swyngedouw E, Heynen NC. 2003. Urban political ecology, justice and the politics of scale. Antipode. 35(5):898–918. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8330.2003.00364.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tallis H, Lubchenco J. 2014. Working together: A call for inclusive conservation. Nature. 515(7525):27–28. doi:10.1038/515027a.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tengö M, Hill R, Malmer P, Raymond CM, Spierenburg M, Danielsen F, Elmqvist T, Folke C. 2017. Weaving knowledge systems in IPBES, CBD and beyond – lessons learned for sustainability. Curr Opi Environ Sustai. 26:17–25. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2016.12.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson HE. 1997. The fallacy of misplaced concreteness: its importance for critical and creative inquiry. Interchange. 28(2):219–230. doi:10.1023/A:1007313324927.
   Google Scholar
• Tironi M, Rodriguez-Giralt I. 2017. Healing, knowing, enduring: care and politics in damaged worlds. Sociol Rev Monograph. 65(2_suppl):89–109. doi:10.1177/0081176917712874.
   Google Scholar
• Tronto JC. 1993. Moral boundaries: a political argument for an ethic of care. New York & London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Turner BL II, Esler KJ, Bridgewater P, Tewksbury J, Sitas N, Abrahams B, Chapin FS III, Chowdhury RR, Christie P, Diaz S, et al. 2016. Socio-environmental systems (SES) research: what have we learned and how can we use this information in future research programs. Curr Opi Environ Sustai. 19:160–168. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2016.04.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Kerkhoff L. 2014. Developing integrative research for sustainability science through a complexity principles-based approach. Sustain Sci. 9(2):143–155. doi:10.1007/s11625-013-0203-y.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Kerkhoff L, Lebel L. 2006. Linking Knowledge and Action for Sustainable Development. Annu Rev Environ Resour. 31(1):445–477. doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.31.102405.170850.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vogt JM, Epstein GB, Mincey SK, Fischer BC, McCord P. 2015. Putting the “E” in SES: unpacking the ecology in the Ostrom social-ecological system framework. Ecol Soc. 20(1):55. doi:10.5751/ES-07239-200155.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagenaar H, Cook SDN. 2011. The push and pull of the world: how experience animates practice. Evid Pol. 7(2):193–212. doi:10.1332/174426411X579225.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walker J, Cooper M. 2011. Genealogies of resilience: from systems ecology to the political economy of crisis adaptation. Security Dial. 42(2):143–160. doi:10.1177/0967010611399616.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsh Z, Böhme J, Wamsler C. 2020. Towards a relational paradigm in sustainability research, practice, and education. Ambio. doi:10.1007/s13280-020-01322-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinbaum DR. 2015. Complexity and the Philosophy of Becoming. Found Sci. 20(3):283–322. doi:10.1007/s10699-014-9370-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• West S, Beilin R, Wagenaar H. 2019a. Introducing a practice perspective on monitoring for adaptive management. People Nature. 1:387–405. doi:10.1002/pan3.10033
   Google Scholar
• West S, Haider LJ, Masterson VA, Enqvist JP, Svedin U, Tengö M. 2018. Stewardship, care and relational values. Curr Opi Environ Sustai. 35:30–38. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2018.10.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• West S, van Kerkhoff L, Wagenaar H. 2019b. Beyond ‘linking knowledge and action’: towards a practice-based approach to transdisciplinary sustainability interventions. Policy Stud. 40(5):534–555. doi:10.1080/01442872.2019.1618810.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whatmore S. 2002. Hybrid geographies: natures cultures spaces. London: Sage. doi:10.4135/9781446219713.
   Google Scholar
• Whitehead AN. 1978. Process and reality Edited by Griffin, D.R., and Sherburne, D.W. New York: The Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Woroniecki S. 2019. Enabling environments? Examining social co-benefits of ecosystem-based adaptation to climate change in Sri Lanka. Sustainability. 11(772):1–20. doi:10.3390/su11030772.
   Google Scholar