Marine social-ecological systems (SES) face unprecedented pressures, demanding approaches designed to create more sustainable interactions within and between those systems. Transformation theory offers frameworks for understanding and documenting systemic change, but its empirical testing in marine contexts remains limited. This study analyzes three case studies involving marine transformations in the Western Indian Ocean region: bycatch mitigation in South African fisheries, fisheries co-management in Tanzania, and regional pelagic fisheries’ management. Each process was documented following Olsson's framework (preparing for change, navigating transition, and building resilience) and characterized using selected transformation attributes. Our findings show that the type of outcome a transformation produces is closely linked to its entry point (practices, views, and structures). Practices-oriented transformation achieved rapid, measurable gains, but limited spillover into underlying values. Views-oriented transformation achieved broader, deeper change across dimensions but unfolded more slowly. Structures-oriented transformation, in the absence of shared values among actors, produced the shallowest and most contested change. Local and national initiatives achieved deeper transformation than regional governance, which faced greater barriers from competing interests and institutional inertia, highlighting the role locally-driven action can play in advancing transformation.
Climate actions aimed at mitigation and adaptation are associated with health co-benefits through interconnected environmental and socioeconomic pathways, yet these relationships remain insufficiently mapped and integrated into decision-making. This study applies a systems approach to construct a directed acyclic graph (DAG)-based, evidence-informed network of linkages among four domains: climate actions, environmental and socioeconomic mediators, and health outcomes, using machine-assisted analysis of six cycles of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment reports (Working Groups II and III). The network represents over 1600 directional linkages among 98 harmonized canonical concepts spanning four domains, highlighting commonly reported pathways such as climate finance and investment → resilient infrastructure → reduced all-cause mortality, ecosystem restoration → flooding prevention and reduction → reduced injuries and trauma from disasters, urban greening and cool surfaces → reduced heat, and air-quality improvement → cardiovascular and mental health benefits. The analysis indicates that environmental mediators, including air pollution, temperature, and ecosystem change, function as central structural hubs, while socioeconomic mediators, such as infrastructure and livelihoods, are associated with the inclusiveness and scale of health gains. Several mediators with strong bridging roles, including air pollution, heat, flooding, infrastructure and income, emerge as key nodes for integrated climate-health planning. By combining large-scale text mining, semantic harmonization, and weighted network analytics, this study advances climate-action research beyond cataloguing individual co-benefits toward a systems-level representation of interconnected pathways that supports more coherent and synergistic policy design. It also introduces a prototype Climate-Health Integrated Planning (CHIP) tool that can help visualize action-to-co-benefit pathways to support cross-sectoral decision-making, investment prioritization, and evidence-based policymaking.
The ecosystem concept, borrowed from natural sciences, helps social scientists study organizations, economic regions, and the complex relationships between organizations and people. However, these discussions often fail to consider the normative aspects and values inherent in social systems. Meanwhile, the ecosystem services concept, developed within the natural sciences, assesses how ecological systems contribute to human well-being, enhancing their perceived, experienced, and economic value to society. Our paper uniquely integrates theory and research in the natural and organizational sciences to examine the limitations of current ecosystems metaphors applied to understand organizations and economic regions. Compelled by worldwide urgency surrounding sustainability and the role of organizations therein, we develop the case for emphasizing human well-being impacts via a proposed construct we term “business ecosystems services,” accompanied by an analysis of ecosystem contributions to human well-being and research questions to propel the field forward. This framing advances ecosystem theory in organizational studies while foregrounding the societal consequences of business ecosystems for human well-being.
Socio-environmental conflicts over natural commons represent a growing challenge for sustainability governance, yet their dynamics remain poorly understood within complex Social-Ecological Systems (SESs). This study examines six emblematic conflicts in the Venice Lagoon (Italy), a complex SES undergoing profound transformations driven by land-use change and the privatisation of natural commons. Drawing on Ostrom’s SES framework and system thinking tools, we combine document analysis with semi-structured interviews to reconstruct conflict trajectories and identify recurring determinants across cases involving protected areas, rural landscapes, and abandoned islands. Our findings reveal a common rationale: public–private partnerships promoting redevelopment projects frequently clash with bottom-up initiatives affecting ecological integrity, cultural heritage and equitable access to natural commons. Conflicts are shaped by governance asymmetries, opaque decision-making and economic incentives linked to tourism, while ecological fragility and cultural values amplify contestation. Despite contextual differences, all cases exhibit procedural issues - such as lack of transparency - and substantial concerns related to habitat conservation and land-use change. Applying Ostrom’s SES framework in combination with system thinking theory enabled us to disentangle multi-level interactions between actors, governance systems, and ecological components, highlighting feedback loops between institutional arrangements and grassroots mobilisation. These insights underscore the need for conflict-sensitive governance prioritising transparency, inclusiveness and adaptive strategies to reconcile development with ecological resilience. Mechanisms such as collective management, legal recognition of ecosystems as rights-bearing entities and multi-level coordination emerge as promising pathways for mitigating tensions. While rooted in the Venetian context, our conceptual contribution offers broader applicability for studying socio-environmental conflicts in other SESs facing similar challenges of commons commodification.
Groundwater governance often fails not because evidence is missing, but because knowledge, authority and everyday water use decisions remain weakly connected. This is especially acute in decentralised agrarian systems where farmers effectively manage aquifers through cumulative on-farm choices yet remain marginal to formal knowledge production and policy deliberation. Drawing on co-design-informed workshops with farmers, scientists and policymakers in Punjab and Sindh, Pakistan, this study diagnoses how the science–policy–practice interface (SPPI) breaks down and why technically credible interventions often lack traction. Using credibility–relevance–legitimacy (CREL) as an evaluative lens, we show that Pakistan’s groundwater SPPI remains largely dyadic and episodic, characterised by weak translation, absent feedback loops, fragmented intermediaries and limited farmer participation. To address this structural mismatch, we reconceptualise SPPI from a science–policy dyad to a farmer-inclusive triad and extend CREL by explicitly distinguishing implementation effectiveness as the outcome of co-produced knowledge. We synthesise these insights in the TRIDENT framework (Triadic Relational Interface for Decentralised Environmental Natural-resource Transitions), which proposes theoretically informed relationships linking participation, boundary roles and multi-directional flows to credible, relevant, legitimate and implementable governance outcomes. While grounded in Pakistan’s Indus Basin, the framework offers transferable mechanisms for groundwater-dependent socio-ecological systems across the Global South.
