Sustainability challenges are often framed around individual behaviour change, with policies focusing on shaping attitudes, choices, and personal responsibility. However, achieving lasting transformation requires looking beyond the individual to consider how broader social, cultural, and economic systems influence sustainability outcomes.
This section highlights the critical role of social sciences in shaping sustainability strategies, moving beyond narrow behavioural models to approaches that recognise collective agency, power dynamics, and structural change. Throughout this site, we emphasise the need to strengthen the social and human dimensions of social-ecological governance. This includes fostering participatory action research, ethical considerations, interdisciplinary collaboration, and the use of using narrative and storytelling to support more inclusive and effective sustainability efforts.
Despite growing recognition of the value of social science insights, these perspectives remain underutilised in sustainability research and policy. The resources in this section explore how social science contributes to environmental governance, adaptation, resilience, and conservation, while also critically examining theoretical tensions between social and natural science approaches.
By bringing critical, interdisciplinary perspectives to sustainability challenges, social scientists can help shape policies and practices that are not only scientifically sound but also socially just and contextually relevant. The papers and resources below provide key insights into how social sciences can be more effectively integrated into sustainability transformations.
We need social science as much as STEM in policymaking
This LSE blog post by Sebastian Ludwicki-Ziegler and Lise Moawad highlights how social sciences were marginalised in COVID-19 policymaking, despite offering crucial insights on ethics, trust, and social context. Drawing on their research (2025) into three European science advisory bodies, the authors call for more balanced, interdisciplinary approaches. Their recommendations go beyond pandemic response, offering practical steps for integrating social science into policy systems to improve legitimacy, inclusion, and the ability to respond to complex societal challenges.
Critical social science perspectives on transformations to sustainability
This 2022 paper by Eleanor Fisher, Eduardo Brondizio and Emily Boyd introduces a special issue on the contribution of social science to addressing transformations to sustainability. It provides a critical perspective on how social sciences can contribute to sustainability transformations. The authors emphasise the importance of integrating diverse social science approaches to understand and facilitate sustainability transformations, highlighting the need to address power dynamics, social inequalities, and cultural contexts.
Beyond the ABC: climate change policy and theories of social change
In this short and deliberately provocative paper Elizabeth Shove reflects on what seems to be a yawning gulf between the potential contribution of the social sciences and the typically restricted models and concepts of social change embedded in contemporary environmental policy in the UK, and in other countries too. As well as making a strong case for going beyond what she refers to as the dominant paradigm of ABC (attitude, behaviour, and choice), she discusses the attractions of this model, the blind spots it creates, and the forms of governance it sustains. This paper provides some insight into why so much relevant social theory remains so marginalised, and helps identify opportunities for making better use of existing intellectual resources. A good summary of the paper can be found here – Going beyond the ABC of climate change policy.
Mainstreaming the social sciences in conservation
This 2016 paper by Nathan Bennett and colleagues points out that despite broad recognition of the value of social sciences and increasingly vocal calls for better engagement with the human element of conservation, the conservation social sciences remain misunderstoodand underutilized in practice. In response the authors recommend fostering knowledge on the scope and contributions of the social sciences to conservation, including social scientists from the inception of interdisciplinary research projects, incorporating social science research and insights during all stages of conservation planning and implementation, building social science capacity at all scales in conservation organizations and agencies, and promoting engagement with the social sciences in and through global conservation policy-influencing organizations. Conservation social scientists, too, need to be willing to engage with natural science knowledge and to communicate insights and recommendations
Why resilience is unappealing to social science: Theoretical and empirical investigations of the scientific use of resilience
This 2015 paper from Lennart Olsson and colleagues acknowledges that resilience is often promoted as a boundary concept to integrate the social and natural dimensions of sustainability. However, they point out that it is a troubled dialogue from which social scientists may feel detached. They first scrutinize the meanings, attributes, and uses of resilience in ecology and elsewhere to construct a typology of definitions. They analyze core concepts and principles in resilience theory that cause disciplinary tensions between the social and natural sciences. Throughout, they develop the argument that incommensurability and unification constrain the interdisciplinary dialogue, whereas pluralism drawing on core social scientific concepts would better facilitate integrated sustainability research.
Global environmental change I: A social turn for resilience?
In this 2014 paper Katrina Brown looks at the concept of resilience in the context of global environmental change. The application of resilience concepts to social and ecological systems and dilemmas has been roundly critiqued for under-theorizing social dimensions. She examines three emerging topics: community resilience; transformations; and resilience as an organizing concept for radical change. She finds that there is still relatively little analysis of social difference and resilience, and there are continuing tensions between normative and analytical stances on resilience. These characteristics are mirrored in policy discourses and local level actions on resilience.
Understanding adaptation and transformation through indigenous practice
This 2015 paper by Marina Apgar and colleagues points out that the need to understand social change and its links with adaptation and transformation is central to resilience. Our aim is to contribute to insights about and understanding of underlying social dynamics at play in social-ecological systems. Their paper argues that longstanding indigenous practices provide opportunities for investigating processes of adaptation and transformation. Their findings reveal that cultural practices facilitating leadership development, personhood development, social networking, critical self-reflection and creative innovation are critical for enabling both adaptation and transformation.
Agency, Capacity, and Resilience to Environmental Change: Lessons from Human Development, Well-Being, and Disasters
This 2011 article by Katrina Brown and Elizabeth Westaway addresses a central criticism of how ideas of resilience are used in the environmental change and social-ecological systems literature, i.e., that the analysis is depoliticized and lacks consideration of agency. It synthesizes knowledge on agency, capacity, and resilience across human development, well-being, and disasters literature to provide insights to support more integrated and human-centered approaches to understanding environmental change.
And a couple of older references to reflect back on
Introduction of Social Sciences in Australian Natural Resource Management Agencies
This 2005 paper by Alice Roughley and David Salt examines the integration, from 1978 to 2002, of six social scientists in five Australian natural resource management agencies. The organisational arrangements for integration, the roles of the social scientists and achievements of social science programs in those agencies illustrate a number of integration approaches and insights for effectively integrating social and natural science. This paper illustrates both significant impediments to integration in practice and positive examples of integrated multidisciplinary approaches in natural resource management.