ICS Working Paper Nº1/2018

ICS W O R K I N G P A P E R S 2018 3 Introduction The current unsustainable relationship between humans and nature has all the signs of critically endangering planetary and human sustainability (Montoya et al., 2018; Steffen et al., 2015; Brown, 2017). Conceptually, the Anthropocene encapsulates this new epoch in which humankind as a collective force has become capable of irreversibly altering natural Earth cycles ( Crutzen, 2002; Barry and Maslin, 2016; Steffen et al., 2 007). Confronting this sets a new context for transformative social innovation towards a form of living and working based on the principles of sustainability (Rickards, 2015; Olsson et al., 2 017; Pel and Bauler, 2014). Here we look at social innovation , from a broader perspective, as efforts towards social change and policy reforms, understood as a three-sided process comprising: a) substance: addressing unmet social needs, b) process: changing social relations, and c) outcome: bringing about new institutional configurations (Pel and Bauer, 2014). Consequently, there is a growing call for socio-ecological alternatives that radically transform our present actions and systems (Barry and Quilley, 2009; Jackson, 2009; Alexander and Rutherford, 2014). This has helped to fuel a substantial increase in the number and variety of community-based initiatives (CBIs) seenteking to create a socio-ecological transition towards planetary sustainability (Göpel, 2017). These niche spaces have been widely acknowledged as transition laboratories (cf. Geels and Shot, 2007; Pelling et al., 2008; Göpel, 2016), where transition can be described as the shift to a new social and ecological economy where humankind must rethink its place and relationship within nature and between present and future generations. The pathway to this transition may emerge via the rise of radical niche- innovations and new user practices and institutions fuelled by cultural and behavioural changes, with a larger role for civil society actors, social movements, and multi-level governance (Hof et al., n.d.; O’Riordan, 2014). In fact, the mobilisation of the community has a significant track record up to present. The concept of community-based can be found discursively and empirically crisscrossing multiple agendas. From localism and local autonomy to nature conservation, circular economy or alternative ecosystem-service valuation discourses, the community has become an indispensable stakeholder worldwide (e.g. Hart and Milstein, 2003; Bohrmann et al., 2012). Furthermore, community-based innovation is increasingly perceived as key to tackle complex anthropogenic socio-ecological problems in the light of sustainability transitions (Anguelovski and Carmin, 2011; Frantzeskaki and Rok, 2018).