Call for Papers

Call for short papers (pdf)

There is increasing evidence that the world is heading toward an environmental crisis. Human perturbations have destabilized Earth-system processes at planetary scale (Steffen et al., 2015; Richardson et al., 2023), with climate change and biodiversity loss as exemplars of the ongoing ecological collapse (Dasgupta, 2021; Diaz et al., 2019). To secure a future-proof future for all species, there is need to undertake systemic change toward sustainable ways of living and doing business (Dyllick & Muff, 2015). In this endeavor, the agency of actors is critical (Geels & Schot, 2007; Pesch, 2015). Upon closer look, though, one can ask, who is engaged in sustainability work and what are the evolving dynamics of such proactive engagement?
 
We build upon definitions of agency that view agency as an individual’s or collective’s capacity to act (Giddens, 1984; Dietz & Burns, 1992). The focus on one’s ‘capacity to act’ explains why questions of agency can be considered to define what it means to be human (Bandura, 2001). The bulk of theorizing in the social sciences has equated human agency with individual-level agency (Emirbayer & Mische, 1998). However, agency can also refer to collectivities that act (Ritzer, 2000; Crozier & Friedberg, 1980), such as social classes, or even cities. What is more, agency can materialize in relationships with others, operating at the interpersonal level as proxy agency (Bandura, 2001), or relational agency (Burkitt, 2015). While social scientists’ bias is toward human agency, agency also involves non-human forms (Latour, 2005; Rupprecht et al., 2020).
 
Taking a closer look at academic knowledge on actors’ agency in building sustainable futures, though, one finds more questions than answers. As the literature spreads across the social and natural sciences, there is no ‘one body of literature’ to turn to for answers. Indeed, numerous actor types have been identified as active change agents in the pursuit of sustainable futures, be it social entrepreneurs, shareholder activists, or employee volunteers, among many others (de Haan & Rotmans, 2018; Avelino & Wittmayer, 2016; Doherty et al., 2014). Critically speaking, the terminology used to appreciate actors pursuing sustainable futures is multifaceted, spans levels of analysis, theoretical bases and fields of science. As regards knowledge integration, the sustainability transitions literature has developed actor categorizations (Fischer & Newig, 2016; Koistinen & Teerikangas, 2021), while individual actors, such as within-firm change makers (Rodell et al., 2016), or collectives, such as social movements (de Bakker et al., 2013), are reviewed in management studies. Based on interdisciplinary knowledge integration, sustainability agency is defined as intentional, proactive individual or collective level action geared toward sustainable futures, also involving interaction with non-material forms of agency (Teerikangas et al., 2021), adopting individual, activist, relational and governance-related forms.
 
This sub-theme engages the EGOS community in exploring this evolving multi-theoretical, multi-level and interdisciplinary field of study in order to appreciate the many facets of sustainability agency. In so doing, this sub-theme aims to appreciate and take stock of this broad, loosely coupled body of knowledge that spans disciplines, involves numerous terms, concepts and theoretical bases, and can be discussed at different levels of analysis. We are further interested in overlaps and interconnections between the variety of concepts, theoretical perspectives and levels of analysis used in the appreciation of sustainability agency. Going forward, the ambition is to create a platform for scholars with various backgrounds to engage in, explore and further develop this interdisciplinary field of research.
 
We invite and encourage empirical, theoretical and conceptual submissions addressing the agency of different kinds of actors engaged in the making of sustainable futures. Taking a closer look, submissions are invited as regards (but not limited to) the following potential avenues.
On the one hand, who are the individuals involved in shaping the sustainability agenda, how do they exercise their agency, and what are the theoretical lenses adopted in their study? For example:

• The role of individual change agents or activists

• Managers at different hierarchical levels, be it team leaders, line managers, middle managers, top managers and executives, CEOs or board members

• Professionals and managers whose professional role relates to sustainability, be it CSR and sustainability managers or sustainability consultants

• Institutional work and institutional entrepreneurship as lenses to appreciate sustainability agency

• Leadership as a lens of exploring the agency of individual actors

• Future stakeholders, as in actors that have not been imagined/created yet

On the other hand, what are the organizational and inter-organizational actors, dynamics and collaborative arrangements used in the pursuit of sustainable futures, and the theoretical lenses used in their study? For example:

• Sustainability-geared entrepreneurial activity, e.g., social or environmental entrepreneurship

• Companies’, non-governmental organizations’, public sector organizations’, such as cities’, local or national governments’ or international institutions’ agency in addressing climate change and biodiversity loss

• Public-private partnerships, cross-sector collaboration or ecosystems as means of collectively pursuing strategic sustainability agendas

• Social movements as vehicles of sustainability transformations

• Leadership as a lens of exploring the agency of organizational actors

 Third, what is the role of non-human actors and forms of agency in building sustainable futures? For example:

• The agency of materials, as, e.g., in circular economy business models

• The agency of plants and animals

• The agency of natural forces, as evident in eco-catastrophes, floods and hurricanes

 Finally, how do different kinds of actors collaborate and collectively engage in the making of sustainable futures? For example, via:

• Projects as agents of sustainability transformations

• Stakeholder engagement and collaboration

• Shared and collective leadership to explore actors’ collaborative sustainability agency

Going forward, the ambition is to create a platform for scholars with various backgrounds to engage in, explore and further develop this interdisciplinary field of research.
 

References

• Avelino, F., & Wittmayer, J.M. (2016): “Shifting power relations in sustainability transitions: A multi-actor perspective.” Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 18 (5), 628–649.
• Bandura, A. (2001): “Social Cognitive Theory: An Agentic Perspective.” Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1–26, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1.
• Burkitt, I. (2015): “Relational agency: Relational sociology, agency and interaction.” European Journal of Social Theory, 19 (3), 322–339.
• Crozier, M., & Friedberg, E. (1980): Actors and Systems: The Politics of Collective Action. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• de Bakker, F., den Hond, F., King, B., & Weber, K. (2013): “Social movements, civil society, and corporations: Taking stock and looking ahead.” Organization Studies, 34 (5–6), 573–593.
• Dasgupta, P. (2021): The Economics of Biodiversity. Final Report of the Independent Review on the Economics of Biodiversity. London: HM Treasury, UK Government.
• de Haan, F.J., & Rotmans, J. (2018): “A proposed theoretical framework for actors in transformative change.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 128, 275–286.
• Díaz, S., Settele, J., Brondízio, E.S., …, & Zayas, C.N. (2019): “Pervasive human-driven decline of life on Earth points to the need for transformative change.” Science, 366 (6471), https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aax3100.
• Dietz, T., & Burns, T.R. (1992): “Human Agency and the Evolutionary Dynamics of Culture.” Acta Sociologica, 35 (3), 187–200.
• Doherty, B., Haugh, H., & Lyon, F. (2014): “Social enterprises as hybrid organizations: A review and research agenda.” International Journal of Management Reviews, 16 (4), 417–436.
• Dyllick, T., & Muff, K. (2015): “Clarifying the meaning of sustainable business: Introducing a typology from business-as-usual to true business sustainability.” Organization & Environment, 29 (2), 156–174.
• Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. (1998): “What is agency?” American Journal of Sociology, 103 (4), 962–1023.
• Fischer, L.-B., & Newig, J. (2016): “Importance of Actors and Agency in Sustainability Transitions: A Systematic Exploration of the Literature.” Sustainability, 8 (5), 476, https://doi.org/10.3390/su8050476.
• Geels, F.W., & Schot, J. (2007): “Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways.” Research Policy, 36 (3), 399–417.
• Giddens, A. (ed.) (1984): The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
• Koistinen, K., & Teerikangas, S. (2021): “The Debate If Agents Matter vs. the System Matters in Sustainability Transitions – A Review of the Literature.” Sustainability, 13 (5), 2821, https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052821.
• Latour, B. (2005): Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
• Pesch, U. (2015): “Tracing discursive space: Agency and change in sustainability transitions.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 90, Part B, 379–388.
• Richardson, K., Steffen, K., Lucht, W., …,  Rockström, J. (2023): “Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries.” Science Advances, 9 (37), https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adh2458.
• Ritzer, G. (ed.) (2000): Sociological Theory (5th edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Rodell, J., Breitsohl, H., Schröder, M., & Keating, D. (2016): “Employee volunteering: A review and framework for future research.” Journal of Management, 42 (1), 55–84.
• Rupprecht, C.D.D, Vervoort, J., Berthelsen, C., …, & Kawai, A. (2020): “Multispecies sustainability.” Global Sustainability, 3, e34, 1–12.
• Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., …, & Sörlin, S. (2015): “Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet.” Science, 347 (6223), https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1259855.
• Teerikangas, S., Onkila, T., Koistinen, K., & Mäkelä, M. (2021): Research Handbook of Sustainability Agency. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.