Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Transition discourses are gaining prominence in efforts to imagine a future that adequately addresses the urgent need to establish low carbon and climate resilient pathways. Within these discourses the ‘public’ is seen as central to the creation and implementation of appropriate interventions. The role of public engagement in societal transformation while essential, is also complex and often poorly understood. The purpose of this paper is to enhance our understanding regarding public engagement and to address the often superficial and shallow policy discourse on this topic. Main text The paper offers a review of evolving literature to map emergent public engagement in processes of transition and change. We adopt a pragmatic approach towards literature retrieval and analysis which enables a cross-disciplinary and cross-sectoral review. We use a scoping review process and the three spheres of transformation framework (designated as the practical, political and personal spheres) to explore trends within this complex research field. The review draws from literature from the last two decades in the Irish context and looks at emergence and evolving spaces of public engagement within various systems of change including energy, food, coastal management and flood adaptation, among others. Conclusions The results highlight the siloed and fragmented way in which public engagement in transitions is carried and we propose a more cross-sectoral and cross-disciplinary approach which depends on bringing into dialogue often contrasting theories and perspectives. The paper also illustrates some shifting engagement approaches. For instance, nexus articles between the practical and political spheres suggest deeper forms of public engagement beyond aggregated consumer behaviour to align technological delivery with institutional and societal contexts. While most articles in the practical sphere draw largely on techno-economic insights this influence and cross-disciplinarity is likely to draw in further innovations. Nexus articles between the political and personal sphere are also drawing on shifting ideas of public engagement and largely stress the need to disrupt reductive notions of engagement and agency within our institutions. Many of these articles call attention to problems with top-down public engagement structures and in various ways show how they often undermine and marginalise different groups.

This article analyses the approaches of academics seeking to engage with private, public and community-based stakeholders through transdisciplinary research about pressing sustainability challenges and, in particular, climate change; it outlines aspects of the institutional factors which influence transdisciplinary research. A qualitative approach was employed in conducting 10 semi-structured interviews to analyse the challenges and motivations of academic researchers when working with a range of other stakeholders through transdisciplinary practice. Two key contributions are made through this work. First, this article adds to the existing literature on motivations and challenges for undertaking research with private, public and community stakeholders in a cross-disciplinary manner. Second, the current institutional circumstances influencing such research practices are outlined, alongside potential ways forward. The research presented here has been undertaken in light of the experiences of the two lead co-authors as early career researchers coming from the disciplines of sociology and energy engineering, engaging in transdisciplinary research within a local community context in relation to a regional energy transition project.

This paper by an international team around MaREI – the Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) national Research Centre for Energy, Climate and Marine research and innovation – builds on two previous papers.1 The underlying model of the “deep institutional innovation” (DIIS) – team posits that societal transformations occur at specific moments in history. It is the premise of the three papers that we are now at such a historical tipping point. Climate change, environmental degradation and a biodiversity crisis, marked increases in inequality, economic crises, the rise of populism, rising geo-political tensions, the effects of increased globalisation, and ongoing religious and ethnic conflicts provide clear evidence that current social institutions are not optimal, either for human flourishing or for addressing global challenges. Meta-institutions around economics, culture, religion, education, politics (to name just a few) need to be fundamentally re-imagined. The coronavirus pandemic has brought this dangerous reality into even starker relief, as it highlights the interconnectedness and the sheer fragility of our globalised socio-economic-environmental system. The authors draw on the models of Kellerman (2012) and Padilla et al. (2007). This triangular model of ‘leaders-followers-context’ emphasises the critical influence of societal and organisational context in affecting followers’ demands and expectations and in empowering particular types of leaders. They describe that underlying changes in the dynamics lead to tipping points that necessitate systemic change. At such historical moments – and facing our present societal “wicked problems”2 accelerates such a dynamic – the prevalence of particular sources of toxicity, if they are not constrained, can tip the balance of the transformation to outcomes that are severely detrimental to the public good.