Most mature companies have started some kind of “transformation”, either digital, or agile transformations, to cope with changes in the environment, yet most fail, ending up delivering nothing or just one more reorganization. We postulate that considering the Organization as a self-aware Complex Adaptative System (CAS) is paramount, as the common conception (Industrial: mechanistic and predictive) results in bringing the systems in a frozen or defensive mode. Stimulating the system enables us to use its adaptative power to develop new capabilities, and all layers should be tackled simultaneously, to prevent the system from collapsing back into its original state. To ensure this, it is necessary to create a seed per level, and a mechanism to propagate the transformation, with a focus on development instead of growth, that is qualitative change rather than quantitative. A common vocabulary should also be provided, so conversations can occur at every level. Finally, changing mindsets is key, and both concepts and techniques should be provided as enablers to the adequate mindset level. We detail one such transformation that resulted in distributed leadership and more intrinsic motivation, providing both an account of the transformation itself and a model to read it.

The lexical analysis of seminal policy-to-diplomacy documents from the socio-environmental discourse of the last fifty year agendas allowed examining the evolution of five themes: resources/waste, pollution, social and economic development, justice, and health. Contextual affinities were strongest between resources, pollution, and health and are linked to societal trends and pressures. On those grounds, the central role of resource stewardship according to nature’s physical limits is highlighted, and dedicated concepts, analytical frameworks, and methodologies with different degrees of sustainability are analyzed. To reframe the identified social and economic problems, the work proposes criteria and choices that (1) allow to compare the dynamics of socioecological states across the planet, (2) help matching the pace of socioecological change by addressing path dependencies through participation and engagement of communities, and (3) enable stakeholders to make trade-offs and take decisions in specific social, economic, political, and cultural contexts. The prioritization of resource justice and responsibility becomes a societal project : from Wellfare State to commonfare communities.

One important motivation for the implementation of the Water Framework Directive is the creation of non-market environmental benefits such as improved ecological quality, or greater opportunities for open-access river recreation via microbial pollution remediation. Pollution sources impacting on ecological or recreational water quality can be uncorrelated but non-market benefits arising from riverine improvements are typically conflated within benefit valuation studies. Using stated preference choice experiments, we seek to disaggregate these sources of value for different river users, thereby allowing decision makers to understand the consequences of adopting alternative investment strategies. Our results suggest anglers derive greater value from improvements to the ecological quality of river water, in contrast to swimmers and rowers for whom greater value is gained from improvements to recreational quality. We also find three distinct groups of respondents: a majority preferring ecological over recreational improvements, a substantial minority holding opposing preference orderings and a small proportion expressing relatively low values for either form of river quality enhancement. As such, this research demonstrates that the non-market benefits which may accrue from different types of water quality improvements are nuanced in terms of their potential beneficiaries and, by inference, their overall value and policy implications.

The corona (COVID-19) pandemic offers an opportunity for dealing with persistent problems, through a transformative recovery process. It is a crisis that offers opportunities for dealing with three interrelated crises: the ecological crisis (climate change, loss of biodiversity, resource depletion, pollution and ecosystem destruction), the confidence crisis (people losing trust in government, politics, companies, regular news channels, science, each other and the future), and the inequality crisis (the widening of the gap between rich and poor). Our argument is that sustainability transitions will not succeed without a different economy and another social contract with the associated rights and duties of care (for the environment and the well-being of others, including future generations). A different social contract is not only desirable from the point of view of sustainability and fairness, justice and equality, but is also necessary to restore citizens' trust in politics, government, companies and each other. In the paper we discuss mechanisms towards a Natural Social Contract, systemic leverage points for system transformations and possibilities for co-evolutionary governance by actor coalitions interested in transformative change. The combination of those three elements helps to synchronize different agendas and reduce the chance that they will work against each other.

This article challenges the notion of the randomness of mutations in eukaryotic cells by unveiling stress-induced human non-random genome editing mechanisms. To account for the existence of such mechanisms, I have developed molecular concepts of the cell environment and cell environmental stressors and, making use of a large quantity of published data, hypothesized the origin of some crucial biological leaps along the evolutionary path of life on Earth under the pressure of natural selection, in particular, 1) virus-cell mating as a primordial form of sexual recombination and symbiosis; 2) Lamarckian CRISPR-Cas systems; 3) eukaryotic gene development; 4) antiviral activity of retrotransposon-guided mutagenic enzymes and finally; 5) the exaptation of antiviral mutagenic mechanisms to stress-induced genome editing mechanisms directed at “hypertranscribed” endogenous genes. Genes transcribed at their maximum rate (hypertranscribed), yet still unable to meet new chronic environmental demands generated by “pollution”, are inadequate and generate more and more intronic retrotransposon transcripts. In this scenario, RNA-guided mutagenic enzymes (e.g. AID/APOBECs), which have been shown to bind to retrotransposon RNA-repetitive sequences, would be surgically targeted by intronic retrotransposons on opened chromatin regions of the same “hypertranscribed” genes. RNA-guided mutagenic enzymes may therefore “Lamarkianly” generate single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) and copy number variations (CNV), as well as transposon transposition and chromosomal translocations in the restricted areas of hyperfunctional and inadequate genes, leaving intact the rest of the genome. CNV and SNP of hypertranscribed genes may allow cells to surgically explore a new fitness scenario, which increases their adaptability to stressful environmental conditions. Like the mechanisms of immunoglobulin somatic hypermutation, non-random genome editing mechanisms may generate several cell mutants, and those codifying for the most environmentally-adequate proteins would have a survival advantage and would therefore be Darwinianly selected. Non-random genome editing mechanisms represent a link between environmental changes and biological novelty and plasticity, and provide a molecular basis to reconcile gene-centered and “ecological” views of evolution.

Socio-ecologic, socio-economic, and socio-technical transitions are opportunities that require fundamental changes in the system. These will encounter matters associated with security, service adoption by end-users, infrastructure and availability. The purpose of this study is to examine and overcome the risks to take advantage of opportunities through the novel Risky-Opportunity Analysis Method (ROAM). A novel quantitative method is designed to determine when, after making some changes, the risks become acceptable so that the opportunity does not deviate from the objectives. The approach provided a quantitative evaluation of the possible changes in parallel with digitization, towards providing a green Service Supply Chain (SSC). The result of ROAM shows that the most cost-effective change to increase the resilience of the system is a solution (SMS) which is different from that identified by a TOPSIS multi-criteria method. Real-word decisions in change management should tackle the complexity of systems and uncertainty of events during and after transition through a careful analysis of the alternatives. A case-study was carried out to evaluate the alternatives of an ancillary service in the Payment Service Providers (PSP). The comparison of the ROAM results with the traditional TOPSIS of the case-study unveils the priority of the ROAM in practice when the alternatives are Risky-Opportunities. The existing risk assessment tools do not take advantage of risky opportunities. To this aim, the current article introduces the term Risky-Opportunity, and two indexes Stress and Strain of the alternatives that are designed to be employed in the new quantitative ROAM approach.