Sustainability is often conceived of as an attempt to balance competing economic, environmental and social priorities. Over the course of three decades of scholarship, however, the meaning and appropriate application of the ‘social pillar’ continues to inspire confusion. In this paper, we posit that the inherent challenge of understanding social sustainability is its many legitimate meanings plus a lack of interdisciplinary scholarship. We draw from literature in multiple disciplines to illustrate five different ways that the concept of social sustainability has been applied in scholarship and professional practice, and highlighting the importance of applications that acknowledge placed-based, process-oriented perspectives that understand social, economic, and environmental imperatives as integrated concepts. Ironically, this framing forecloses on social sustainability as an entity distinct from environmental and economic sustainability. We believe that organizing the conversation around these five applications can help advocates of sustainability use the concept of social sustainability in clear and powerful ways while avoiding applications that relegate the social dimensions of sustainability to an afterthought.

Grassroots innovation literature proposes that ‘intermediately’ situated community-based projects—those which are neither too radical, nor too embedded in the mainstream—play an important cross-contextual bridging role in processes of innovation for sustainable development. This paper explores this intermediacy claim by comparing how three established ecovillage projects engage outsiders and diffuse their lessons learned. Employing comparative case-study methodology, I find that while all three projects successfully replicate alternative practices outside their boundaries—for example through education, outreach, and on-site activities—one project has partnered with municipal planners to translate ‘ecovillage concepts’ into a new zoning category that will facilitate similar development by mainstream actors. The argument is made that the landscape for grassroots innovation is uneven, and that niche-to-regime translation occurs through projects that position themselves as part of two action domains at once.

Understanding consumer preferences in the circular economy can help producers develop profitable strategies, lowering the risk involved in transitioning to circular business models and circular product design. This study uses a choice experiment to identify customer segments for mobile phones and robot vacuum cleaners at different levels of circularity. The experiment observes how a product’s theoretical Circular Economy Score (ranging from 0 to 100) influences consumer preferences as compared to other product attributes like price, appearance, warranty, battery life, reseller type, or ease of repair. Drawing from 800 UK respondents, the results indicate the presence of three customer segments that are sensitive to a product’s Circular Economy Score, including two that appear willing to purchase recirculated items and one that expresses a preference against them. The results offer initial evidence that a market for recirculated consumer electronics exists and that circularity labeling is a marketable option. The results also present a strong rationale for further research that probes a greater variety of products and contexts.

The per capita resource consumption for inhabitants of Dancing Rabbit Ecovillage (DR) is less than ten percent of the average American in most major categories, approximating “one planet” living in a nation that contributes disproportionately to global resource consumption. This article examines DR’s extraordinary energy and resource savings through the lens of social practice theory, which focuses on the meanings, competencies, and materials that individuals combine to form everyday practices. Participant observation and interviews with DR community members reveals how this rural ecovillage achieves remarkable energy and resource savings by transitioning away from the exclusive ownership of capital goods, investing in skills that facilitate the collective management of resources, and eliminating waste by taking advantage of locally available resources. Results suggest that local governments interested in sustainability and climate mitigation should encourage systems of collective resource management rather than maintaining a traditional focus on influencing changes in individual consumption choices.