This article begins with a review and synthesis of some of the key theories, scholars, case examples, debates, methods, and (multiple) interpretations of environmental justice (EJ), as well as its expansion and globalization. We then look to some newly emerging themes, actions, and strategies for EJ and just sustainabilities. First, we look at the practices and materials of everyday life, illustrated by food and energy movements; second, the ongoing work on community and the importance of identity and attachment, informed by urban planning, food, and climate concerns; third, the growing interest in the relationship between human practices and communities and nonhuman nature. We also expand on the longstanding interest in just sustainabilities within this movement, illustrated by a wide range of concerns with food, energy, and climate justice. These new areas of work illustrate both recent developments and a set of paths forward for both the theory and practice of EJ.

Conservation practice requires an understanding of complex social‐ecological processes of a system and the different meanings and values that people attach to them. Mental models research offers a suite of methods that can be used to reveal these understandings and how they might affect conservation outcomes. Mental models are representations in people's minds of how parts of the world work. We seek to demonstrate their value to conservation and assist practitioners and researchers in navigating the choices of methods available to elicit them. We begin by explaining some of the dominant applications of mental models in conservation: revealing individual assumptions about a system, developing a stakeholder‐based model of the system, and creating a shared pathway to conservation. We then provide a framework to “walk through” the stepwise decisions in mental models research, with a focus on diagram‐based methods. Finally, we discuss some of the limitations of mental models research and application that are important to consider. This work extends the use of mental models research in improving our ability to understand social‐ecological systems, creating a powerful set of tools to inform and shape conservation initiatives.

In this paper, we explore the current state of the food hub by discussing innovative practices supporting efforts to build healthy, equitable, and sustainable food systems. We present key insights from a roundtable discussion among scholars and Guelph, ON, N1H 8N9, Canada; Lecturer,

Objective:There is an urgent need to identify and develop cross-sectoral policies which promote and support a healthy, safe and sustainable food system. To help shape the political agenda, a critical first step is a shared definition of such a system among policy makers across relevant sectors. The aim of the present study was to determine how Australian policy actors define, and contribute to, a healthy, safe and sustainable food system.Design:A Delphi survey, consisting of two rounds, was conducted. Participants were asked how they define, and contribute to, a healthy, safe and sustainable food system (Round 1) and indicate their level of agreement with summary statements (Round 2).Setting:This was an online Delphi survey conducted in Australia.Participants:Twenty-nine and fourteen multisectoral and multilevel policy makers completed Round 1 and Round 2, respectively.Results:The definition included food processing regulation, environmentally friendly food production and access to nutritious food. All agreed that it was important for them to improve access and supply of healthy food and ensure healthy planning principles are applied.Conclusions:There were cross-sectoral differences in definitions and contributions; however, critical consensus was achieved. The study contributes to the definition of key elements of a cross-sectoral food and nutrition policy to meet today’s environmental, health, social and economic challenges; however, further research using a more representative multisectoral sample is warranted.

No abstract