Socio-Economic, Political, and Environmentally Sustainable Development Considerations of Transitional Innovation

Introduction

The economic globalization processes are characterized by a multiplicity of innovative methods originated in different locations across the world due to increasing uncertainty and specialization giving rise to the emergence of new competitors (Hämäläinen & Schienstock, 2001).

The concept of innovation is social, relational, and networked process between the guided by institutional behaviors of actors and firms, supply chains, governments, local communities, and universities. Socio-ecological transition requires the background as the starting point in terms of economic, social, and environmental sustainability to achieve the aims of sustainable growth and development (Dimitrova, 2013). Growth in transportation emissions is induced by low-density growth (Hankey & Marshall, 2010;Liu & Shen, 2011). Socio-ecological innovation tends to achieve sustainable livelihoods and other issues. (Rusciano, Civero, & Scarpato, 2020; Rusciano, Civero, & Scarpato, 2020; Cisco & Gatto, 2021).

Interdisciplinary theories of innovations are connected to empirical research. Responsible research and innovation are an approach to all frameworks in need of grounding processes and procedures to local circumstances. Transdisciplinary research approach on socio-ecological innovation must be supported by innovative methodologies and research questions. A framework socio-ecological system is complex and should be integrated to the socio-ecosystem interactions of human societies (Redman et al. 2004). Haberl et al. 2006). The evaluative frame of reference relates to knowledge, natural, economic, and social reasoning (Leeuwis & van den Ban 2004). The evaluative reference framework incorporates socio-economic and technical valuation of consequences in terms of risk perceptions and aspirations considering the heterogeneity degree of biophysical and socio-economic systems

Combination of economics, sociological and psychological findings lead to non-material aspects relevant to well-being including the family and social relations, health, work, leisure, personal feelings of meaning, purpose, and achievement of goals (Layard, 2006; Frey, 2008; Frey and Stutzer, 2002A).

Panarchy theory argues that socioeconomic systems go through cycles of growth and conservation, followed by release and renewal. The concept of cycles connects the activities and provides logical order and sequence (Loorbach, 2010). Evolution of human societies is the succession of sociological regimes to establish interactive socio-ecological patterns (Krausmann et al., 2008, Schandl et al., 2009).

The normative and ethical soundness of responsible research and innovation criteria remains limited by targeting the research and innovation processes and programs design and framing and overlooking its implementation. The perceptive framing of socio-ecological context has influence on the interactions of social actors facing disturbances. The mission-oriented responsible research innovation is an approach that brings innovation on track to the direction of the required problem-solving process.

Socio-logical innovation has differentials between conventional innovation and capacious notions of innovation (Weber & Rohracher, 2012; Coenen et al. 2017; 2018; Schot & Steinmueller 2018; Diercks et al. 2019; Grillitsch et al. 2019). Socio-ecological innovations solve specific environmental problems complex in nature and human behavior that requires the integration of the technical innovation process with the economic, social, political, and civil society for institutions, social groups, stakeholder, actors, etc. Technical innovation becomes part of socio-ecological innovations. Focusing on foundational economy to identify people involved in problem solving based on deliberative solutions of tangible and specific local problems such as drought, economic hardships, and disappearance of local industries, etc.