Ecological Economics 189 (2021) 107171 0921-8009/© 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. Methodological and Ideological Options Fostering critical pluralism with systems theory, methods, and heuristics K. Kish a, b, e, f, * , D. Mallery b, f, g , G. Yahya Haage a, f , R. Melgar-Melgar c, e , M. Burke c, e, f , C. Orr d, f , N.L. Smolyar c, e , S. Sanniti d , J. Larson c, e a McGill University, Natural Resource Science, Canada b York University, Faculty of Urban and Environmental Change, Canada c University of Vermont, Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources, Gund Institute for Environment, United States d University of Waterloo, School of Environment, Resource, and Sustainability, Canada e Leadership for the Ecozoic, Canada and the United States f Economics for the Anthropocene, Canada and the United States g Centre for the Understanding of Sustainable Prosperity, United Kingdom A R T I C L E INFO Keywords: Soft systems methodology Critical systems heuristics Participatory action research Sociological paradigms Ecological economics ABSTRACT Ecological economics and systems theory have a long-standing history. As a foregrounding metatheoretical framework, systems thinking deepens socio-ecological acuity through comprehensive models of complex re- lationships between social and biophysical systems. However, critical and soft systems are often overlooked, necessitating a framework for “critical pluralism,” similar to that used by systems theorists themselves. To do this, we argue that ecological economics needs to include paradigm analysis as an integral part of the ecological economic discourse to situate work within sociological paradigms – not just biophysical limits to growth. To help establish a critical pluralism approach, we trained a group of emerging ecological economics scholars to integrate systems thinking more frmly in research approaches. We integrate soft systems methodology and critical systems heuristics to establish foundations for critical soft systems methodology. We then trained emerging scholars on this new methodology. Emergent from the results of this training is a new paradigm of thought, centred on regenerative features, for the future of ecological economics – which is best navigated with critical pluralistic approaches. The results of this training also present lessons for the discipline of ecological economics that help chart out the discipline's tensions. 1. Introduction Systems thinking pervades ecological economics. Through a foun- dation in systems thinking, ecological economics emerged to join social and natural sciences to address increasingly complex socio-ecological challenges. Systems thinking worked as a foundation as it helps under- stand the world through relationships and connections. In taking sys- tems thinking as a foregrounding philosophy, ecological economists deepen socio-ecological acumen through more comprehensive models of complex relationships between humans and natural systems; as Røpke (2004) notes, “in relation to the development of ecological economics, the systems perspective was, and still is, dominant” (Røpke, 2004, p. 305). Furthermore, Plumecocq's (2014) lexicographic analysis of the journal of EE indicates that the prevalence of systems theory in EE (complex adaptive systems/resilience thinking in particular) has only increased in the decades since. Understanding these relationships is key to education, management and policy development that addresses biophysical limits to growth and equitable and just social transitions. This way of viewing the world permeates the common sense of ecological economics researchers. Such a view is desirable because it enables researchers to inherently “think in systems” and see interdisciplinarity as usual. However, it is also prob- lematic because it creates haphazard integration of divergent systems theories, each with different and frequently incommensurable ap- proaches for systemic research, analysis, and intervention. Not all systems thinking is created equally. Systems theory is extensively heterogeneous concerning the ontological commitments, epistemological assumptions, and methodological approaches adopted by the various, discrete expressions of systems theory and practice. EE draws primarily from various expressions of systems ecology, including, but not limited to, formal energy systems language (Gupta and Hall, 2011; Hall et al., 2009; Odum, 2007), complex adaptive systems, * Corresponding author. E-mail address: katiekish@gmail.com (K. Kish). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Ecological Economics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107171 Received 17 January 2021; Received in revised form 19 July 2021; Accepted 19 July 2021