Abrupt systemic changes in ecological and socio-economic systems are a regular occurrence. While there has been much attention to studying systemic changes primarily in ecology as well as in economics, the attempts to do so for coupled socio-environmental systems are rarer. This paper bridges the gap by reviewing how models can be instrumental in exploring significant, fundamental changes in such systems. The history of modelling systemic change in various disciplines contains a range of definitions and approaches. Even so, most of these efforts share some common challenges within the modelling context. We propose a framework drawing these challenges together, and use it to discuss the articles in this thematic issue on modelling systemic change in coupled social and environmental systems. The differing approaches used highlight that modelling systemic change is an area of endeavour that would benefit from greater synergies between the various disciplines concerned with systemic change.

Social-ecological systems (SES) are dynamic systems that continuously change in response to internal or external pressures. A better understanding of the interactions of the social and ecological systems that drive those dynamics is crucial for the development of sustainable management strategies. Dynamic models can serve as tools to explore social-ecological interactions; however, the complexity of the studied systems and the need to integrate knowledge, theories, and approaches from different disciplines pose considerable challenges for their development. We assess the potential of Ostrom’s general SES framework (SESF) to guide a systematic and transparent process of model development in light of these difficulties. We develop a stepwise procedure for applying SESF to identify variables and their relationships relevant for an analysis of the SES. In doing so we demonstrate how the hierarchy of concepts in SESF and the identification of social-ecological processes using the newly introduced process relationships can help to unpack the system in a systematic and transparent way. We test the procedure by applying it to develop a dynamic model of decision making in the management of recreational fisheries. The added value of the common framework lies in the guidance it provides for (1) a structured approach to identifying major variables and the level of detail needed, and (2) a procedure that enhances model transparency by making explicit underlying assumptions and choices made when selecting variables and their interactions as well as the theories or empirical evidence on which they are based. Both aspects are of great relevance when dealing with the complexity of SES and integrating conceptual backgrounds from different disciplines. We discuss the advantages and difficulties of the application of SESF for model development, and contribute to its further refinement.