Abstract:Research on social‐ecological systems (SES) has highlighted their complex and adaptive character and pointed to the importance of recognizing their intertwined nature. Yet, we often base our analysis and governance of SES on static and independent objects, such as actors and resources which are not well suited to address complexity and intertwinedness. This bias, which is largely implicit, has its roots in substance ontologies that have influenced most of contemporary science. This paper argues that it is useful to critically reflect on this ontological grounding and develop SES research from a process ontological perspective. Key insights are that process ontological concepts such as process, event and possibility space are able to overcome the dichotomy between the social and the ecological and allow for a conceptualization of continuous change (dynamism) that enhances our understanding of SES as truly intertwined and complex systems. This will enable SES researchers to conceptualize problems as well as corresponding solutions in novel ways which will ultimately support the development of novel governance approaches, from rethinking the aims of policies from managing people towards managing relations between and among people and the natural system. To fully tap the potential which comes with a change in worldview towards a process ontology, changing research approaches and ways of abstracting are required. La recherche sur les systèmes socio‐écologiques (SSE) a mis en évidence leur caractère complexe et adaptatif et a souligné l'importance de reconnaître l'enchevêtrement du social et de l’écologique. Pourtant, nos analyses et nos modes de gouvernance se basent souvent sur l'existence d'objets statiques et indépendants, tels que des acteurs ou des ressources qui, soit ne permettent pas d'expliquer/communiquer le caractère complexe de ces systèmes, soit ignorent leur nature enchevêtrée. Ce biais, largement implicite, trouve ses racines dans les ontologies de la substance qui ont influencé la plupart des sciences contemporaines. Cet article propose de réfléchir de manière critique sur les fondements ontologiques des SSE et de s'inspirer d'ontologies qui considèrent les relations et processus comme fondamentaux pour développer des recherches sur les SSE, tenant compte de leur caractère complexe, adaptatif et enchevêtré. Des concepts tels que processus, événements et espace de possibilité permettent de dépasser la dichotomie nature/société et de conceptualiser le changement continu (dynamisme) de telle sorte que notre compréhension des SSE se trouve améliorée. Cette nouvelle perspective permettra de repenser les problèmes des SSE et, par conséquent, de développer de nouvelles approches de gouvernance visant à gérer les relations entre les personnes tout aussi bien qu'entre les personnes et leur environnement. Pour exploiter pleinement le potentiel d'une ontologie des processus, il est nécessaire de modifier nos approches de recherche et nos méthodes d'abstraction. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

Reconsidering domestication from a process archaeology perspective

Current perspectives and the future of domestication studies

Re-considering Processual and Post-Processual Archaeology: Can a Historical Approach Help Nuance the Usage of aDNA and Archaeogenetics

Plant domestication and agricultural ecologies

What is the `process' in cultural process and in processual archaeology?

Post-processual Archaeology

Brazilian and Mexican experiences in the study of incipient domestication

Rethinking the Origins of Animal Domestication in China

Anthropology and the Anthropocene: Criticisms, Experiments, and Collaborations

The role of G protein‐coupled receptors and their ligands in animal domestication

Toward the Identification of Formation Processes

Conducting sustainability research in the anthropocene: toward a relational approach

Old and New Perspectives on the Nature/Culture Opposition in Biology and Anthropology

Archaeophenomics of ancient domestic plants and animals using geometric morphometrics : a review

New Food Crop Domestication in the Age of Gene Editing: Genetic, Agronomic and Cultural Change Remain Co-evolutionarily Entangled

From nouns to verbs: How process ontologies enhance our understanding of social‐ecological systems understood as complex adaptive systems

Social agency and the dynamics of prehistoric technology

Domestication and the evolution of crops: variable syndromes, complex genetic architectures, and ecological entanglements

On complex archaeologies: conceptualizing social complexity and its potential for archaeology

Reconsidering the link between past material culture and cognition in light of contemporary hunter-gatherer material use.

Rethinking technological change in smallholder agriculture