Background/Question/Methods Finding and implementing solutions that sustain human-environment systems are wicked collection action problems. The systems we seek to sustain are not well defined and lack clear boundaries, there is no single best or even obvious approach to achieve sustainability, and moving forward involves multiple stakeholders with often conflicting objectives (Rittel and Weber 1973). Solutions often involve making transformative (systemic) changes, and these types of change require more than technical solutions but also knowledge of how to realize transformation over time. Knowledge is needed to support “think[ing] critically about outcomes as well as processes, about institutional and process designs, about power and performance” (Forester 2013). This type of knowledge emerges from entangled processes of action, learning and capacity building, and provides insights not just on technical aspects of the problem, but cultural needs, definitions of justice, evolving capacity to implement adaptive actions, and other locally defined factors. To succeed, we will need to stretch our understanding of “co-production” (Lemos et al. 2018) and transform science-governance partnerships. Results/Conclusions This talk will explore some of the changes that will be required to realize a “pluralistic and integrated approach to action-oriented knowledge” (Caniglia et al. 2020), including embracing transdiscplinarity and expanding what’s considered as “knowledge”, establishing mechanisms for social learning, improving the mechanics of how science and decision processes work together, and realigning the interactions of science and governance frameworks to encourage application of science. The speaker will draw on his experiences working with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the US National Climate Assessment, and other science-to action processes. References Caniglia, Guido, C. Luederitz, T. von Wirth, I. Fazey, B. Martín-López, K. Hondrila, A. König, et al. “A Pluralistic and Integrated Approach to Action-Oriented Knowledge for Sustainability.” Nature Sustainability, October 5, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-00616-z. Forester, John. “On the Theory and Practice of Critical Pragmatism: Deliberative Practice and Creative Negotiations.” Planning Theory 12, no. 1 (February 2013): 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095212448750. Lemos, Maria Carmen, James C. Arnott, Nicole M. Ardoin, Kristin Baja, Angela T. Bednarek, Art Dewulf, Clare Fieseler, et al. “To Co-Produce or Not to Co-Produce.” Nature Sustainability 1, no. 12 (December 2018): 722–24. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0191-0. Rittel, Horst W. J., and Melvin M. Webber. “Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning.” Policy Sciences 4, no. 2 (June 1, 1973): 155–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730.