_<mark>Social sustainability is when all people feel part of the development process and believe that they and their descendants will benefit from it. Socially sustainable communities and societies are willing and able to work together to overcome challenges, deliver public goods, and allocate scarce resources in ways that are perceived as legitimate and fair by all so that all people may thrive over time.</mark>_ <mark>(Barron et al 2023: 30)</mark> <mark>This definition highlights four critical components of social sustainability: social cohesion, inclusion, resilience, and process legitimacy. A cohesive society has a shared purpose and high levels of trust, allowing communities and groups to work together toward a common good, respond to challenges, and drive real solutions and sustainable compromises. An inclusive society is one where all people have access to markets and services as well as political, social, and cultural spaces, which allows all members of society to thrive. A resilient society has the ability, capacity, and flexibility to avoid conflicts (including inter-personal violence) and to withstand, bounce back from, or absorb the impacts of exogenous shocks over time. Process legitimacy captures the processes by which policies or programs are designed and implemented within the context of existing norms and values, such that the decisions made and carried out are considered fair, credible, and acceptable by all members and groups of a given community or society.</mark> <mark>Barron et al.’s (2023) definition of social inclusion aligns closely with World Bank (2005, 2013b) and Das and Espinoza (2019) and shares commonalities with the definitions presented in Ballet, Bazin and Mahieu (2020). While similar Barron et al (2023) differ from Ballet et al (2020) in the following: i) they use social inclusion rather than equity; ii)focus on equal access to economic, political, civic and physical spaces instead of inequalities; iii)employ resilience instead of safety so that the framework can capture readiness to all kind of shocks; and iv) add empowerment to social cohesion, agency and participation. A particular feature of Barron et al (2023) is their inclusion of process legitimacy, feature emphasized by Pawlowski (2008) and Dempsey et al (2011) as necessary to maintain social sustainability.</mark> <mark>As such, Barron et al.’s (2023) definitions and framework unite the social sustainability literature emphases on connected communities, well-being for all, durability or resilience over time, and meaningful participation and engagement, and a strong social contract within an intertemporal horizon (each emphasized in works by Dempsey et al. 2011, Pierson 2002; Ratcliffe 2000). Durability and resilience focus on the stability and security of communities over time. Some literature characterizes these principles as safety, resembling but going further than resilience by emphasizing reduced vulnerability before shocks occur (Adger 2000). Meaningful participation and engagement reinforce the importance of connected and cohesive communities, underscoring the value of a strong social contract.</mark> <mark>Figure 1 shows how Barron et al.’s (2023) components interact. Despite the framework’s simplicity, the interactions it portrays are, in practice, highly complex, nonlinear, and context-dependent, reflecting the rich dynamics at play in all communities and societies. The framework functions within a conceptual space known as the “policy arena”: the institutions and forums where public resources are allocated and decisions are made among individuals, government, and stakeholder groups through debate, negotiation, and compromise, with ample potential for disagreement, tensions, or even conflict (World Bank 2017). Expanding access to the policy arena, especially for marginal and vulnerable groups, as well as sharing information and building in feedback loops and other social accountability measures, are important for resolving tensions.</mark> 4