**1. Introduction**

Limits of both the linear model of industrial development and consumerist way of living have been clearly identified since the 1960s by the first systemic studies on the effect of human activities on the environment. Pioneering studies such as *Silent Spring* by Rachel Carlson [1] and the later comprehensive report *The Limits to Growth* issued by MIT in 1972 [2] showed to a broad public for the first time that mankind should reconsider its role in a limited world where available resources and living species, including humans, are not arranged hierarchically and autonomously but through interconnected and fragile networks. Recent analyses are confirming that, in spite of the growing debate, the inertia of both economy and demography is driving the world toward the "tipping point" [3].

Nevertheless, fundamental advancements—even if mostly at a theoretical level—have been registered in setting up a "culture of transition". We can mention, among others, the introduction of the deep ecology approach by Arne Næss [4], the responsibility principle by Hans Jonas [5,6], and the precautionary principle as part of the 1992 Rio Declaration [7]. Since the Rio Declaration, the concept of sustainable development (SD) has been widely adopted at different policy levels, forcing a sense of responsibility for future generations [8]. A comprehensive vision of sustainable development was finally established with the Sustainable Development Goals 2030 (SDGs), which was approved by the UN Assembly in 2015 [9].

The basic principles embedded in the UN SDGs envisage a circular and socially responsible economy where natural resources are not overexploited and where communities are the effective beneficiaries of economic growth. Binding the preservation of the environment with social justice and equality is then considered the only possible framework for a long term, peaceful development of human societies [10]. The switch to such a new model, where economic and welfare expansion are no longer sustained by the detriment of the global ecosystem, represents a challenging field of innovation in terms of technologies, regulations, business, and social models.

In parallel to the relatively slow progress in the adoption of SD principles and policies by the public and the private sector, a broad range of bottom-up initiatives have been flourishing, supported by the emerging paradigm of open innovation (OI), which has been expanding from the core technological innovation domain—as initially explored by Chesbrough [11]—to a broader extent, including technology, social, and environmental dimensions [12].

In this study, we will highlight how Beuys anticipated, through his artistic life and production, the combination of social open innovation methodologies, which are presently applied to support a contextual transition towards environmental, economic and social sustainability. The sense of urgency, an open and collaborative approach, the search for disruptive solutions to be scaled-up at a global level, the fundamental role of individual engagemen<sup>t</sup> and creativity, and the idea of "shaping" the change, which is presently characterizing the social open innovation arena, can all be found along the artistic path of Beuys from the years of the Free International University to the ultimate 7000 Eichen urban art project in Kassel.
