Positive psychologists have approached the construct of wellbeing from a different perspective, emphasising life satisfaction \cite{Pavot_2008,Diener_1984}, psychological wellbeing \cite{Ryff_1995,Ryff_2014} and flourishing \cite{Diener_2009,seligman2011,Seligman_2018}. ‘Resilience’ is another associated concept  \cite{association}, which emphasises the process of adapting well in the face of adversity or tragedy, and ‘bouncing back’ from difficult experiences. It is interesting to observe that this psychological definition conflicts with those from other disciplines (e.g. engineering), which highlight ‘stability’ and ‘efficiency’ \cite{Quinlan_2015}. One need only think of a 'stable bridge' or an 'efficient production line' to appreciate the distinction between psychological science and engineering here. Others have introduced the concept of ‘salutogenesis’ \cite{ANTONOVSKY_1996}, a word based on the Latin term ‘salus’ (health, well-being) and the Greek word ‘genesis’ meaning emergence or creation. The salutogenic concept counters the tendency of medicine to focus on ‘pathogenesis’, and emphasises a role for a ‘sense of coherence’ for managing and overcoming stress reflecting feelings of confidence that the environment is comprehensible, manageable and meaningful. However, psychological theories of wellbeing have also been criticised for ignoring wider systemic issues such as loneliness, inequality, environmental degradation and climate change \cite{Carlisle_2009,b2010,Frawley_2015}. These criticisms are being tackled, in part, by developments in conservation and environmental psychology, which explicitly link psychological science to some of these challenges. Developments include for instance, the positive psychology of sustainability \cite{Corral_Verdugo_2015,Corral_Verdugo_2012}, sustainable happiness \cite{2010,O_Brien_2012,obrien2016} and sustainable wellbeing \cite{Kjell_2011}. However, others have argued that the concepts of 'resilience' and 'sustainability' have become so corrupted by neoliberalism, the fossil fuel industry and the Trump administration, that these concepts are no longer useful \cite{albrecht2019}
Here we define the word 'wellbeing' to refer to positive psychological experience, which can be impacted on by positive health behaviours, and is promoted through a sense of connectedness to ourselves as individuals, as well as to the communities and environment within which we live. Our GENIAL model provides and evidence-based and life-course framework for appreciating how wellbeing (or illbeing) may arise. Our paper is organised as follows: Section \ref{605389} briefly reviews our previously proposed model of wellbeing, the GENIAL model. The word GENIAL is an acronym encompassing Genomics, Environment, vagus Nerve, social Interaction, Allostatic regulation, and Longevity, providing a life course framework within which to understand the pathways to health and wellbeing versus premature mortality. GENIAL provides a theoretical context with which to understand key components which determine pathways to health and wellbeing for individuals, for example, psychological experiences, health behaviours, vagal function. However, a plethora of evidence shows that health and wellbeing are influenced by individual factors but by the systems and environment that surround people. Accordingly, Section \ref{806067} expands the focus of the GENIAL model to explicitly encompass individual, community and environmental wellbeing  (see Fig \ref{881013}), highlighting a key role for individual wellbeing as a foundation to build community and environmental wellbeing in line with social ecology theory, and their respective bidirectional impacts on the wellbeing of individuals. Section \ref{170385} provides a succinct summary of our updated model. Section \ref{933427} considers the implications of our updated model (GENIAL 2.0) for people living with chronic conditions, and section \ref{223145} draws some conclusions and provides some examples relating to our own work that we are doing in this regard.