Diverse values of nature for sustainability

Unai Pascual*, Patricia Balvanera, Christopher B. Anderson, Rebecca Chaplin-Kramer, Michael Christie, David González-Jiménez, Adrian Martin, Christopher M. Raymond, Mette Termansen, Arild Vatn, Simone Athayde, Brigitte Baptiste, David N. Barton, Sander Jacobs, Eszter Kelemen, Ritesh Kumar, Elena Lazos, Tuyeni H. Mwampamba, Barbara Nakangu, Patrick O’FarrellSuneetha M. Subramanian, Meine van Noordwijk, So Eun Ahn, Sacha Amaruzaman, Ariane M. Amin, Paola Arias-Arévalo, Gabriela Arroyo-Robles, Mariana Cantú-Fernández, Antonio J. Castro, Victoria Contreras, Alta De Vos, Nicolas Dendoncker, Stefanie Engel, Uta Eser, Daniel P. Faith, Anna Filyushkina, Houda Ghazi, Erik Gómez-Baggethun, Rachelle K. Gould, Louise Guibrunet, Haripriya Gundimeda, Thomas Hahn, Zuzana V. Harmáčková, Marcello Hernández-Blanco, Andra Ioana Horcea-Milcu, Mariaelena Huambachano, Natalia Lutti Hummel Wicher, Cem İskender Aydın, Mine Islar, Ann Kathrin Koessler, Jasper O. Kenter, Marina Kosmus, Heera Lee, Beria Leimona, Sharachchandra Lele, Dominic Lenzi, Bosco Lliso, Lelani M. Mannetti, Juliana Merçon, Ana Sofía Monroy-Sais, Nibedita Mukherjee, Barbara Muraca, Roldan Muradian, Ranjini Murali, Sara H. Nelson, Gabriel R. Nemogá-Soto, Jonas Ngouhouo-Poufoun, Aidin Niamir, Emmanuel Nuesiri, Tobias O. Nyumba, Begüm Özkaynak, Ignacio Palomo, Ram Pandit, Agnieszka Pawłowska-Mainville, Luciana Porter-Bolland, Martin Quaas, Julian Rode, Ricardo Rozzi, Sonya Sachdeva, Aibek Samakov, Marije Schaafsma, Nadia Sitas, Paula Ungar, Evonne Yiu, Yuki Yoshida, Eglee Zent

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

86 Citations (Scopus)
6 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Twenty-five years since foundational publications on valuing ecosystem services for human well-being1,2, addressing the global biodiversity crisis3 still implies confronting barriers to incorporating nature’s diverse values into decision-making. These barriers include powerful interests supported by current norms and legal rules such as property rights, which determine whose values and which values of nature are acted on. A better understanding of how and why nature is (under)valued is more urgent than ever4. Notwithstanding agreements to incorporate nature’s values into actions, including the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)5 and the UN Sustainable Development Goals6, predominant environmental and development policies still prioritize a subset of values, particularly those linked to markets, and ignore other ways people relate to and benefit from nature7. Arguably, a ‘values crisis’ underpins the intertwined crises of biodiversity loss and climate change8, pandemic emergence9 and socio-environmental injustices10. On the basis of more than 50,000 scientific publications, policy documents and Indigenous and local knowledge sources, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) assessed knowledge on nature’s diverse values and valuation methods to gain insights into their role in policymaking and fuller integration into decisions7,11. Applying this evidence, combinations of values-centred approaches are proposed to improve valuation and address barriers to uptake, ultimately leveraging transformative changes towards more just (that is, fair treatment of people and nature, including inter- and intragenerational equity) and sustainable futures.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)813-823
Number of pages11
JournalNature
Volume620
Issue number7975
Early online date9 Aug 2023
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 24 Aug 2023

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Diverse values of nature for sustainability'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this