Figure 1. The basic structure of the Nature Futures Framework (a) as during the time of the workshop, as well as three annotated versions (b-d) as presented to the participants to provide additional explanation of the framework to help them understand how it may be interpreted and used. The Nature Futures Framework presents a triangular space (a) with vertices representing three broad perspectives on nature: Nature for Nature (NfN), Nature for Society (NfS) and Nature as Culture (NaC). It accommodates three key value types that are identified by the IPBES guidance on multiple values of nature: relational values, instrumental values and intrinsic values (b). These three values do not map unequivocally to the three perspectives, allowing for their coexistence, but help constitute an interpretation of the altitudes and therewith fundamental differences between the vertices. The altitude through the NaC vertex can be interpreted as distinguishing people as being an integral part of nature (NaC) from a dichotomy where people see themselves primarily as separate from nature (NfS & NfN). The altitude through the NfN vertex may be interpreted as a gradient between the perspective that human intervention is unnatural and undesirable: “Nature can best take care of itself” (NfN) and the perspective that humans contribute to nature, and that management and restoration is principally not a bad thing (NaC & NfS). The altitude through the NfS vertex differentiates a focus on use (NfS) from a non-instrumental perspective (NaC, NfN). We note that besides intrinsic value of nature (NfN), the reciprocal relationship of people and nature may have intrinsic value as well (NaC). Furthermore, we showed (c) how examples of popular concepts used in the contemporary debate around nature and biodiversity conservation may be mapped on the Nature Futures Framework, to explain how the Nature Futures Framework may be used to structure discussions on prefered human-nature relationships, and (d) how the Nature Futures Framework may be populated with a broader set of nature values identified by De Argumentenfabriek (2013). Note that the interpretation, presentation and use of the Nature Futures Framework in this paper is independent from IPBES.

The Three Horizons Framework

The Three Horizons framework is a tool for collaboratively exploring the future. It is a graphical approach where stakeholders are invited to discuss future visions and pathways to achieve them (Curry and Hodgson 2008; Sharpe et al. 2016). It is most applicable in cases of high uncertainty and high agency, in which participants can be creative agents, capable of influencing which future emerges around them. The three horizons present a metaphor to help people consider near, medium, and long term futures. However, beyond just a linear view, the three horizons represent three different ways of relating to the future in the present, thereby welcoming people who hold very different views on the future (e.g. managerial, entrepreneurial, or visionary mindsets). The underlying theory of change looks at how existing dominant patterns and paradigms of the “first horizon” (the world as it is now) could shift to fundamentally new patterns of the “third horizon” (the desired future)—through a period of innovation, contestation and transition in the “second horizon”, thereby scaffolding discussions about transformative change (Sharpe et al. 2016). The Three Horizons approach has been used in a variety of contexts, including pathways for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (Aguiar et al. 2020) and the Life Framework of Values that is also used within IPBES (Harmáčková et al. 2021).

The Sustainable Development Goals

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development are a collection of 17 goals that present “the blueprint to achieve a better and more sustainable future for all”. They were adopted by all United Nations Member States in 2015 and should be achieved by 2030. The SDGs are presented as integrated and indivisible, to prevent the occurrence of tradeoffs that hinder progress across the full set of SDGs. The SDGs are operationalized through a set of 169 associated targets (see sdgs.un.org/goals).

The Nature Futures of NPHD Workshop Process

We applied the participatory futures process during a full day workshop in the dune landscape of the National Park Hollandse Duinen on June 17th 2019. The workshop was collaboratively designed and prepared by a transdisciplinary research team of researchers from diverse backgrounds, including geography, political science, ecology, sustainability science, and the director of the national park. The process was inspired by the workshop process of the Seeds of the Good Anthropocene project as described by Pereira et al. (2017).

Participant selection and preparation

A group of 23 key stake- and knowledge holders of the National Park participated. They were selected and invited by the director of the National Park and represented a diversity of professional backgrounds (See Appendix A for an overview of categories). During the workshop participants were divided into three groups of approximately 7 people. We aimed to maximize diversity within groups, to create fertile ground for discussion and, ultimately, rich, diverse visions of the future. In the invitation to the workshop, the aims and background of the project were explained, and participants were given a brief overview of the workshop phases. We tried to avoid giving too much detailed information to prevent biasing the participants’ views and expectations. The agenda of the workshop as attached to the invitation is presented in Appendix B.

Facilitation

For each of the three groups there was an organizing researcher who facilitated the process, supported by a note taker. Additionally there was one experienced facilitator that oversaw all groups to jump in when necessary and to ensure that the three groups made similar progress. For the interactive group work we prepared A1-sized sheets with depictions of the basic structures of the Nature Futures Framework and the Three Horizons Framework. Participants captured their input on sticky notes that were placed on these diagrams. The facilitators encouraged discussions but did not push for consensus as to allow for plurality (Turnhout et al. 2020). The goal was to let a rich picture emerge that helps stakeholders understand and respect the diversity of perspectives held by the different stakeholders and which can be further unpacked. Participants did not include their names so that the output became a group product. Throughout the process participants were encouraged to cluster sticky notes thematically to facilitate joint sense making. The process facilitators were supported by a graphic facilitator who created illustrations that captured the outputs of the group work throughout the workshop process for all participants to see. The Chatham House Rule was applied to promote a safe environment for creativity and inspiration. The lunch break was combined with a walk through the dune landscape to help participants connect with nature and each other.

Workshop process

The process consisted of six distinct phases. The first phase focused on introductions and ‘setting the scene’ where each participant reflected on their personal relationship with nature. After the first phase the participants split up into their groups. The second phase focused on unpacking and populating the Nature Futures Framework. During the third, fourth and fifth phase we focused on the Three Horizons for visioning and pathway exploration. During the sixth and final phase the groups presented their work and insights to each other followed by a plenary reflection and discussion for joint sense making and identifying possible follow-up steps.

Phase 1: Introductions and setting the scene

The workshop started with an icebreaker exercise that was designed to inspire. In the invitation for the workshop, participants were asked to bring a picture or other type of object that captures or represents a strong personal relationship with nature. During the introductions, participants were asked to introduce themselves based on the explanation of what they brought. The goal was to nurture a positive and nature-oriented mindset among participants and already get a sense of the diversity of relationships held by different people. Also, avoiding introductions based on which organization people represent may help build a safe environment for creativity and out-of-the box thinking. After the introductions the participants split into three parallel groups.

Phase 2: Annotating and unpacking the Nature Futures Framework

Each of the participants was asked to position their picture or object on the triangular space of the Nature Futures Framework and explain to the other group members why they chose the respective place in the triangle. Populating and discussing the triangular space aimed to open-up a plurality of perspectives and create a rich value foundation for the visioning. The facilitators asked the following questions: Why is nature in NPHD important for you? Where in the triangle do you belong, identify yourself with? After everyone had their turn, participants were asked to place additional perspectives using sticky notes, either representing themselves or the organisation they represent. We asked: Why is nature important for the people you represent? Which groups of people may identify themselves with which parts of the triangle? Subsequently, the groups reflected on which areas of the triangle were populated and which areas were still open to check which perspectives might be missing, to discuss multiple values for nature. We asked: Is the entire triangle populated? What are shared and connecting values? Where are the gaps? Are there perspectives missing?

Phase 3: Third Horizon

The third phase focused on the third horizon, that is, a desirable future (a system we want to transform to). The goal was to imagine elements of positive futures for people and nature in NPHD (Fig 3A). The facilitators asked the participants: What does a desirable future of NPHD look like, if we project our (shared) nature values onto the future? To ground the envisioned futures in the present world, we asked: What are pockets of the future in the present, or ‘seeds’ that have the potential to sprout and grow a desirable future. After several rounds of adding elements, we used a prompt to help participants synthesize and cast their diverse imaginations into sets of keywords in the form of newspaper headlines. We asked: Imagine and formulate a future newspaper headline about National Park Hollandse Duinen. What does it say? The headlines provided useful input for the graphic facilitator.