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.