Photo: Palle Knudsen/Unsplash

In 2019, IPBES, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, published a landmark report (the “Global Assessment Report”) that assessed the most recent scientific knowledge on the dire state of the planet’s biodiversity and ecosystems. This report stressed that achieving international nature protection goals by 2030 – and fulfilling the 2050 vision outlined in the Global Biodiversity Framework – would require transformative changes in the prevailing development model, socio-ecological dynamics, and energy, food, and production systems. In 2021, the eighth plenary session of IPBES, composed of government representatives from nearly 150 member countries, mandated the Platform with producing a thematic report on “the underlying causes of biodiversity loss and the determinants of transformative change and options for achieving the 2050 Vision for Biodiversity.” IPBES completed this effort in December 2024. At the end of the eleventh plenary session held in Windhoek, Namibia, the three co-chairs of the report presented the Summary for Policy-Makers of the “Transformative Change Report.” The full text of the report will be published in the coming months. The report was prepared over three years by 101 experts in various scientific and humanistic disciplines from 42 countries worldwide. In addition to the Summary for Policy-Makers, the report features five chapters exploring the causes of the current ecological crisis, the potential for transformative change across all sectors, the obstacles that may delay or impede this transformation, and pathways for social, economic, political transformations, as well as individual and collective action to initiate change. During the press conference, the three co-chairs Arun Agrawal, Lucas Garibaldi, and Karen O’Brien highlighted the report’s groundbreaking nature, both within IPBES and the broader science-policy interface. In recent years, science-policy documents – such as the IPCC climate reports and the environmental reports produced by the United Nations Environment Programme – have shifted from merely describing the state of the environment to a somewhat normative aim: fostering active dialogue between the scientific community and policymakers. This approach aims to encourage cooperation in designing policy responses that can address the complexity and scale of current challenges. The IPBES Transformative Change Report is innovative in both its conceptual and empirical approaches, the co-chairs highlighted. Its primary goal is to spark public dialogue on underexplored topics, such as the need to radically rethink every aspect of our lifestyles. The co-chairs noted that the report’s novel assessment methodology, which involved reviewing over 7,000 articles and documents in the scientific literature, as well as mapping and comparing approximately 800 different visions and 400 case studies. The co-chairs expressed hope that this document will play a central role in future negotiations on nature protection and provide practical guidance for achieving international environmental protection goals for 2030 and 2050. The concept of transformative change was first introduced in the 2019 IPBES report on biodiversity and ecosystems, which defined it as “A fundamental, system-wide reorganization across technological, economic and social factors, including paradigms, goals and values.” The 2024 thematic report builds on this definition, delving deeper into it and focusing on the ultimate goal of this radical change: creating “a just and sustainable world.”  

To live up to the scale and depth of the challenges ahead, the authors write in the Summary for Policy-Makers, “a simple system-wide reorganization of constituent elements” that compose today’s socio-ecological systems “is not enough.” Transformative change requires new conceptions and strategies that yield positive outcomes for biodiversity and nature.

The report underscores that this change is “urgent, necessary, and challenging—but possible.”

It is urgent, because further delays on the path to sustainability would be excessively costly, particularly compared to the benefits of acting swiftly while the window of opportunity to avoid crossing critical tipping points remains open.

It is necessary, because previous efforts to halting or reversing the interconnected crises of climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution have failed, with “serious repercussions for the global economy and human well-being.”

It is challenging because past approaches have focused on reforming rather than transforming existing systems. Moreover, funding for conservation and restoration efforts remains woefully insufficient; public and private expenditure on biodiversity conservation amounts to roughly 0.25% of global GDP—an insignificant fraction. It is, therefore, unsurprising that the international community has consistently failed to meet its environmental objectives.

Causes of the crisis, obstacles to change, and principles for achieving it

To understand the origins of the current environmental crisis, it is insufficient to list its proximate causes—which were already outlined in the IPBES 2019 report. Instead, one must delve into its fundamental, systemic causes, which lie at the heart of the Western worldview. This is precisely the focus of the 2024 thematic report, which identifies three primary drivers of the crisis:

• Disconnection from and domination over nature and people;
• Concentration of power and wealth;
• Prioritization of short-term, individual and material gains.

These are not strictly scientific causes but are deeply social in nature. They reflect core issues in a society dominated by economic values and shaped by an anthropocentric, utilitarian approach to the natural world.

In addition to these deep-rooted causes, the report also highlights several barriers that hinder transformative change – many of which require disrupting the status quo. Five main obstacles are identified:

• “Relations of domination over nature and people, especially those that emerged and were propagated in colonial eras and that persist over time;
• Economic and political inequalities;
• Inadequate policies and unfit institutions;
• Unsustainable consumption and production patterns including individual habits and practices;
• Limited access to clean technologies and uncoordinated knowledge and innovation systems.”

“These challenges – the authors point out – operate at multiple scales and reflect views, structures and practices that are complex and power-laden”. Moreover, these obstacles are interconnected and often coexist, making transformative change particularly difficult in many contexts.

Addressing the environmental crisis requires tackling both its root causes and the obstacles that stand in the way of transformation. The team of over 100 experts who contributed to the report four key principles to support this process and guide the transformation of our societies and worldview:

• “Equity and justice;
• Pluralism and inclusion;
• Respectful and reciprocal relationships between humans and nature;
• Adaptive learning and action.”

While these principles are comprehensive, they are not sufficient on their own. Understanding what needs to be done is only part of the challenge; it is equally crucial to understand how to do it. To address the “how,” the report underscores the need for epistemological and methodological pluralism. This involves listening to and including perspectives that radically challenge dominant narratives, such as those of various Indigenous populations. Indigenous cultures and worldviews are especially relevant because of their inherently sustainable approaches to living in harmony with nature.

Changing worldviews

The first and most crucial step toward transformative change must be theoretical in nature. The authors write in the Summary for Policy-Makers:

“Shifting dominant societal views and values to recognize and prioritize human-nature interconnectedness is a powerful strategy for transformative change. These shifts can be facilitated through cultural narratives and by changing dominant social norms, facilitating transformative learning processes, co-creating new knowledge and weaving different knowledge systems, worldviews and values that recognize human-nature interdependencies and ethics of care.”

The dimensions most influenced by a particular worldview—views, structures, and practices—must be the starting point for change. These elements shape societal interactions with nature and therefore require transformation first.

While these theoretical changes are essential, the report also outlines four pragmatic strategies to drive transformative change:

• Recognising biocultural diversity and making significant conservation efforts to protect places that hold both biological value and cultural significance for the communities inhabiting them;
• Driving transformative change in sectors most responsible for biodiversity loss and environmental degradation;
• Transforming economic systems to prioritise nature and social justice over profit and private interests;
• Transforming governance systems to ensure that they are integrated, inclusive, accountable, and adaptive.

To transform views, structures, and practices in ways that sustain and accelerate these changes, it is also crucial to develop “shared positive visions” that inspire action These visions involve narratives that depict:

“desirable future states of people and nature, including Mother Earth, shaped by [alternative] values and worldviews and often include[ing] defined goals and intentional efforts to attain such future states.”

The goal is not to replace one dominant paradigm with another but to embrace a plurality of approaches to understanding and interacting with the natural world. This involves integrating intrinsic, relational, and utilitarian values and applying them contextually.

Whole of government, whole of society

As highlighted in previous IPBES reports, the 2024 report once again highlights a critical condition for successful nature protection and societal transformation: the participation of everyone at every level—from individuals to collectives—regardless of their social position. This “whole-of-government, whole-of-society” approach reinforces the idea that transformative change of this magnitude requires mobilising all available resources and efforts to stand a chance of success. Individual actions are meaningless compared to the concerted efforts of diverse actors working together.

Policy—which has so far been slow and ineffective—businesses, civil society, Indigenous populations, local communities, educators and media, the scientific community, and individual citizens must all strive to enact the desired transformative change within their respective realms.