Human societies face existential challenges on multiple fronts: climate change, biodiversity loss, altered biogeochemical flows, social unrest and injustices. Innovative solutions are needed to shift current trajectories towards a sustainable and just future. Futures thinking enables people to explore and articulate alternative futures and find pathways towards their desired futures. Indigenous people have the potential to make significant contributions to futures thinking because of their distinctive perspectives: the viewpoint of already living in a post-apocalyptic world in the context of colonisation, unique knowledges, worldviews, and perspectives on time, as well as significant contributions to safeguarding biological and cultural diversity. A body of literature is emerging where Indigenous peoples contribute to and lead futures thinking approaches; however, this literature is diffuse and highly diverse in its approaches and terminology. Thus, we take an innovation-seeking and systematic approach to (1) identify patterns and processes in futures thinking with, for, and by Indigenous people; (2) highlight innovative approaches; (3) bring together diverse and sector-specific terminology; and (4) foreground emerging strengths and weaknesses. We identified four framings of Indigenous futures thinking: Adaptation oriented, Participatory, Culturally grounded, and Indigenising. Factors contributing to innovation include strong involvement of Indigenous people in the research team, co-design, and authorship, using Indigenous methodologies, cultural protocols, and explicitly employing decolonisation and trauma-informed approaches. We spotlight the challenges of conducting an exhaustive literature review in an emerging field with inconsistent terminology (e.g., capturing regions where Indigeneity is contested). We also create a living glossary of terms to aid other researchers and communities in using and refining the suite of methods identified here, with the aim of stimulating further innovations in this field.

Future dynamics of biological invasions are highly uncertain because they depend on multiple social-ecological drivers. We used a scenario-based approach to explore potential management options for invasive species in Europe. During two workshops involving a multidisciplinary team of experts, we developed a management strategy arranged into 19 goals relating to policy, research, public awareness, and biosecurity. We conceived solutions for achieving these goals under different plausible future scenarios, and identified four interrelated recommendations around which any long-term strategy for managing invasive species can be structured: (1) a European biosecurity regime, (2) a dedicated communication strategy, (3) data standardization and management tools, and (4) a monitoring and assessment system. Finally, we assessed the feasibility of the management strategy and found substantial differences among scenarios. Collectively, our results indicate that it is time for a new strategy for managing biological invasions in Europe, one that is based on a more integrative approach across socioeconomic sectors and countries.

Biosphere Futures (https://biospherefutures.net/) is a new online database to collect and discover scenario studies from across the world, with a specific focus on scenarios that explicitly incorporate interdependencies between humans and their supporting ecosystems. It provides access to a globally diverse collection of case studies that includes most ecosystems and regions, enabling exploration of the multifaceted ways in which the future might unfold. Together, the case studies illuminate the diversity and plurality of people’s expectations and aspirations for the future. The objective of Biosphere Futures is to promote the use of scenarios for sustainable development of the biosphere and to foster a community of practice around social-ecological scenarios. We do so by facilitating the assessment, synthesis, and comparative analysis of scenario case studies, pointing to relevant resources, and by helping practitioners and researchers to disseminate and showcase their own work. This article begins by outlining the rationale behind the creation of the database, followed by an introduction to its functionality and the criteria employed for selecting case studies. Subsequently, we present a synthesis of the first 100 case studies included in the scenarios database, highlighting emerging patterns and identifying potential avenues for further research. Finally, given that broader utilization and contributions to the database will enhance the achievement of Biosphere Futures’ objectives, we invite the creators of social-ecological scenarios to contribute additional case studies. By expanding the database’s breadth and depth, we can collectively foster a more nuanced understanding of the possible trajectories of our biosphere and enable better decision making for sustainable development.

1. Invasive alien species are one of the major threats to global biodiversity, ecosystem integrity, nature's contributions to people and human health. While scenarios about potential future developments have been available for other global change drivers for quite some time, we largely lack an understanding of how biological invasions might unfold in the future across spatial scales.
2. Based on previous work on global invasion scenarios, we developed a workflow to downscale global scenarios to a regional and policy-relevant context. We applied this workflow at the European scale to create four European scenarios of biological invasions until 2050 that consider different environmental, socio-economic and socio-cultural trajectories, namely the European Alien Species Narratives (Eur-ASNs).
3. We compared the Eur-ASNs with their previously published global counterparts (Global-ASNs), assessing changes in 26 scenario variables. This assessment showed a high consistency between global and European scenarios in the logic and assumptions of the scenario variables. However, several discrepancies in scenario variable trends were detected that could be attributed to scale differences. This suggests that the workflow is able to capture scale-dependent differences across scenarios.
4. We also compared the Global- and Eur-ASNs with the widely used Global and European Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs), a set of scenarios developed in the context of climate change to capture different future socio-economic trends. Our comparison showed considerable divergences in the scenario space occupied by the different scenarios, with overall larger differences between the ASNs and SSPs than across scales (global vs. European) within the scenario initiatives.
5. Given the differences between the ASNs and SSPs, it seems that the SSPs do not adequately capture the scenario space relevant to understanding the complex future of biological invasions. This underlines the importance of developing independent but complementary scenarios focussed on biological invasions. The downscaling workflow we implemented and presented here provides a tool to develop such scenarios across different regions and contexts. This is a major step towards an improved understanding of all major drivers of global change, including biological invasions.

The DMZ’s soil contains millions of landmines. The DMZ’s edges are defined by razor-wire and monitored by sensors. Outside the DMZ, two million soldiers wait and watch one another.

Within the DMZ there has been no farming, no construction, and not even much walking. The DMZ has become an involuntary park. Trees have grown, wetlands flooded, rivers wiggle, and rare creatures roam. Cranes bow their red-crowned heads, and wild boars, pad through a forest that grows over the hidden instruments of pain. The DMZ reminds people that nature continues without us, and offers hope that time can bring life even to places that are full of death.

In September 2023, the EcoPeace Forum was held as part of the DMZ Open Festival in South Korea. This forum was a more academic part of the festival. It had a peace and an ecology stream. In the ecology stream a group of international experts, including me, used the IPBES Nature Future Framework and “Seeds of a Good Anthropocene” scenario methods to imagine a set of positive nature futures for the DMZ.

The Nature Futures Framework identifies that three different types of nature values underlie most discussions of how people would like to live in harmony with nature. These values emphasize values of Nature for Society, Nature for Nature, and Nature for Culture. In the DMZ, we used this framework to think about different ways people could live in harmony with nature.

We did this using methods from the ‘Seeds of a Good Anthropocene’ project. These methodologies are designed to identify and cultivate existing seeds of sustainability to imagine how the growth of different seeds could interact to produce different types of futures. Forum participants selected different sets of seeds and then used them to develop four alternative visions of a DMZ where people could live in harmony with nature. These stories were written to illustrate these visions.

I wrote these stories to provide more detail to these visions, and inspire people to create their own stories of desirable futures. I hope the stories help people imagine and develop new initiatives to create a future where nature and people can live in harmony in Korea.

Integrated assessment models that incorporate biodiversity and ecosystem services could be an important tool for improving our understanding of interconnected social-economic-ecological systems, and for analyzing how policy alternatives can shift future trajectories towards more sustainable development. Despite recent scientific and technological advances, key gaps remain in the scientific community’s ability to deliver information to decision-makers at the pace and scale needed to address sustainability challenges. We identify five research frontiers for integrated social-economic-ecological modeling (primarily focused on terrestrial systems) to incorporate biodiversity and ecosystem services: 1) downscaling impacts of direct and indirect drivers on ecosystems; 2) incorporating feedbacks in ecosystems; 3) linking ecological impacts to human well-being, 4) disaggregating outcomes for distributional equity considerations, and 5) incorporating dynamic feedbacks of ecosystem services on the social-economic system. We discuss progress and challenges along each of these five frontiers and the science-policy linkages needed to move new research and information into action.

Motivation: Foresight methods are increasingly recognized as essential for decision-making in complex environments, particularly within development and research settings. As foresight methods continue to gain prominence for decision-making, their application in these settings grows. Funders and policy-makers can benefit from the experience of transformative foresight practitioners and researchers who are skilled in designing novel ways to envision alternative and diverse development futures. Purpose: The Seeds of Good Anthropocenes (SoGA) initiative has experimented with transformative foresight since its inception in 2016. We position SoGA within the framework of Minkkinen et al. (2019); we present its transformative capacity through participatory visioning; and we explore how foresight methods can shape strategic development options. Approach and methods: We draw lessons from how SoGA, used extensively in various contexts around the world, has introduced experimental transformative foresight to deal with diversity and complexity. We describe the transformative foresight processes in detail. Findings: SoGA exemplifies how transformative foresight can support policy and change initiatives by providing participants, planners, and decision-makers with opportunities to reinforce the collaborative and transformative objectives of their policy and convening practices. Such engagement not only deepens the strategic impact of policies, it also encourages a more inclusive and participatory approach to policy development, aligning with broader goals for sustainable and impactful change.

To halt further destruction of the biosphere, most people and societies around the globe need to transform their relationships with nature. The internationally agreed vision under the Convention of Biological Diversity—Living in harmony with nature—is that “By 2050, biodiversity is valued, conserved, restored and wisely used, maintaining ecosystem services, sustaining a healthy planet and delivering benefits essential for all people”. In this context, there are a variety of debates between alternative perspectives on how to achieve this vision. Yet, scenarios and models that are able to explore these debates in the context of “living in harmony with nature” have not been widely developed. To address this gap, the Nature Futures Framework has been developed to catalyse the development of new scenarios and models that embrace a plurality of perspectives on desirable futures for nature and people. In this paper, members of the IPBES task force on scenarios and models provide an example of how the Nature Futures Framework can be implemented for the development of illustrative narratives representing a diversity of desirable nature futures: information that can be used to assess and develop scenarios and models whilst acknowledging the underpinning value perspectives on nature. Here, the term illustrative reflects the multiple ways in which desired nature futures can be captured by these narratives. In addition, to explore the interdependence between narratives, and therefore their potential to be translated into scenarios and models, the six narratives developed here were assessed around three areas of the transformative change debate, specifically, (1) land sparing vs. land sharing, (2) Half Earth vs. Whole Earth conservation, and (3) green growth vs. post-growth economic development. The paper concludes with an assessment of how the Nature Futures Framework could be used to assist in developing and articulating transformative pathways towards desirable nature futures.

The Anthropocene is characterized by accelerating change and global challenges of increasing complexity. Inspired by what some have called a polycrisis, we explore whether the human trajectory of increasing complexity and influence on the Earth system could become a form of trap for humanity. Based on an adaptation of the evolutionary traps concept to a global human context, we present results from a participatory mapping. We identify 14 traps and categorize them as either global, technology or structural traps. An assessment reveals that 12 traps (86%) could be in an advanced phase of trapping with high risk of hard-to-reverse lock-ins and growing risks of negative impacts on human well-being. Ten traps (71%) currently see growing trends in their indicators. Revealing the systemic nature of the polycrisis, we assess that Anthropocene traps often interact reinforcingly (45% of pairwise interactions), and rarely in a dampening fashion (3%). We end by discussing capacities that will be important for navigating these systemic challenges in pursuit of global sustainability. Doing so, we introduce evolvability as a unifying concept for such research between the sustainability and evolutionary sciences.

Many challenges posed by the current Anthropocene epoch require fundamental transformations to humanity's relationships with the rest of the planet. Achieving such transformations requires that humanity improve its understanding of the current situation and enhance its ability to imagine pathways toward alternative, preferable futures. We review advances in addressing these challenges that employ systematic and structured thinking about multiple possible futures (futures-thinking). Over seven decades, especially the past two, approaches to futures-thinking have helped people from diverse backgrounds reach a common understanding of important issues, underlying causes, and pathways toward optimistic futures. A recent focus has been the stimulation of imagination to produce new options. The roles of futures-thinking in breaking unhelpful social addictions and in conflict resolution are key emerging topics. We summarize cognitive, cultural, and institutional constraints on the societal uptake of futures-thinking, concluding that none are insurmountable once understood.