This session explores the complex interdependencies between economic systems and ecological integrity, addressing how choices in agriculture, manufacturing, and consumer behaviour directly affect biodiversity outcomes. In line with the conference theme ‘Leading Transformation Together’, we highlight the urgency of confronting the systemic drivers of biodiversity loss by rethinking production and consumption within planetary boundaries, and by co-developing biodiversity-positive futures grounded in justice and equity. We invite papers that foster discussion and share insights on how biodiversity is interconnected with consumption, production, markets and marketing systems. We bring together researchers to explore how consumption and production patterns—across sectors and scales—can either undermine or support biodiversity.
Through interdisciplinary perspectives, we examine both drivers of biodiversity loss and opportunities for transformative practices that align production and consumption with planetary boundaries. We welcome presenters from a variety of backgrounds, for example ecologist or biodiversity researchers, environmental economists, researchers of sustainable business, consumer researchers, policy experts on biodiversity and trade, or indigenous community researchers.
There is limited understanding of what transformative change towards climate and biodiversity goals might entail in the context of food and biomass systems, and the specific role of justice as a leverage point for transformative change. Competing perspectives on justice lead to different preferences for how food and biomass systems are reshaped, and a deeper understanding of those competing perspectives may foster collaborative action. To address this gap, we developed and quantified three contrasting pathways designed to meet biodiversity, climate and human wellbeing goals through transformative change, but picturing contrasted value perspectives about environmental justice and human-nature relationships.
The three developed pathways, Global Green Innovation (GGI), Global Stewardship Towards Co-Existence (GS), and Needs-Based and Nature-Connected Local Stewardship (LS), involve interventions across multiple domains, coherently linked through assumptions about their dominant values, based on the Nature Futures Framework (NFF) and the Applied Justice Taxonomy and Assessment (AJUST) framework. Key intervention domains include food consumption patterns, food waste and loss strategies, cropland and forest management, conservation and restoration, trade, biomass demand, and climate change mitigation. To capture different alternative value perspectives on human-nature relationships and distributive justice, the pathways are differentiated in terms of distribution of efforts across regions and interventions domains.
The qualitative narratives were quantified and analyzed using the Global Biosphere Management Model (GLOBIOM). The GLOBIOM model was expanded to include additional interventions (e.g., more diversified land use practices for cropland and forest management, alternative dietary and food consumption inequality trajectories) and socio-economic and environmental indicators (e.g., human health impact from food consumption, value of production, labor in crop production, multiple driver-response pathways for biodiversity based on the GLOBIO and LC-IMPACT biodiversity models).
We will introduce the new pathways, and analyze the quantitative projections of socio-economic and environmental impacts from 2020 to 2050, with a focus on how the pathways differ in terms of their implied distribution of impacts across supply chain actors (e.g., consumers, livestock vs crop producers) and world regions, and in terms of trade-offs between socio-economic and environmental impacts.
How to cite: Rouet-Pollakis, S., Leclere, D., Kozicka, M., Addo, F., Woodhouse, E., Wong, C., Nowak, L., Kastner, T., Braun, D., Kuipers, K., Aschi, F., Verones, F., Havlik, P., and Frank, S.: Alternative just pathways for transformative change in the food and biomass supply chains towards goals for nature, climate and people , World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-846, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-846, 2026.
Conserving biodiversity and ensuring sustainable and diverse food systems for growing populations are intimately related issues. This relationship is especially complex in countries like Brazil, an important producer and exporter country with highly biodiverse ecosystems. This study explores three decades of Brazilian regional food-biodiversity nexus to answer: what are the trends in biodiversity impact and agricultural diversity in the Brazilian mesoregions between 1990 and 2023? And what is the influence of international trade on those processes? We used the countryside Species-Area Relationship as a biodiversity impact indicator, the Shannon Diversity Index as a crop diversity indicator, and the proportion of cropland with at least 10% natural vegetation in a 1km2 window as a measure of landscape heterogeneity. Approximately half of the mesoregions present an increasing trend in biodiversity loss, with regions in the Amazon-Cerrado transition zone having the greatest rate of loss. There’s a significant decline in crop diversity across the mesoregions between 1990 and 2023. However, for 92% of the mesoregions, no significant linear trend was detected. Landscape heterogeneity within mesoregions significantly changed between 1990 and 2023, decreasing in 53% of them. There is a strong positive correlation between the magnitude of loss in landscape heterogeneity and the magnitude of biodiversity loss. Mesoregions with higher export shares had less crop diversity, less landscape heterogeneity and greater biodiversity impact than mesoregions with lower export shares. Finally, there is a weak negative correlation between the magnitudes of change in export shares and in crop diversity and landscape heterogeneity in the mesoregions, while it is a weak positive correlation for regional species loss: i.e. the greater the increase in the export share of the mesoregions, the greater the increase in their biodiversity impact and the decrease in their agricultural diversity. Our results suggest there is an overall trend towards more biodiversity impacts and less agricultural diversity in the Brazilian mesoregions, and that this trend is influenced by global market dynamics, with export-oriented regions showing stronger associations with losses of bio- and agricultural diversity
How to cite: Rabeschini, G. and kastner, T.: Increased export-oriented production is associated with regional losses in biodiversity and agricultural diversity in Brazil, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-499, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-499, 2026.
Food production ranks among the primary causes of biodiversity decline. While drivers of this decline are well known, the role of food value chains in contributing to efforts to mitigate the ongoing biodiversity decline remains poorly understood. Adopting a qualitative, grounded theory research design, we explore companies’ biodiversity actions across a national food value chain. Empirically, we study 37 companies operating in the Finnish food value chain via interviews aiming to capture the companies’ actions on biodiversity, supplemented by secondary material. Adopting a theoretical sampling strategy, studied companies ranged from primary production to processing, trade and food services.
As our findings, we (1) identify a total of 161 biodiversity actions that companies undertake, summarized into 20 focal actions (2) assess which of these actions bear direct vs. indirect impact on biodiversity, and further, how these actions depend on (3) a company’s position in the value chain, and (4) the function within an organization.
Taking a closer look, the biodiversity actions were either geared at land use or they were undertaken in organizational functions. Land use related biodiversity actions aimed either at sharing productive land with biodiversity or sparing land for biodiversity via efficient land use practices, although improving soil and growing conditions could be seen as relating to both aims. Further, we observed that only actions that took place in primary production and that aimed at sharing land with nature and improving soil, had direct, positive impacts on biodiversity. In contrast, while land sparing strategies were commonly cited by value chain actors, the causal mechanism through which spared land could contribute to biodiversity conservation instead of prompting other forms of intensive land use, remained unidentified. Actions undertaken in organizational functions related to supply chain management, sales and marketing, and corporate-level actions.
In sum, we contribute to the discussion on biodiversity and business by offering an analytical categorization of companies’ direct vs. indirect biodiversity actions across a national food value chain. Paralleling corporate commitments, reporting and measurement, our findings are a call to appreciate what companies and businesses, across sectors, industries and supply chains, actually do toward biodiversity conservation.
How to cite: Lappalainen, O., Kuhmonen, I., Teerikangas, S., Salo, M., and Turunen, M.: How do companies act .. the talk? A closer look at companies' biodiversity actions across a national food value chain, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-433, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-433, 2026.
The accelerating ecological crisis, characterized by climate change, biodiversity loss, and widespread environmental degradation, poses profound challenges for both human well-being and nature (Amel et al., 2017; Dasgupta, 2021; Díaz et al., 2019; IPBES, 2019). These global threats are psychologically complex and often perceived as distant and abstract, which can hinder meaningful engagement and action. This study investigates how futures consciousness, defined as the capacity to envision and prepare for alternative futures (Ahvenharju et al., 2018), relates to environmental risk perception (Lalot et al., 2025; van der Linden, 2015) and well-being (Huta & Ryan, 2010) among consumers. Drawing on insights from futures studies, environmental psychology, and transformative consumer research, the study aims to deepen the understanding of how consumers navigate uncertainty and imagine pathways toward a sustainable life amid global environmental threats.
Using a nationally representative dataset from Finland (N=2000) collected in 2024, the study examines perceptions of two critical drivers of the ecological crisis: climate change and biodiversity loss. Consumers completed measures of futures consciousness, perceived environmental risk, and multidimensional well-being. Structural equation modeling revealed that futures consciousness was positively associated with well-being, suggesting that a forward-looking mindset can foster resilience and hope. At the same time, consumers with higher futures consciousness also reported greater awareness of environmental risks. This heightened risk perception, in turn, was linked to lower well-being, underscoring the psychological complexity of environmental engagement.
Our findings highlight the dual role of futures consciousness. It can inspire proactive responses to biodiversity decline and climate disruption, yet also amplify concern in ways that challenge well-being. By illuminating these dynamics, the study offers a framework for promoting ecological responsibility and psychological resilience. Ultimately, cultivating futures consciousness emerges as a key strategy for safeguarding human well-being and nature, reinforcing the moral imperative to act for the benefit of future generations and the planet.
How to cite: Räikkönen, J., Grénman, M., Ahvenharju, S., and Lalot, F.: Consumers Glimpsing Beyond the Shadows: Connecting Futures Consciousness, Environmental Risk Perception, and Well-being, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-497, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-497, 2026.
The ecological crisis, marked by rapid climate change and declining biodiversity, requires a reevaluation of what constitutes the “good life,” as human overexploitation of natural resources leads to environmental degradation (Amel et al., 2017; Dasgupta, 2021; Díaz et al., 2019; IPBES, 2019). Philosophical discussions like Aristotle’s notion of eudaimonia and the virtue of temperance (i.e., moderation) provide a foundation for redefining a good life and sustainable living, which emphasizes minimizing environmental impact, and our moral responsibilities toward nature and future generations (Díaz et al., 2019).
This qualitative study explores Generation Zs’ perceptions of sustainable living, focusing on the challenges they face in maintaining consumption within planetary boundaries. Integrating insights from environmental psychology, positive psychology, and transformative consumer research, the study seeks to deepen the understanding of how Gen Zs navigate the complexities of sustainable living amidst prevalent overconsumption. Data were gathered from 10 focus group discussions (n=48) in 2025 with Finnish Gen Zs, aged 18 to 30 years. The discussions elucidate Gen Zs’ understanding and interpretations of nature and biodiversity, their experiences of moderation and excess in daily life, and their aspirations for a good life and sustainable future. Thematic content analysis was employed to analyze the data.
Preliminary findings indicate participants’ profound connection with nature, its biodiversity, and the small wonders in their natural surroundings. Nature provides peace, restoration, and meaningful experiences, supporting eudaimonic well-being and a sense of purpose. Participants conceptualize moderation through mindful consumption practices, such as reusing products, favouring second hand shopping, and prioritizing local food. A moderate lifestyle is viewed as a strategy to manage excessive consumption and balancing personal and ecological well-being. Furthermore, the pursuit of a good life is manifested through daily actions, linking individual agency to collective and structural solutions, reinforced through positive encouragement and leading by example.
This study contributes to the broader discourse on sustainability transformation by redefining a good life and sustainable living. It provides valuable insights into how younger generations perceive and implement sustainable practices, potentially informing future policies and initiatives aimed at ecological sustainability.
How to cite: Grénman, M., Varjola, N., Pecoraro, M., Uusitalo, O., and Räikkönen, J.: Gen Z Consumers’ Perceptions of Sustainable Living: Visions for Transformation through Moderation, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-378, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-378, 2026.
Biodiversity loss caused by unsustainable consumption and production threatens planetary wellbeing, yet few studies take a holistic approach linking consumption directly to biodiversity. This conceptual study addresses this gap by examining how Bruno Latour’s New Climatic Regime as a novel analytical lens for understanding the systemic drivers and root causes of biodiversity loss and the cultural foundations of overconsumption. This study examines how research has covered the link between consumption and biodiversity under the tensions of local and global scales, and how Latour’s Terrestrial perspective can deepen understanding of consumption in sustainability transitions.
Drawing on Latour’s critique of the modern division between the local and the global, the analysis highlights how relying on either regime leads to irresolvable contradictions in attempts to address ecological crises. Local framings often fail to capture transboundary challenges, while global framings risk abstracting away from situated ecological relations. Latour’s third, Terrestrial orientation grounded in attachment, interdependence, and recognition of ecological limits opens alternative pathways for reconceptualising consumption within planetary boundaries.
Findings from the conceptual analysis show that only a small body of existing research explicitly addresses the role of systemic and structural issues and cultural and societal restrictions. Studies that do so emphasise the urgency of moving beyond anthropocentric and growth-oriented paradigms. Latour’s framework offers a bridge between cultural and structural analyses of consumption by situating consumer practices within socio-material networks that include human and non-human actors, ecological limits, embeddedness, and multispecies interdependencies.
The research further conceptualises consumers sustainable practices in everyday life as potential “seeds of change” within complex socio-material networks. Individual actions such as adopting sustainable practices or shifting purchasing habits gain impact when connected to supportive infrastructures, organisational actors, technologies, and policy environments. Rather than viewing consumers as powerless agents within large systems, the Terrestrial perspective positions them as nodes within socio-material networks, where their actions contribute the emergent reconfiguration of meanings, material flows and relationships.
Ultimately, the study contributes to interdisciplinary debates on biodiversity-positive futures by advancing a systemic understanding of consumption.
How to cite: Pecoraro, M. and Uusitalo, O.: Rethinking Consumption and Biodiversity: Insights from Latour’s New Climatic Regime , World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-329, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-329, 2026.
The Planetary Health Check 2025 revealed that we have already breached seven of the nine planetary boundaries. Moreover, both biodiversity and nature’s contributions to people continue to decline globally, underscoring the need for urgent transformative action. In this context, the interface between biodiversity, climate, agriculture and food supply and consumption represents a critical common area of action and conflict, within which innovations for societal transformations towards systemic sustainability can be identified. The core question remains: How can we protect biodiversity at local, national, and global scales, while minimising global climate change, and simultaneously achieving resilient agriculture for food security? A systemic perspective on these topics is critical because it can reveal the complex interlinkages between related societal dynamics and biophysical processes, conflicting goals and implementation problems, and help identify coordinated solutions for sustainability transformations. To better understand the role of biodiversity at the interface, we analyse projected changes in biodiversity indicators relevant to the Sustainable Development Goals and the biodiversity targets formulated in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework across future land-use and climate-change scenarios with the purpose of identifying potential future hotspots of biodiversity risk at different scales. We are particularly interested in species associated with agricultural areas, both those that impact and those that are impacted by agricultural land use. We will set the analytical outcomes of these biodiversity analyses into the context of integrated quantifications of different planetary boundaries across spatial scales. Furthermore, we will complement these analyses with advancements in spatially explicit crop yield forecasting, which are crucial for a better understanding of agri-food-environment interactions across scales and can help identify more sustainable agricultural management scenarios. We embed the outcomes of these different analyses within a systemic perspective on sustainability to create systemic knowledge for sustainable, transformative pathways at the interface between biodiversity, climate, agriculture and food.
How to cite: Voskamp, A., Nowak, L., Almeida, B., Halder, K., Stuckas, H., Gerten, D., Kumar Srivastava, A., Jochen Schanze, J., and Fritz, S.: Systemic knowledge for biodiversity, climate, and the agri-food system within planetary boundaries: biodiversity-based approaches, World Biodiversity Forum 2026, Davos, Switzerland, 14–19 Jun 2026, WBF2026-675, https://doi.org/10.5194/wbf2026-675, 2026.
