Long-term biodiversity monitoring increasingly depends on technologies that can collect, transmit, and store data across diverse and often remote landscapes. Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) offer powerful tools for in-situ environmental monitoring, enabling continuous, real-time tracking of parameters that indicate or affect the ecosystem health at a resolution and frequency that traditional surveys cannot match. However, designing and implementing these systems is complicated and the decision to adopt such systems often hinges on a clear understanding of the technology options, implementation and running costs, and the integration potential of the data into broader biodiversity health frameworks.

This workshop is designed for decision-makers, project managers, and conservation leaders seeking a practical, high-level understanding of wireless sensor networks. Rather than focusing on technical minutiae, we will explore real-world case studies, illustrate how different types of WSNs have been used in various contexts such as ecological restoration in conservation areas. We’ll also be broadly discussing the technical options that would need to be weighed for a given landscape and the approximate total implementation cost.

Participants will gain a high-level understanding of:
• Real world case studies of wireless sensor networks in a biodiversity monitoring context
• Technology trade-offs such as range, power, cost, and environmental robustness
• Total cost of ownership, including deployment, equipment, maintenance, and data management
• How to integrate sensor network data into a larger information system to quantify ecosystem health or impact of ecological restoration works

Total: 180 mins

SIGN-UP LINK: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdHH_dzgYWGbHtqVVCyQWOfwT5VCFJifhaPdGtkHyHf0m8THg/viewform?usp=publish-editor

Animal movement is a fundamental component of biodiversity, shaping how organisms interact with their environment, access resources, avoid threats, and support ecosystem function. In a time of rapid environmental change, movement data—from individual paths to mass migrations—provide timely insights into species’ responses to shifting conditions. Yet, movement remains underrepresented in standardized biodiversity monitoring frameworks, limiting our ability to track spatial and behavioral responses and inform policy. Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) offer a global framework for translating ecological data into actionable indicators. While movement is a named component of the EBV framework, no standardized workflow exists to convert raw movement data into EBVs. This gap hinders integration into global assessments and the ability to capture dynamics across species and taxonomic levels. This workshop will bring together researchers, practitioners, and policy-makers to explore how movement can be better represented within the EBV framework—both as a distinct EBV and as a cross-cutting component informing other EBVs, Essential Ocean Variables, and biodiversity indicators. Participants will assess data from biologgers, radar, acoustics, and camera traps to identify biologically meaningful and technically feasible metrics. Workshop goals include clarifying movement’s role in EBVs, prioritizing key metrics, exploring data harmonization, fostering international dialogue, and supporting pathways to policy-relevant indicators. Expected outcomes include a refined conceptual framework, prioritized metrics and data sources, and recommendations for engaging movement scientists in indicator development.

SIGN-UP LINK: https://forms.cloud.microsoft/e/szRksryvLk

Fungi and other microeukaryotes (e.g., meiofauna) play pivotal roles in terrestrial, freshwater, and marine ecosystems. They contribute to nutrient cycling, decomposition, and food web dynamics (among others), and thereby to numerous ecosystem services. Yet, they are mostly overlooked in biodiversity monitoring programs. To address this oversight we need to i) improve coordination and standardisation of data collection, ii) make use of high-throughput technologies, including ‘omics, iii) establish comprehensive monitoring programs, that encompass a wide range of biomes, taxonomic groups, and spatial scales, iv) enhance data sharing and accessibility, and v) engage with policymakers and other stakeholders to ensure that monitoring efforts are aligned with their needs. One critical step towards these goals will be the development of Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) for Fungi and other microeukaryotes. EBVs are priority variables designed to operationalise how changes in biodiversity across time, space, and biological level are measured and described. They bridge the gap between raw biodiversity data and derived policy-relevant indicators. This workshop aims at bringing together people, spanning a wide range of relevant backgrounds and expertise, to discuss the development and implementation of EBVs for Fungi and other microeukaryotes (180 min). The expected outcomes are i) a White paper on development and implementation of EBVs for Fungi and other microeukaryotes; and ii) the establishment of a novel cross-kingdom network of experts contributing to the development of EBVs for Fungi and other microeukaryotes.

GEOLOCATION APPROACH IN BIODIVERSITY FINANCE
Geospatial tools are increasingly being mobilized across the financial sector, yet they operate at very different scales and with very different logics. On one end, top-down and systemic approaches model nature-economy linkages at the global level, assessing risks, opportunities and climate dependencies across large investment portfolios. On the other, bottom-up, small-scale approaches embed geolocation data directly into local landscape finance, tracing how capital flows through regenerative and collective governance models on the ground.
But how could these two meet? Is it the governance structures behind financial decision-making? Is it the data itself, the way geolocation and landscape-level information gets translated into financial systems? Or is it the workflow that determines how spatial information ultimately directs capital towards biodiversity-positive actions, while identifying and stopping harmful financial flows and negative impact dependencies?
This session presents two different angles on geospatial approaches in finance, from global investment modelling to local landscape finance, and explores where these scales converge and what it would take to make spatial data a true driver of nature-positive capital allocation. Navigating the void in between means understanding how data, actors, and governance collectively shape biodiversity finance. The session will also examine how geospatial approaches can help actors identify the most suitable biodiversity finance mechanism in a given context, how geospatial data can help determine project credibility including additionality, leakage and disclosure, and what constitutes good quality geospatial data in terms of the metrics used, not only the scale at which they are applied.

Schedule:
Opening
Why do geospatial approaches matter for finance? A brief framing of the session's central questions, followed by an audience pulse check: what do participants already know, use, or wonder about geospatial tools in their own financial practice?
Part 1 — Two scales connected (3 × 10 min)
1- Large scale, global investment Nature 3B — Geospatial nature-economy modelling and scenario development to assess nature-related risks, opportunities, impacts and climate links, with a focus on the workflow to link geolocation data to financial data. Stefano Battiston – University of Zurich
2 - Small scale, local investment ReGeNL — Landscape Finance approach for regenerative agriculture: benefits and challenges in financing at local level. Cătălina Papari – Utrecht University
3 - Navigating the void in between - Scrutinising how data, actors, and governance collectively shape biodiversity finance. Covering (1) how geospatial approaches can help actors identify the most suitable biodiversity finance mechanism to use in a given context; (2) how geospatial data can help determine project credibility (e.g., additionality, leakage, disclosure); (3) what constitutes good quality geospatial data (i.e., in terms of the metrics, not only the scale). Benjamin Thompson – Monash University
Part 2 — Breakout Groups (facilitated discussion)
Participants form three groups, each anchored around one of the three presentations. The presenter from each context facilitates their group, with one participant designated as note-taker. The central question guiding all groups: How can geospatial data be coherently integrated into the financial system, from small to large scale — and which actors are needed to drive this system transformation?
Groups are invited to reflect on:
• How do different data types serve the needs of different financial actors?
• What roles and responsibilities do actors across the system play?
• What governance structures enable or constrain integration?
• How can geospatial data help identify the right finance mechanism to use?
• And how do different ecosystem types shape the challenge of scale coherence?

Part 3 — Panel Discussion
A plenary panel drawing on insights from the breakout sessions, bringing together the three presenters and key voices from the audience to synthesize findings and identify pathways forward.

SIGN-UP LINK: https://ee.kobotoolbox.org/x/GnQR1twW

Globally, there is a growing interest from the younger or present future generation, commonly known as the early-career researchers (ECRs), in engaging in SPPIs. This is driven by several factors, including but not limited to the need to contribute to positive societal change, understand policy processes, and career development, among others (Filyushkina et al., 2022). In most regions, such as Africa, the barriers among the Next Gen of Leaders to effectively contribute to and strengthen SPPI include a lack of adequate understanding about involvement channels, limited knowledge of engagement platforms and opportunities, funding constraints, inadequate and/or sometimes inappropriate training, and, many times, low credibility perceptions of emerging capacity by other actors across the SPPI.

Despite the ongoing efforts to address the drivers of change and achieve the biodiversity-climate-society connectivity goal, little attention is placed on bringing together inter-generational think-tanks, policy-actors, and grassroots players from various disciplines and spaces. Africa is experiencing a deficit or lack of deliberate programs that are designed to leverage the inter-generational SPPI research talents and skills, expertise, innovation, and lived experiences to help upend the curves of change and achieve biodiversity-climate-society connectivity. The NextGen of SPPI Leaders on Biodiversity, Climate, and Society seeks to consolidate and transfer, through a regional stock-take, inter-generational SPPI capacity and leadership in Africa. It will co-create, implement, and evaluate SPPI initiatives that seek to address, through fostering partnerships and collaborations, the triple-challenge of biodiversity loss, climate crisis, and the need to meet socio-economic needs.  

SIGN-UP LINK: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CU2TcwNbZo43uieDzZPikz8LSsw2CepMYfUgZ6_jpcs/edit?usp=sharing

Scenarios and models are essential tools to inform actions for effective policy implementation in building ecosystem resilience, mitigating climate change, and enhancing human well-being amidst the unfolding polycrisis. However, whether they can support delivering these actions, depends on their forecasting capabilities to respond to rapid change through the integration of novel systems behaviours and the delivery of policy-relevant output.
In a recent review on the scenario modelling capabilities of biodiversity models, with respect to the Kunming-Montreal Biodiversity Framework and the IPBES Natures Futures Framework, we have identified key challenges and significant potentials for linking model-based scenario approaches to tackle the biodiversity-related polycrisis. These fundamental challenges include (i) the lack of causal understanding of biodiversity change across scales estimated from fragmented data, (ii) the limitations of integration of qualitative values with quantitative projections, (iii) the heterogeneity in semantic and data organization across science and policy agencies and (iv) the absence of established links between biodiversity science and the public and private sectors, including the economy and finance.
In this workshop, we will provide an open space to discuss these challenges from science-policy and biodiversity modelling perspectives. Discussions will be facilitated by panel sessions starting with science-policy agencies of change, presenting multiscale perspectives on how biodiversity modelling and scenarios are utilized in decision making. This session will be complemented by two panel discussions highlighting global to local scientific innovations from the modelling and scenarios sphere introducing collaborative inter- and trans-disciplinary approaches from biodiversity to finance.
The panel discussions will be followed by interactive exercises to foster knowledge exchange and collaboration with the aim to improve biodiversity models and scenario forecasts for their relevance to multiscale policy reporting and decision-making (e.g. CBD NBSAPs and NRs, corporate disclosure) through scientific advancements and science-policy interfaces (e.g. national biodiversity and ecosystem assessment). Breakout groups will discuss topics around (i) enhancing communication and uptake of biodiversity data, models and scenarios among diverse science and policy agencies, (ii) improving biodiversity representation in integrated assessment models and sectoral models, (iii) linking national biodiversity indicators to detection and attribution capabilities of models and scenarios, and (iv) linking biodiversity to natural capital and the economy understanding the different valuing and measuring systems.
The outcomes of this workshop will provide the basis for a roadmap sketching out needs and essential steps addressing the fundamental challenges and explicitly highlighting synergistic priority actions supporting the development and uptake of societally relevant models and scenarios across scientific and policy spaces.

- Background report on model review: https://sciencesearch.defra.gov.uk/ProjectDetails?ProjectId=21822
- Four pre-workshop webinars: https://km-gbf-model-review.github.io/resources/

SIGN-UP LINK: https://forms.gle/TL8YTvDphdtvyDdw7

We are now more than halfway to the 2030 deadline of the Global Biodiversity Framework, and yet global biodiversity indicators continue to decline, and we are not on track to meet its objectives. Progress is further complicated by several challenges, including:

- Partial reporting that highlight positive actions while masking negative impacts.
- Incomplete integration of non-governmental data that could help track real-world progress.
- A lack of tools to inform forward-looking policy choices that prioritise long-term global benefits over short-term national gains.

To begin addressing these challenges, we propose a new initiative: ‘NATURE Impacts’, which aims to assess national progress towards achieving the Global Biodiversity Framework’s mission of halting and reversing nature loss by 2030.

By leveraging existing datasets and engaging a broad range of stakeholders with expertise in national-level conservation contexts, NATURE Impacts will evaluate national commitments and actions contribute to global biodiversity recovery, aiming to provide civil society with the information needed to prioritise actions that can deliver the greatest positive impacts for nature. Over time, the project seeks to develop an evidence-based, dynamic picture of opportunities to accelerate progress and increase ambition for global nature recovery.

This workshop will begin with a short framing session introducing the NATURE Impacts initiative and outlining the framework. This will be followed by two breakout discussions designed to generate insights to inform the next phase of the project.

Participants will be invited to reflect on the following questions:
- What information is needed to prioritise actions in your country for maximum global benefit?
- Is it possible to assess fair allocation of effort between countries, and how might this be done?

Insights generated during the breakout sessions will be used to:
- Identify priority indicators for assessing national contributions to global biodiversity recovery.
- Highlight key data gaps and practical challenges in measuring and monitoring biodiversity status, policy actions, and cross-border environmental impacts.
- Explore approaches for assessing fair allocation of effort between nations, including metrics such as economic capacity, development level, population, and consumption footprints.
- Identify opportunities for pilot applications, partnerships, and further collaboration to advance the NATURE Impacts initiative.
- Identify information to inform a phase of modelling to underpin a policy tool.

Healthy soils are the foundation of sustainable agricultural production. The importance of soil biodiversity for a resource-efficient and stress-resilient agriculture is increasingly being recognized, with initiatives like the EU's Horizon Soil Missions leading the way. However, the best farming practices that enhance soil biodiversity and ecosystem functioning in specific contexts and under future climate conditions – including those targeting aboveground diversification – remain to be determined.

In this 180 min workshop, we aim to bridge this gap by bringing together a diverse group of stakeholders involved in past and current European research projects – including agronomists, biologists, soil scientists, social scientists, agricultural advisors, and policymakers. Together, we will identify the most efficient and context-specific practices for enhancing biodiversity and the functioning of agroecosystems without compromising agricultural production. We plan to invite participants from ongoing and completed EU projects working at the intersection of sustainable agriculture, biodiversity, and soil health, as well as anyone interested in contributing to this important dialogue.

Workshop structure:
1) 4-6 presentations from invited EU projects highlighting key insights and challenges (60 + 10 min break).
2) Group discussions to share and reflect on best practices for biodiversity and ecosystem functioning (50 + 10 min break).
3) Plenary session to synthesize discussions into a draft roadmap for future research and policy (50 min).

Expected outcomes:
1) A strong expert network across biodiversity realms to support future sustainable agroecosystem projects.
2) A roadmap paper consolidating current knowledge and outlining key research gaps and policy priorities.

Novel ecosystems—assemblages that diverge from historical baselines in composition, function, and dynamics—are increasingly widespread, yet their role in biodiversity futures remains contested. Some view novelty as a loss of ecological integrity, while others emphasize its potential to sustain biodiversity, ecosystem functions, and human well-being under accelerating global change. This session seeks to advance conceptual clarity by critically examining what constitutes novelty, how it differs across ecological and cultural contexts, and how these definitions shape scientific, management, and policy responses.

We will explore implications for biodiversity futures, recognising how novel ecosystems both challenge conservation targets based on historical reference conditions and open opportunities for resilience, ecosystem service provision, and adaptive governance. The session will also showcase emerging methods for anticipating novelty, including detection frameworks, scenario modelling, and early-warning indicators that can identify thresholds, forecast trajectories, and assess trade-offs between resisting, guiding, or accepting novelty.

Finally, contributors will examine governance and ethical dimensions of ecological novelty. Central to this discussion are questions of when, and under what conditions, acceptance of novelty is ecologically, socially, or ethically legitimate. By engaging diverse disciplinary and practice-based perspectives, the session will provide critical insights into how we define, anticipate, and govern novel ecosystems, and how these choices shape pathways to biodiversity futures.

In order to achieve transformative futures, it is helpful to contemplate what is meant by ‘transformative change’. IPBES’s (2019: XVIII) definition of transformative change as a “fundamental, system-wide reorganization across technological, economic and social factors, including paradigms, goals and values” is now widely used. At the same time, it is interpreted in many different ways, leading to some uses that are decidedly not transformative. So, what exactly is transformative change? In this 90-minute workshop, we present a tool from our project “Translating transformations: Improving transdisciplinary transformative change initiatives by promoting critical social science literacy” that was designed to answer such a question. Grounded in critical social theory on societal power dynamics, the goal of the tool/workshop is to assist participants with learning how to critically assess (proposed) solutions to societal and environmental problems, and whether they could be considered transformative change. Specifically, participants will learn from the tool, and from each other, to categorize solutions as mitigation, adaption, or transformation. The workshop consists of a brief introduction followed by a dynamic mixture of individual and small group activities. Intended outcomes include improved capacity for differentiating types of change with practical generalized examples, as well as examples from participants’ own fields. Additionally, participants will gain experience with our open access tool, which they may use in their own work/contexts.

BLENDED TEAMS, BLENDED FINANCE: MIXING IT UP FOR BIODIVERSITY IMPACT
Biodiversity loss poses material risks to economies and financial systems, yet private capital toward nature-positive outcomes remains scarce. Blended finance is gaining traction as mechanisms to close this gap, but barriers persist: unclear risk-return profiles, absent measurement standards, and stubborn myths about investability and perceived risks.
The session tackles these head-on. We open by grounding the conversation in academic framing and lived audience experience, before moving into real-world cases from WWF where public, philanthropic, and institutional capital are combined to finance sustainable agriculture/ forestry, and blue economy initiatives. Participants then interrogate these cases directly, probing deal structures, aggregation logic, fiduciary alignment, and what it would take to replicate them at scale, especially from the perspective of large capital providers such as institutional investors and pension funds.
Small group discussions allow deeper exchange across practitioners, NGOs, academics, and investors, before a collective plenary surfaces shared barriers and solution pathways to scale-up private markets. A cross-cutting thread throughout: how blended finance can embed justice, stewardship, and multi-actor collaboration as design principles and not just an afterthought.
The session builds on initiatives including the Financing Biodiversity Project in the Netherlands and WWF Netherlands' blended finance work.
Schedule:
Intro & Academic Overview
The session opens with a quick agenda and room mapping, followed by a short academic framing of blended finance for nature and an interactive true-or-false exercise on common myths.

Blended Finance in Practice
A presentation of WWF that covers how to structure blended finance for nature-positive outcomes and the role of NGOs and institutional investors, illustrated by two real cases.

Introducing Challenges / Questions on the Cases
Participants are introduced to a set of guiding questions on deal structure, investability, and what institutional investors would need to engag, framing the group discussion to follow.

Group Discussions
Small groups work through both cases using the guiding questions, exploring barriers and enablers for institutional investment in blended finance for nature (discussion facilitated with questions by organizers).

Plenary & Close
Groups report back, findings are compared across tables, and the session closes with a short synthesis.

Goal of the workshop:
Over the course of one day, we want to continue shaping our vision of a biodiversity academy aimed at leaders in industry and the financial sector. We want to explore what high-impact biodiversity leadership looks like in practice and how an academy could enable leaders and their organisations identify and manage their biodiversity-related risks and opportunities by creating the necessary mindset, capabilities and behaviours.

Expected outcomes:
1) Participants will co-create a leadership toolkit focused on positive storytelling and biodiversity impact, and reflect on how they might inspire and lead nature-positive change within their own contexts. We will seek to empower attendees to take further steps toward integrating biodiversity leadership into organizational cultures, and foster a peer support network to sustain momentum.
2) For the University of Zurich, we will look to test our emerging thinking on a skeleton for a biodiversity academy aimed at enabling leaders in the private sector. To achieve this objective, we will carefully consider the audience of the workshop and will potentially use it as a first high-profile opportunity to bring together a first cohort of the leaders we are looking to move along on the journey

Date: 14 June 2026, Sunday

Duration: 4 x 90-minute sessions (morning and afternoon), followed by an informal networking dinner

This workshop will present latest developments in nature-related scenarios; connect research, finance and policy; identify scaling opportunities:

• Explore the latest developments in nature-related scenario design and modeling approaches, including new frameworks, indicators, and data integration methods.
• Discuss how nature risk scenarios can inform regional or corporate planning and both micro- and macroprudential risk assessment, supervision, and central bank mandates.
• Identify challenges and opportunities for financial institutions, regulators, and supervisors in integrating biodiversity and ecosystem services risks into their assessment and decision-making processes.
• Highlight the role of international collaboration in advancing science-based, forward-looking tools for managing financial risks from biodiversity loss or ecosystem services degradation.
• Reflect on biodiversity and ecosystem services risk assessment – what data, models, and partnerships are still needed to mainstream nature-related scenarios from the local to the global level.

Speakers: Maria J. Santos (University of Zurich), Benjamin S. Black (ZALF/ ETH Zurich), Fernando Resende (IIS Brazil), Elise Kremer (NGFS, Banque de France).
Chair: Florian Altermatt (University of Zurich and EAWAG).
Conveners: Maud Abdelli (WWF International), Oliver Schelske (Swiss Re Foundation), Eloi Astier (AXA Foundation for Human Progress), Claudio Nuber (EY), Adrien Portafaix (EY)

SIGN-UP LINK: https://forms.gle/N4gTHNuedzjhMa7x9

Biodiversity loss poses profound ecological and governance challenges. Firms depend on ecosystem services such as water, pollination, and soil health, yet these dependencies are often unpriced and under-governed. This 90-minute workshop examines how firms can govern nature to mitigate biodiversity risks and generate strategic and financial value, combining short keynotes with a moderated panel and interactive Q&A.

Walls: Business–nature dependencies, impacts, and risk measurement.
Stroehle: How governance structures and boards integrate biodiversity into firm strategy.
Nerlinger: Valuing biodiversity through financial transmission channels and reporting frameworks.
Sirén: Strategic innovation and nature-positive opportunities for firms.
Teerikangas (moderator): Panel discussion with the keynote speakers on actionable governance mechanisms.

Goals
Demonstrate how biodiversity risks and dependencies can be translated into business-relevant metrics.
Provide governance, finance, and innovation perspectives for embedding biodiversity into corporate decision-making.
Bridge theory and practice by identifying actionable mechanisms for firms, investors, and regulators.

Expected Outcomes
Participants will gain an integrated understanding of how biodiversity can be governed at the firm level to manage risk, drive innovation, and create long-term value while preserving and regenerating nature. The workshop will provide practical insights for executives, boards, and policymakers seeking credible and ethical governance solutions for biodiversity.

Sign-up required: Participation in this workshop requires prior sign-up through the expression of interest form. Registrations will be reviewed by the organisers, and participants will be informed directly regarding their participation. Please go to https://swissnex.org/india/event/interspecies-money-a-concept-to-give-nature-economic-agency/

For as long as nature is held in the charity bucket, it struggles to assert its needs. However, life on Earth depends indisputably on nature to flourish. So, what can we do?
In this workshop, we use the Interspecies Money (IM) concept developed by Jonathan Ledgard and his group as an entry point to discuss how such concepts can give nature economic agency to assert its needs. We will explore how AI, blockchain, digital payment and identification mechanisms, combined with ecological knowledge and data, can enable monetary microtransactions across species to support long-term coexistence.
Using learnings from the 2024-25 groundbreaking IM pilot in Rwanda, centred around the Kwitonda group of mountain gorillas, we will then explore how concepts like IM can be expanded to other species and geographical areas. The last part of the workshop discusses the intersectoral and interdisciplinary connections needed to realise and scale such frameworks with the aim seed new pilots in other regions as an outcome of this workshop
Guided by experts in banking, digital infrastructure, ecology and AI, this workshop aims to engineer intersectoral discussions on neutral ground. To counteract preconceived biases, participants' affiliations will not be revealed until the workshop ends. Participants should walk away with concrete understanding of their potential role in revolutionising nature conservation financing towards a more agile, impactful and stakeholder-driven approach.
To engage with a wider audience, we propose a podcast mini-series, e.g. in SwissRe's Risk REconsidered, discussing opportunities and risks associated with radically changing the way species protection is financially supported.

Duration 3 x 90 minutes

Description:
To bend the curve of biodiversity loss, collective accountability and effective action across users require shared metrics and a clear understanding of how those metrics are built, tested, and applied in practice. This session offers an inside look at developing consensus-based state of nature metrics spanning terrestrial, freshwater, and marine systems.

Grounded in the Nature Positive Initiative’s work, the session will explore how universal indicators are co-developed across scientific, policy, and business communities; where methodological rigor has been maintained; and how simplification and usability have been balanced to enable real-world application at scale. It will also highlight how insights from 2025 business piloting have reshaped metric design and usability.

The session will open with a short film to establish the urgency and narrative context for nature-positive action, followed by a focused panel on putting metrics into practice, highlighting key tensions, trade-offs, and points of convergence. A cross-sector panel featuring representatives from academia, business, finance, and civil society will examine how these metrics function across institutional contexts, including implications for research, disclosure, target-setting, and decision-making.

Goals:
- Understand how consensus on universal nature state metrics is developed and evolving
- Highlight scientific foundations, practical trade-offs, and real-world applications
- Identify pathways to scale adoption and ensure integrity in implementation

Outcomes:
- Increased clarity on the methodological foundations and evolution of nature state metrics
- Practical insights from cross-sector application, including lessons from business piloting
- Clear entry points for engagement in testing, refining, and embedding metrics
- Momentum toward widespread adoption and alignment to drive nature-positive outcomes

Speakers Include:
Rachel Martin, Technical Manager Nature Positive Initiative & Oxford University
Ashley Bang, The Biodiversity Consultancy & Oxford University
Niak Sian Koh, GoNaturePositive!
Professor Maria Santos, University of Zurich & U21 Nature Positive Coalition

How can investors link capital to real biodiversity gains? This workshop defines investable evidence and shows how transparent measurement and data infrastructure make it bankable. We compare regulated compensation systems such as Germany’s eco-points (Ökopunkte/Ökokonto) with other emerging nature credits systems to clarify use cases, incentives, and risks. We then explore how continuous digital monitoring—satellites, drones, field sensors, bioacoustics, eDNA—and disciplined data management turn site-level observations into reproducible indicators, baselines, and performance triggers for contracts and portfolios. Short demos will illustrate (i) provenance-rich nature data management and QA/QC with Svarmi’s DATACT, (ii) high-integrity sensor networks from adjacent environmental markets as a blueprint for robust MRV, and (iii) market enablement via new entrepreneurial players in the nature credits market.
Outcome: a practical checklist investors and project developers can use to assess transparency, traceability, and long-term stewardship in nature deals.

o Specialist environmental courts and tribunals (ECTs) are often seen as key to resolving environmental disputes and enforcing biodiversity protections. But, they may risk reinforcing proceduralism, institutional constraints and include risks including how “knowledge” and scientific expertise is treated, and how "biodiversity" is understood. Shifting legal categories and inconsistencies between statutes, create significant complexity for courts and practitioners. This workshop invites critical and comparative engagement with the role of ECTs as institutions. Drawing on recent scholarship, case-studies and diverse experiences, we ask whether ECTs help move beyond procedural review toward substantive protection and restoration of biodiversity and under what conditions. In particular: How do ECTs influence biodiversity governance, directly (e.g. through rulings) or indirectly (e.g. through deterrence, capacity-building, or procedural design)? When and why do specialist courts outperform generalist forums? When do they risk marginalising broader ecological / justice concerns? What is the role of institutional design, technical expertise/expert witnesses, standing, and access to justice in shaping outcomes? How do ECTs and evolving legal frameworks interact, including recognition of rights of nature, Indigenous legal orders, and earth systems law? Do biodiversity outcomes depend on judicial forums themselves or on broader political, legal, or epistemic conditions? How do historical legal categories and fragmented statutory regimes shape the way biodiversity is defined, protected, or left vulnerable in specialist courts? Are courts appropriate fora for determining contested matters of science and is the precautionary principle working appropriately in those scenarios?

This interactive workshop invites all those interested in exploring the evolving interface between ecosystems, the climate legal regime, and human rights, in light of recent landmark rulings from the International Court of Justice, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, and European Court of Human Rights. These decisions underscore the need to integrate biodiversity and diverse epistemic perspectives into legal reasoning within the “triple environmental crisis,” while simultaneously opening, recalibrating, or foreclosing critical conceptual and legal avenues. They have reinforced some interpretive paths (e.g., privileging human rights), constrained others (e.g., climate law as a lex specialis regime), and left key questions unsolved (e.g., structural drivers of environmental crises). These tensions raise pressing questions about law’s role in enabling biodiversity-positive futures, the legal methodologies required, and the institutional and jurisdictional complexities of implementation.

Designed as an ideas laboratory, the workshop will begin with a concise framing introduction, followed by facilitated group work across thematic clusters, and conclude with a plenary to share insights, receive feedback, and refine draft ideas. Participants will form collaborative groups to co-develop tangible outputs such as blogs, commentaries, podcasts, or research proposals. Immediate outcomes will include draft contributions, while laying the groundwork for longer-term joint projects (e.g., special issues or co-authored articles). By fostering this co-writing session, the workshop seeks to advance the legal understanding of biodiversity and climate justice, while building enduring collaborations that extend beyond the Forum.

Achieving the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework requires immediate and ambitious action across sectors, particularly within financial institutions and corporations. Yet, translating emerging (academic) frameworks into actionable biodiversity targets has proven complex, with many practical questions still unresolved.
This workshop will present and discuss the outcomes of a large-scale action research project conducted between 2024 and 2025 with six leading asset managers and pension funds, alongside organisations such as WWF and the Sustainable Finance Lab. Drawing on candid reflections from a transdisciplinary team spanning ecology, finance, and business sustainability, we will explore how institutions can identify the right information to set informed targets, including assessments of biodiversity impacts, drivers, risks, and opportunities. Participants will engage with key themes such as the types of biodiversity targets financial and corporate actors can adopt, the support structures needed to sustain implementation, and the type of strategic interventions such as engagement for systemic change, and the integration of biodiversity targets within the climate-biodiversity nexus and the exploration of social justice We will have a particular focus on deforestation as a critical test case.
The session aims to foster dialogue among financial actors, NGOs, academics, and practitioners, building on collaborative initiatives such as the Financing Biodiversity Project in the Netherlands. By connecting theory with practice, the workshop seeks to advance collective capacity for setting and operationalising biodiversity-positive financial strategies that are both ambitious, triggering time-bound action and equitable.

SIGN-UP LINK: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSe0-R62bXRtDqOn8j4oSvQpYICOY2tpswVQTKLbUV3rv6CSfA/viewform?usp=dialog

The call for transformative governance in biodiversity conservation is growing. Global biodiversity governance is shifting toward greater scrutiny and support for non-traditional actors and deeper interaction between public and private entities—from the bottom up, rather than focusing solely on legal regimes and state-centric practices.

This “whole-of-society approach” is central to the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). As emphasized in the CBD Action Agenda for Nature and People, not only national governments and international organizations, but also sub-national authorities, businesses, Indigenous peoples, local communities, researchers, and NGOs—so-called “middle-out” actors—are increasingly participating in biodiversity efforts.

Challenges remain: translating this approach into local practice, preventing unintended effects like greenwashing or sectoral leakage, and aligning fragmented institutions. Governance innovation is critical. Without equitable distribution of governance capacity, the whole-of-society approach risks becoming a “nobody’s approach.” Capacity must be built across three domains: enabling rules, shared discourses, and access to essential resources. This fosters a polycentric system grounded in accountability, transparency, justice, equity, and sustainability.

This session explores theoretical debates, conceptual innovations, and empirical insights into how this approach is adopted. We examine the roles of non-state actors, their networks, and agency in co-designing biodiversity solutions. We invite experts to share research, practical experience, and policy insights to help advance the GBF and foster collaboration for change.

How can countries truly measure and protect genetic diversity under the CBD Global Biodiversity Framework? The first step is to identify the list of species that are relevant to monitor over time. This may seem like a straightforward task but in reality, there are many parameters to consider.
Drawing on the EU Biodiversa+ GINAMO project’s co-creation work with European countries, this 90 min workshop invites participants to actively work on and discuss methodologies for species selection and how to ensure a broader, more representative set of species, than those already “on the radar”, such as threatened or legally protected. Species covering varied ecosystems, taxonomic groups, threat levels and life histories must be assessed and monitored for genetic diversity to ensure robust, long-term monitoring portfolios, and to ensure indicators reflect the real state of genetic diversity and can guide future action.
The workshop aims to:
-stimulate critical discussion on species selection strategies for GBF Goal A monitoring, emphasizing inclusivity across relevant spectra,
-explore methodologies for selection criteria,
- explore pathways for integrating broader species sets into national indicator frameworks to improve policy relevance and long-term monitoring viability,
- foster a shared understanding among participants of why representative species selection strengthens countries' use of CBD GBF Goal A.
You’ll leave with:
-new insights on inclusive species selection and its policy relevance,
-a preliminary list of practical criteria for national and regional species portfolio design,
-links to an active network of genetic experts in biodiversity monitoring.
If you want genetic diversity indicators that capture the resilience of life on Earth, this is the workshop to join!

The high seas are essential for achieving the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), especially Target 3 on conserving 30% of the ocean through protected areas and other effective measures. This workshop examines how the UN BBNJ Agreement can help deliver on GBF commitments by addressing two central approaches for areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ): dynamic Area-Based Management Tools (ABMTs), crucial for responding to climate-driven species shifts, and Other Effective Conservation Measures (OECMs), which are often more practical and adaptable than traditional MPAs.

Building on the CBD’s Ecologically or Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs), discussions will explore how these scientific inputs can guide ABMT and OECM development while strengthening synergies across regional and sectoral organizations (e.g. OSPAR, ISA, RFMOs). In doing so, the workshop links directly to GBF Targets 1, 2, and 10 on restoring and safeguarding ecosystems and Target 20 on effective cross-sectoral planning.

The session will bring together scientists, legal experts, and stakeholders to share insights and generate co-developed recommendations. By aligning effective governance tools with GBF objectives, the workshop seeks to advance practical solutions for protecting biodiversity in ABNJ and supports the WBF 2026 theme “Leading Transformation Together.”

We will:
- Explore ABMT design for shifting species under Targets 3 and 10
- Assess OECMs as complementary pathways to deliver Targets 2 and 3
- Identify opportunities for coordination using EBSAs to meet Target 20
- Facilitate dialogue to produce actionable recommendations for GBF-aligned ocean governance

A key goal of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) is to restore 30% of degraded ecosystems globally by 2030. In line with this, the EU Nature Restoration Law (NRL), in force since 2024, requires effective restoration measures on at least 20% of the EU’s land and sea by 2030. To achieve this, Member States are developing the national restoration plans (NRPs) detailing how NRL targets will be met. A first draft, using the EU template, is due by early 2026. After a formal consultation phase, the revised draft must be submitted to the European Commission in September 2026. This process demands coordination across governance levels, stakeholder and public involvement, financial support, and robust monitoring and evaluation systems.

Genomics offers robust, scalable tools to track biodiversity change, yet genomic indicators remain underused in national monitoring and the GBF framework. This workshop tackles the gap between scientific readiness and policy uptake. We will identify where genomics strengthens Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) and Essential Ocean Variables (EOVs), how to align these indicators across borders, and what is needed to make them operational. Particular attention will be given to two key challenges: establishing national baselines for genomic data and translating genomic results into clear, accessible information for society, decision-makers, and politicians.

Duration 2 × 90-min, AM + PM

Aims
Identify the added value of genomics in estimation and use of EBVs and EOVs that goes beyond country borders
Map existing and emerging genomics-based EBVs and EOVs to GBF targets for species, genomics, and ecosystem integrity, supporting targets 2, 3, 4, and 12
Identify technical, legal, capacity, and any other barriers to integrating genomic indicators into national monitoring and reporting
Discuss how countries can establish robust genomic data baselines that support comparable monitoring across borders
Explore how genomic results can be communicated and implemented in an easy-to-understand way for society at large, including policymakers and politicians
Design a roadmap linking (meta)data standards, FAIR repositories, best data management practices, and funding to encourage uptake of genomics so data guides decisions

Format
The workshop will include two short talks given by the organisers, one at the beginning of the first session and one at the beginning of the second session. These will be followed by round-table discussions focused on finding common solutions to two main challenges: establishing genomic data baselines in each country and improving the uptake of genomic results by making them clear, accessible, and useful for society, decision-makers, and politicians. The workshop will conclude with a plenary synthesis using real-time polling.

Expected Outcomes
Workshop report for the GBF monitoring framework secretariat, archived on Zenodo
Draft outline of a perspective article on the important steps to be taken to ensure the uptake of genomics-enabled indicators for biodiversity targets

We welcome participants from research, government, conservation NGOs, business/finance, and IPLCs. No abstract submission is required. We will ensure diversity in gender, career stage, and geographic representation and will advertise the event widely.

Link to register: https://www.cognitoforms.com/ERGAEuropeanReferenceGenomeAtlas/WBFDavosGenomeicsenabledIndicatorsForBiodiversityTargets

Mainstreaming biodiversity: implementing the GBF commitment into your company strategy (and make it work)

By Naturalis Biodiversity Center and Philips

Content of the session
Mainstreaming Biodiversity is a core element in the GBF (see targets 14-23). At the same time, the term is poorly understood, let alone that companies have specific tools, targets, and strategies on it, neither in their own organization nor across their value chain.

This workshop aims to:
1. Explain the term mainstreaming biodiversity (making the extraordinary ordinary) --> Naturalis
2. Explore challenges and opportunities for mainstreaming biodiversity in organizational contexts (e.g. standardizing biodiversity assessments, metrics in different regional contexts --> Philips
3. Reflect how mainstreaming barriers can be overcome with the audience --> both

Biological conservation increasingly depends on biodiversity monitoring systems capable of detecting ecological change across large spatial and temporal scales. Many monitoring initiatives remain fragmented, short-term, or limited to species inventories, constraining their capacity to reveal the mechanisms driving biodiversity responses to global change.

This workshop will be a platform to introduce and co-construct the emerging BIODIVERSITY III initiative of the Belmont Forum, an international partnership of funding agencies, international scientific councils, and regional consortia dedicated to promoting transdisciplinary and transnational research to help understand, mitigate, and adapt to global environmental change. Belmont Forum funding opportunities —known as Collaborative Research Actions (CRAs)— are co-designed with the global research community and societal actors to identify research priorities addressing major sustainability challenges.

The goal of this workshop is to ensure that the biodiversity community (natural sciences, social sciences and humanities, societal actors) is heard in shaping the scientific priorities of the BIODIVERSITY III CRA. Panellists and participants will discuss key needs for biodiversity monitoring in marine ecosystems, including long-term observations, integration across biological levels of organisation, emerging technologies, and connections between biodiversity science, policy, and societal action. Insights from this workshop will help inform the co-design of future international research initiatives supporting biodiversity conservation.

Strengthening the quality of human–nature relationships is increasingly recognized as a
leverage point for addressing biodiversity loss and fostering transformational change
(Riechers et al., 2021). Nature-based recreation (NBR) activities such as hiking, skiing,
birdwatching and many more not only contribute to individual well-being but may also
help cultivate more sustainable human–nature relationships. Beyond their instrumental
benefits for mental and physical health, these activities are thought to foster
environmental care and encourage conservation-oriented behaviour (Soga & Gaston,
2016). They can also be associated with intrinsic and relational values, thus including
the three common value typologies (intrinsic, instrumental and relational values).

In this workshop, we aim to collaboratively explore the values ascribed to nature
through the practice of different NBR activities and connect these to practical
implications. Following introductions to value concepts, methods for studying them,
and the role of NBR through the lens of birdwatching, we will discuss different NBR
activities and examine the values attributed to nature in each. In a second step, we will
foster a dialogue between theory and practice to explore how these insights can inform
the design and management of places where NBR activities take place

SIGN-UP LINK: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSf0tww299IeaY4iCB_sL-9K9DHRmyI5YOmTkZ_LShJgBRflLw/viewform?usp=sharing&ouid=109323683529261027539

Living in harmony with nature is the shared vision of the KM Global Biodiversity Framework for 2050 and is recognised as a central principle in sustainability decisions. Transformative change at all levels, integrating plural values and understanding human-nature interactions, is key to achieving this vision.
We invite the biodiversity community to exchange thoughts and knowledge on a just transformative change that explicitly considers the quality of life of the non-human world. We will reflect on what paradigm shift is needed for individuals and society to truly co-exist with non-humans, with special attention to a group often overlooked in these debates: domesticated non-human animals, whose lives are closely tied to the provision of certain ecosystem and cultural services.
The workshop will open with a lecture on a quality-of-life approach, followed by its operationalisation and a discussion of potential transformative change actions derived from it. This approach assesses the influence of socio-economic indicators and nature’s contributions to people within the land system on both people’s and nature’s quality of life. Participants will be invited to take the perspective of non-humans, addressing their individual and collective needs across material and non-material quality-of-life dimensions and value frames (people and nature living from, in, with, and as each other).
We propose a minimum of 90 min., extendable to 180 min. if the perspectives of other non-human groups are considered. Goals include fostering dialogue on non-human quality of life and improving its integration into assessments and transformative change frameworks. Expected outcomes include exchange, mutual learning, feedback on the approach, and networking for collaboration in this field.

A common approach to transformative change centers on rethinking human-nature relations. While some Transdisciplinary Transformative Change Initiatives (TTCIs) succeed with this, they often stress ‘reconnection’ as a starting point (Abson et al. 2017), assuming that human-human relations are inconsequential and nature is something we can ‘disconnect’ from – contrasting with holistic worldviews. Other TTCIs have engaged Indigenous Peoples’ perspectives but often without addressing how power prioritizes certain forms of knowledge. As a result, these efforts can lead to problematic knowledge extraction or subordination of such perspectives (Latulippe & Klenk 2020).
We aimed to address these issues by interweaving experiences and knowledges of Indigenous and non-Indigenous academics and practitioners; inviting Indigenous Peoples’ intervention in Western lands rather than the reverse; and centering holistic understandings in Swiss nature conservation. Using adaptations of the Three Horizons Framework (3H) and Two-Eyed Seeing, we co-developed protocols, practices, and methods (PPMs) to re-visibilize human-human/-nature connections.
This 3-hour workshop facilitates mutual knowledge exchange by drawing on our experiences and working with participants’ projects. It combines short conceptual inputs with individual and small-group activities. In the first half, participants will work with 3H and Two-Eyed Seeing using one of their own projects. In the second half, they will experiment with our PPMs.
Intended outcomes include improved capacity to work with multiple knowledge systems and to ‘re-visibilize’ relations, supported by practical examples from participants’ projects. Participants will also gain hands-on experience with our methods and tools to apply in their contexts.

Ecosystem restoration has been gaining ground, notably since the launch of the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration in 2019. Several principles and standards exist for restoration. While these may refer to "stakeholder engagement", they remain extremely weak and insufficient to guide practitioners when it comes to truly, effectively and equitably collaborating with Indigenous Peoples and local communities (IP&LCs) to define, agree and collaborate on ecosystem restoration initiatives. Through the IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) we have been exploring good practices for restoration and IP&LCs from planning, through to implementation and securing positive outcomes. In this workshop we will discuss the good practices identified through our work using illustrative case studies.
a) duration: 90 min., b) goal: integration of IP&LCs in large-scale ecosystem restoration practice being promoted under the various global targets; and c) expected outcomes: shared understanding of good practices in IP&LCs and ecosystem restoration.

In recent years, the ongoing climate crisis has powerfully shaped public discourse, activism, and policy priorities worldwide. However, the equally urgent biodiversity crisis receives less attention, despite its relevance for our planet’s future. How can we ensure that addressing climate change does not come at the expense of awareness and action on biodiversity loss? What role do shared narratives play in making biodiversity issues more salient and actionable, and how can these narratives be designed to resonate with diverse audiences?
This participatory workshop aims to foster dialogue and creativity among researchers, practitioners, and communicators from across disciplines. After a brief input on the power of narratives in science communication, participants will divide into small groups to collaboratively develop innovative, integrative narratives on biodiversity communication. Through guided discussion, groups will identify strengths and weaknesses in climate and biodiversity discourses – such as the climate movement’s strong public visibility versus the often overlooked importance of biodiversity – and experiment with ways to use the strengths of one to address the weaknesses of the other.
The 90 min. workshop will also engage participants in critical reflection on the role of emotionality in science communication: What kinds and degrees of emotions are both appropriate and effective in the current situation? How can we strike a balance between mobilizing concern and fostering constructive engagement?
The session will conclude with a plenary exchange of developed narratives and a discussion on how these can be applied in practice to spark new collaborations and strategies for communicating the urgency and relevance of biodiversity change in a warming world.

While addressing biodiversity loss and climate change requires robust scientific knowledge, it also requires effective pathways to ensure that this knowledge is understood, trusted, and acted upon. Yet, the flow of biodiversity and climate knowledge between providers and users remains uneven and fragmented, limiting the potential for transformative change.

This session, convened by the EU-funded RESPIN project (Reinforcing Science-Policy Interfaces for integrated biodiversity and climate knowledge and policies), explores how knowledge circulates between holders (scientists, institutions, IPBES/IPCC experts) and users (policy makers, societal organisations, practitioners). Drawing on social network analysis in seven countries, as well as surveys and interviews with over 700 knowledge holders and users, RESPIN identifies both barriers and opportunities for more inclusive and impactful knowledge uptake.

The session will share comparative insights into how different national and regional contexts shape knowledge networks, including who is central, who is marginalised, and what formats (policy briefs, online data, direct exchange) best support uptake. It will also use the recent IPBES Nexus and Transformative Change Assessments as examples of where knowledge input and uptake are critical for policy impact.

To ensure active engagement, we propose a 90-minute workshop-format session. Short presentations will introduce RESPIN findings, followed by structured discussion in small groups (World Café format).

SIGN-UP LINK: https://tinyurl.com/WBF-CON20

Accelerating growth of biodiversity knowledge, spanning peer-reviewed publications and grey literature, poses challenges for seeking timely and trustworthy evidence for policy, practice, and research. This full-day, invitation-only workshop (with limited seats) will bring together experts to map what exists, what is needed, and how to move forward to improve and develop literature workflows.
The morning will feature short talks offering a snapshot of the state of the art: insights from initiatives, overviews of tools and techniques, and case studies demonstrating applications, providing a shared understanding of strengths, gaps, and persistent challenges in literature identification, screening, and preparation for synthesis.
In the afternoon, participants will work in breakout groups to discuss the needs of different user communities, from science–policy bodies to independent projects, and outline ways forward. Afterwards, we will design the foundations of a new Community of Practice (CoPLit) to streamline and innovate workflows, and explore opportunities for collaboration and funding.
We aim to have established a CoPLit with core members and leaders, identified needs to guide user-focused research and development in biodiversity literature workflows, and defined next steps for joint projects, proposals, and tool development.
We aim to set the stage for coordinated, open, and practical approaches to make literature more accessible, relevant, and available for evidence-based biodiversity research, practice, and policy.
This workshop is part of a curated series of workshops and sessions focusing on biodiversity evidence, which can be identified in the programme by titles beginning with “Biodiversity Evidence:”.

How can diverse perceptions of the term ‘biodiversity’ be reconciled to successfully engage in dialogue? How can scientists, stakeholders, and policymakers effectively collaborate to protect biodiversity? Biodiversity loss remains challenging to communicate, as its complexity allows for multiple interpretations and approaches to mitigation. This often leads to ambiguity in policymaker-stakeholder discussions, highlighting the need for an ongoing adaptation of biodiversity to specific contexts.
In this 90-minute interactive workshop, participants navigate adapting the term ‘biodiversity’ in real-world conservation scenarios. The conveners bring their rich experience as ecologists co-producing research, advocating through NGOs, engaging in policy discussions, and leading previous workshops, to guide fruitful discussions.
Goals: We aim to provide a time and place for reflection, fostering a diverse discussion through sharing personal views, experiences and tools for tackling the challenges of communicating biodiversity topics at the policy level. Participants will reflect upon unique and shared perceptions, and how each may advocate for effective policies. We’ll discuss opportunities and challenges encountered when communicating environmental issues in policy settings.
Outcomes:
Reflection upon the unique perceptions of biodiversity in policy settings, facilitating a starting point for communication based upon mutual understanding and trust.
Increased awareness of challenges professionals face when communicating about biodiversity in policy settings, enabling participants to anticipate and prepare accordingly.
Imbue participants with a sense of agency regarding their ability to overcome communication challenges when communicating in policy settings.

SIGN-UP LINK: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSe-Ih0OJT7FTnGJQuE6ak8vCPBEQABN4LBkDhYrEQzfQl5AkQ/viewform?usp=preview

As environmental crises intensify, conservation must integrate not only ecosystems and disciplines but also cultures, institutions, and epistemologies. Conservation social science plays a pivotal role in navigating the complex intersections of science, policy, and society. Over the past two decades—alongside the rise of the Society for Conservation Biology’s Social Science Working Group (SSWG)—this field has grown into a robust, interdisciplinary community shaping global conservation thought and practice.

This workshop builds on that legacy to explore how conservation social science informs the governance of nature, people, and place across scales and cultures. Presentations will examine stakeholder engagement, co-production of knowledge, social impact assessment, Indigenous knowledge systems, and the integration of equity and well-being into conservation policy. Drawing from the 2025 Trends and Future Directions in Social Science special issue in Conservation Biology, the session will assess the mainstreaming of social science in conservation institutions while addressing persistent challenges: power asymmetries, epistemological tensions, colonial legacies, underrepresentation from the Global South, and unequal access to knowledge.

Looking ahead, we emphasize training and empowering new generations of conservation social scientists who can translate across scientific, policy, and societal domains with cultural competence and ethical sensitivity. Through dialogue on participatory methods, transparency, and collaboration, this symposium invites reflection on how to institutionalize inclusive and reflexive standards. We ask: What could conservation social science look like in 20 years if guided by justice, integrity, and global inclusion?

This 90-minute workshop will explore how Nature-based Solutions (NbS) can link science, policy, and practice to address disaster risk reduction and climate change adaptation, while safeguarding biodiversity and strengthening societal resilience. Drawing on evidence and practical experience from national and regional initiatives, the session will highlight innovative approaches that harness ecosystem services for risk reduction and sustainable development. Case studies from the EU-funded NBSINFRA and ALBATROSS projects will illustrate NbS as living laboratories where scientists, policymakers, practitioners, and communities co-produce knowledge and test solutions in urban and rural contexts. These examples demonstrate how NbS can be adapted to diverse settings while generating transferable lessons for scaling.

The workshop emphasizes co-production of actionable knowledge across rights holders and stakeholders to ensure NbS are inclusive, credible, and effective. Key enabling conditions such as robust scientific frameworks, evidence-based policy design, innovative financing mechanisms, and cross-sectoral partnerships will be discussed to strengthen trust in science and biodiversity-informed decision-making. Goals include sharing science-based insights, comparing rural and urban applications, exploring enabling conditions for scaling NbS, and capturing stakeholder perspectives. Expected outcomes include a synthesis of evidence and lessons, identification of capacity-building priorities, and strengthened science–policy–society dialogue to advance resilient, inclusive societies.

SIGN-UP LINK: https://link.webropol.com/s/wbf2026-con25

Biodiversity loss has entered mainstream awareness, yet meaningful action continues to lag. Since the IPBES (2019) and Dasgupta (2020) reports, biodiversity has gained recognition alongside climate change in business, policy, and public discourse. However, the transition from awareness to action remains slow.

This workshop builds on insights from a transdisciplinary research project BIODIFUL (2021–2025) focused on fostering biodiversity-respectful leadership across society. We define leadership not only through formal roles in business, politics, and beyond, but also as the ability to inspire and mobilize others within personal networks, from communities to workplaces.

We propose that exponential change begins with individuals acting as biodiversity agents in their own spheres of influence. By equipping participants with tools and strategies to educate and activate their networks, we aim to catalyze chain reactions of biodiversity-positive behavior.

In this 180 minute-session we will share practical insights from our project on enabling biodiversity leadership, facilitate co-creation of strategies to empower participants as change agents, and explore how communication can make biodiversity relevant to business, policy, and individual choices. Participants will leave with actionable tools to influence biodiversity-respectful behavior in their networks, and practical ways to communicate biodiversity knowledge into everyday practice.

---The number of participants is limited to 50.---
The session explores the concept of biocultural diversity (BCD), which recognizes the interweaving of cultural and natural processes in landscapes shaped by long- or short-term human–more-than-human interactions, can be translated into actionable practices connecting science, society, and practice. Drawing on real-world cases, we examine how co-creative approaches can strengthen feedback loops between human, non-human actors, & ecology, fostering both BD and cultural vitality. Cases include governance structures, local practices, and innovations. Through the session, we illustrate and envision future pathways where BCD principles guide inclusive planning, decision-making, and stewardship. Our goal is to deepen mutual understanding of interdependence among stakeholders, thereby strengthening trust in science as a partner.
Form: Case presentations (15 min): Three scholars and practitioners from diverse regions present cases demonstrating how BCD frameworks have been implemented, adapted, or envisioned for BD action. Co-creation (45 min): Participants join small groups to co-develop ideas, identify barriers, and propose solutions. Each group works with a large systems map of a case, visualizing actors, relationships, and dynamics to support exploration of complexity and situating ideas within broader systems. Insights (30 min): A plenary discussion synthesizes key takeaways, recommendations, and opportunities for scaling BCD approaches, offering a roadmap for trust, dialogue, and co-produced knowledge in BD governance.
Outcomes: Participants will gain insights into BCD in practice, identify barriers and enablers, co-create solutions, formulate recommendations for policy and planning, and strengthen networks that foster collaboration around biocultural heritage and BD

We need to improve Science-Policy-Practice interfaces for better biodiversity outcomes. The EU has committed to establishing a Science Service for Biodiversity aiming to connect research on biodiversity to policy in a targeted dialogue between scientists, other knowledge holders and policy. Answering knowledge requests from policy forms a core of the Science Service. The goals of this workshop are to introduce the Science Service and the model of answering requests, build capacity for participants to use the step- by- step protocol developed for handling knowledge requests from policy, discuss the challenges of the process and consider scaling possibilities to other than EU contexts. Innovative interaction methods will illustrate the real-world policy challenges and enable participants to reflect on the roles of policy officers, knowledge brokers, practitioners and researchers.

Duration:
• Introduction to EU Science Service for Biodiversity
• Presentation of “Model for answering urgent policy requests to support biodiversity policies”
• Capacity-building in small groups on how science can answer policy requests within short time frames. Group work will consist of going through the steps of the protocol on answering requests including forming thematic expert groups, managing the process and interacting with policy officers within a dialogic model. Groups will be working with real world examples.
• Facilitated summing up, interactive dialogue and reflection on scaling the model for other than EU contexts.

Expected outcomes will include an increased understanding of knowledge for policy support, hands-on experience on handling knowledge requests from policy and conclusion on scaling up possibilities of the model for different contexts.

SIGN-UP LINK: https://forms.gle/yJ2ZxnemcTXCGZds8

Modern societies face a range of complex problems and continuous crises, such as climate change, social inequalities, and – notably – biodiversity loss. The urgency of biodiversity protection calls for greater ambition—in line with the Global Biodiversity Framework’s call for transformative change—which requires strengthened efforts and enhanced collaboration. Over the last decade, the landscape of biodiversity actors has become more diverse, extending beyond national platforms to include civil society groups e.g. from business, finance, citizen science, the arts, and even the World Biodiversity Forum itself. In this workshop, we bring together a diversity of biodiversity platforms and science-policy interfaces to share their experiences in creating and maintaining processes for knowledge synthesis, knowledge assessment and decision support. Using a systematic approach to understanding and categorising exchange formats at the science-policy interface, we explore intervention points, opportunities, and critical windows of action as well as the demands of emerging actors and emphasizes creating spaces for reflection, experimentation, and bridge-building across communities. Furthermore, it examines new forms of collaboration, including heterogeneous or non-traditional coalitions that may open novel pathways for integrating biodiversity research and policy.
The workshop will be structured in three sections:
(1) Creating a Community of Practice (CoP), diverse platforms are invited to shortly present themselves in a speed dating type session.
(2) Establishing a typology of biodiversity platforms and SPIs according to key criteria, including their target groups within policy and society, their roles at various stages of the policy making process, and their specific functions within these processes.
(3) Exploring approaches how to move from “grand challenges” to implementation in practice, focusing on inspiring formats addressing the demands of emerging actors and emphasizing creating spaces for reflection, experimentation, and bridge-building across communities.
This workshop offers a much-needed review and in-depth understanding of science–policy interaction mechanisms, providing practical insights for improving evidence-based collaboration in biodiversity contexts. Outcomes of the workshop will be prepared as a white paper and peer-reviewed publication.

This workshop examines how land tenure—customary and formal—shapes social relationships and biodiversity outcomes in mountain and upland regions. Despite its central role in sustaining ecosystems, tenure is often overlooked in biodiversity policy and practice. Drawing on cases from the Himalayas, Southeast Asia, the Sinai, East Africa, and the European Alps, we explore how secure rights support conservation, ecosystem regeneration, and sustainable livelihoods.

The session will highlight governance systems such as community forest management, collective water management, and incentive-based schemes reversing deforestation in South Asia; customary tribal tenure in arid mountain landscapes, where informal agreements underpin conservation in protected areas; and cadastral systems in the Alps, where historical boundaries shape biodiversity management. Perspectives from land systems research will connect these place-based cases, spanning different scales and timeframes, to broader debates on sustainability transitions. The workshop will also link these experiences to the international science-policy arena, examining how tenure security can be embedded in global frameworks and adaptation strategies.

Duration: 90 mins
Goals: (a) Show how secure land tenure enables biodiversity management; (b) Share cross-regional lessons from diverse upland contexts; (c) Co-develop strategies for integrating tenure into policy and practice.
Expected Outcomes: Participants will deepen understanding of tenure’s role in biodiversity, contribute to a synthesis brief with cross-regional insights, and co-create actionable recommendations for policy and program design. The workshop will also foster connections among researchers, community leaders, and policy actors for future collaboration.

Leaders working to protect our planet face relentless tensions—between conservation and development, local needs and global priorities, urgency and patience. The instinct is to choose one side, but either/or thinking narrows our options and undermines lasting impact. This workshop introduces both/and thinking as a critical leadership skill for navigating the complexity of biodiversity and sustainability challenges. Drawing on cutting-edge research and global case studies, participants will learn how to embrace paradoxes as a source of strategic clarity, innovation, and more regenerative solutions.
Participants will be able to

- Recognize common leadership paradoxes in biodiversity and leadership and why they are intensifying in today’s world.
- Diagnose and escape three vicious cycles of either/or thinking: rabbit holes, wrecking balls, and trench warfare.
- Apply practical tools and case-based frameworks to reframe tensions and lead with greater agility, resilience, and clarity.