Environment strategy: transformative changes for sustainability

6. Policy lever sustainability propositions

A range of policy levers can be assessed according to their transformative potential. National states have limited capacities to effect transformative change, because of their current ensnaring in global political economies, which limit independent policy directions, which we return to in the promising pathways for transformative change section. The IPBES Values Assessment (2022) is focused on biodiversity conservation, but many of its findings and specific policy lever assessments have much wider potential application.

Key findings from the assessment are:

• Economic and political decisions based on a narrow set of market values of nature underpin the global biodiversity crisis. Instrumental values of nature that are assessed or traded through markets, such as those associated with intensive food production, are prioritise, but do not adequately reflect how nature contributes to people’s quality of life.
• Issues of environmental and social justice are neglected in environmental valuation. Most studies of 2010-2020 focus on improving the condition of nature (65%) and 31% on improving people’s quality of life, with only 4% focusing on improving issues of social justice. Stakeholder engagement was found in only 2% of studies and only 1% engaging stakeholders systematically.
• IPBES Values Assessment utilised the life framework of values to show differences between anthropocentric, biocentric and pluricentric perspectives^[15]. The latter – pluricentric perspectives - are not well known in the UK and there is scope to learn from these in the future to guide future thinking and action.

A key source of policy levers, assessed according to their transformative change potential, is that of the IPBES Values Assessment (2022). While focused on biodiversity conservation, many of the proposals have broader resonance. Policy levers can be identified across diverse spheres (economic, cultural, legal, social and cultural, rights based and customary etc) on an evaluative scale of transformative change potential, from maintaining the status quo, through (more) incremental, to (more) transformative.

Four types of policy levers for transformative governance were outlined by the IPBES Values Assessment, 2022, drawing on existing literature. These are:

• Economic and financial policy levers: These include status quo interventions such as REDD+. Consumption taxes, tradeable permits, biodiversity relevant taxes, charges and fees, biodiversity offsets and derivatives trading and commodity futures. More incremental approaches include PES, environmental subsidies and eliminating harmful subsidies, ecological fiscal transfers, ecosystem accounting, and biodiversity financing (including ODA). More transformative levers are alternative economic models and alternative measures of human well-being.
• Legal and regulatory policy instruments: Status quo interventions include EIAs, NBSAPs and other legislation, legislative control over pesticide use, commodity chain regulation, trade bans, legal restrictions on natural resources use. More incremental measures include legally protected areas, locally managed marine areas, marine protected areas and spatial planning, multi-lateral agreements, expanding food market transparency, environmental public interest litigation. More transformative approaches are rights of nature.
• Social and cultural policy instruments: Status quo interventions include corporate social responsibility. More incremental levers include environmental education, certification and labelling, public information instruments, behaviour nudges for reduced consumption, socially responsible investments. More transformative approaches are co-management.
• Rights based and customary instruments: No status quo interventions are noted. More incremental approaches include Other effective area-based mechanisms (OECMs), ILK revitalisation, IPLC-led codes of ethical conduct, and Free, Prior and Informed Consent. More transformative levers are not outlined.

These policy levers are summarised in table 1 below (IPBES 2022, chapter 6, p459).

Overall, status quo and incremental levers lack the capacity to shift economic paradigms and recognise other values of nature. Examples of status quo interventions include biodiversity offsets, commodity chain regulation and certification and labelling. More transformative approaches are suggested: More transformative economic and financial instruments include alternative economic models and alternative measures of well-being. More transformative legal and regulatory policy instruments are rights of nature. Social and cultural policy instruments are co-management. No rights-based and customary instruments are noted. See Tables 1 and 2.

Key change agents highlighted with acronyms:

• IO = Intergovernmental organisations
• NSG = National and subnational governments
• NGO = Non-governmental organisations
• P = Private actors

Shapes refer to transformative (blue triangle) or incremental (orange circle) potential, while the circle options highlight those which rather maintain the status quo

Source: Text reproduced from Intergovernmental Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, Values Assessment (2022)

This report employs the Values Assessment (2022) as a starting point for discussing potential transformative change leverage points, but also explores additional pathways emerging in the literature towards sustainability transformations.