| Summary: | Over the last three decades, the politicisation of the environment as well as evidence-based policymaking have made matters more complex for both researchers and politicians. However, in spite of an unprecedented array of instruments and reports published under the auspices of the United Nations to define approaches aimed at ensuring sustainable development, high ambitions have not converted into sufficient action to respond to emergencies. What lessons can be drawn? The article attempts to clarify the concepts used to frame humans’ relationships with the natural world at the highest level of international politics. It reviews the framework of action and analyses the contours and implications of the concepts defined by scientists and used in mainstream international politics, in particular “ecosystem services”, “nature-based solutions” and “nature’s contributions to people”. This helps to understand the choices made and their limits, as well as the linkages between ecological and economic systems, all of which may explain why it is difficult to perceive transformative changes in policies. The article invites fresh perspectives in the face of emergency.
|
|---|
