Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Defining and operationalizing ‘nature-positive’ — a question of power

Stenseke, Marie ; Olsson, Johanna Alkan LU ; Arvidsson, Susanne LU ; Droste, Nils LU orcid ; Elliot, Viktor ; Gipperth, Lena and Smith, Henrik G. LU orcid (2025) In Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 77.
Abstract

This paper examines how the concept ‘nature-positive’ as a means to enhance biodiversity is defined and used, viewed through the lens of power. Building on a three-dimensional conceptualization of power, we elaborate on i) how ‘nature-positive’ enters and remains on business and policy agendas, ii) different interpretations from both ecological and business perspectives, and iii) the governance of its implementation. Our findings reveal divergent positions, where some argue for a clear and operational definition that makes the concept practical for business and enforceable in legal frameworks. Others adopt a more critical standpoint, viewing it as a boundary object that facilitates processes encouraging positive actions. At the same... (More)

This paper examines how the concept ‘nature-positive’ as a means to enhance biodiversity is defined and used, viewed through the lens of power. Building on a three-dimensional conceptualization of power, we elaborate on i) how ‘nature-positive’ enters and remains on business and policy agendas, ii) different interpretations from both ecological and business perspectives, and iii) the governance of its implementation. Our findings reveal divergent positions, where some argue for a clear and operational definition that makes the concept practical for business and enforceable in legal frameworks. Others adopt a more critical standpoint, viewing it as a boundary object that facilitates processes encouraging positive actions. At the same time, yet other voices regard it as a distraction from addressing the structural drivers of biodiversity loss. We conclude that, from a normative standpoint, an open and ideally balanced debate would empower multiple voices and interpretations. Reflecting on who stands to benefit from different operationalizations is important from a justice perspective. For ‘nature-positive’ to serve as a driver of transformative change, it must be underpinned by a robust toolkit capable of addressing the complexity of biodiversity and its multiple values.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; ; ; ; ; and
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
volume
77
article number
101581
publisher
Elsevier
external identifiers
  • scopus:105018234911
ISSN
1877-3435
DOI
10.1016/j.cosust.2025.101581
language
English
LU publication?
yes
additional info
Publisher Copyright: © 2025 The Author(s)
id
56d93f9a-755c-4bdc-929e-d637c069d629
date added to LUP
2025-10-22 08:30:58
date last changed
2025-10-22 10:17:21
@article{56d93f9a-755c-4bdc-929e-d637c069d629,
  abstract     = {{<p>This paper examines how the concept ‘nature-positive’ as a means to enhance biodiversity is defined and used, viewed through the lens of power. Building on a three-dimensional conceptualization of power, we elaborate on i) how ‘nature-positive’ enters and remains on business and policy agendas, ii) different interpretations from both ecological and business perspectives, and iii) the governance of its implementation. Our findings reveal divergent positions, where some argue for a clear and operational definition that makes the concept practical for business and enforceable in legal frameworks. Others adopt a more critical standpoint, viewing it as a boundary object that facilitates processes encouraging positive actions. At the same time, yet other voices regard it as a distraction from addressing the structural drivers of biodiversity loss. We conclude that, from a normative standpoint, an open and ideally balanced debate would empower multiple voices and interpretations. Reflecting on who stands to benefit from different operationalizations is important from a justice perspective. For ‘nature-positive’ to serve as a driver of transformative change, it must be underpinned by a robust toolkit capable of addressing the complexity of biodiversity and its multiple values.</p>}},
  author       = {{Stenseke, Marie and Olsson, Johanna Alkan and Arvidsson, Susanne and Droste, Nils and Elliot, Viktor and Gipperth, Lena and Smith, Henrik G.}},
  issn         = {{1877-3435}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  publisher    = {{Elsevier}},
  series       = {{Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability}},
  title        = {{Defining and operationalizing ‘nature-positive’ — a question of power}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2025.101581}},
  doi          = {{10.1016/j.cosust.2025.101581}},
  volume       = {{77}},
  year         = {{2025}},
}