**Background:** The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has set a 2050 vision of humanity 'Living in harmony with nature,' yet few existing scenarios describe desirable futures for both nature and people. Most environmental futures are dominated by dystopian narratives, and even 'sustainability scenarios' often fail to achieve global biodiversity targets. The IPBES Nature Futures Framework (NFF) was developed to address this gap by focusing on the multiple values that underpin human–nature relationships—intrinsic (Nature for Nature), instrumental (Nature for Society), and relational (Nature as Culture/One with Nature). This paper describes a methodological approach to create illustrative narratives that operationalize the NFF, enabling the development of pluralistic, nature-positive scenarios.
**Methods:** In February 2020, the IPBES task force on scenarios and models held a workshop in Shonan Village, Hayama, Japan, with 9 in-person and 24 remote participants. The process involved four steps: (1) reviewing the NFF triangular space and identifying six locations—the three corners and three sides of the triangle; (2) defining scenario skeletons through thematic characterization using 22 themes organized into five overarching categories (Society's governance, Society's functioning, Natural resource management, Habitat and biodiversity, Society's organization); (3) developing illustrative narratives following a standardized one-paragraph-per-category format; and (4) aligning narratives along three gradients representing key debates in transformative change: land sharing vs. land sparing, Half Earth vs. Whole Earth approaches, and green growth vs. post-growth economic paradigms. A seventh central location was not characterized because the extremes and pairwise combinations were clearer for comparative analysis.
**Key Results:** Six scenario skeletons and their corresponding illustrative narratives were produced: (1) Arcology (Nature for Nature)—extreme land sparing with >70% of natural areas strictly protected, people living in dense self-sustaining high-tech cities; (2) Sharing through Sparing (NN–NS)—evidence-based protected areas, intensive but sustainable use of remaining areas, green interconnected market economy; (3) Optimising Nature (Nature for Society)—highly connected world maximizing efficient and sustainable utilization of nature's contributions, green growth, top-down governance; (4) Innovative Commons (NC–NS)—innovative ecological commons, land sharing, decentralized governance, community-based networks, protected areas ≤14% of land; (5) Reciprocal Stewardship (Nature as Culture)—biological and cultural diversity co-conserved, post-growth economy, no protected areas separating people from nature; (6) Dynamic Natures (NN–NC)—polycentric world of nested social–ecological systems, post-growth, adaptive settlements, no dams or large-scale permanent infrastructure. The narratives were positioned along the three gradients: Arcology and Sharing through Sparing clustered near the land sparing/Half Earth extremes, while Innovative Commons and Reciprocal Stewardship aligned with land sharing/Whole Earth approaches. Optimising Nature represented the green growth extreme, with Dynamic Natures and Reciprocal Stewardship at the post-growth end.
**Clinical Implications:** While not a clinical study, this work has significant implications for environmental and public health policy. The narratives provide a structured framework for exploring how different value systems shape pathways to sustainability, which directly affects determinants of health such as food systems, water quality, air pollution, and biodiversity. The paper emphasizes that achieving the CBD's 2050 vision requires transformative change—'fundamental, system-wide reorganisation across technological, economic and social factors, including paradigms, goals and values.' The NFF-based narratives can help policymakers and stakeholders imagine and negotiate which transformed futures are considered just and desirable, broadening policy approaches to be more inclusive of plural values. The authors note that IPBES is currently working on an assessment of transformative change (due in 2024) and that these narratives offer one example of what transformed futures could look like, serving as a starting point for consolidating transformative ideas into actual policies.