The Nature Dialogue
As a project-based entry point, the Nature Dialogue offers opportunities to learn about different viewpoints, create shared understanding, and integrate multiple values of nature in decision- making. The proposal is based on the multiple values of nature (the concept) and consists of two main elements: the value archetypes (the tool) and the dialogue (the method).
Scope:
Design for Government Course
Duration:
4 months (2024)
Client:
Ministry of Environment and Prime Minister’s Office
Role:
Service designer in a team of four
Tools:
System thinking, Policy design
OVERVIEW
The goal
Biodiversity issues in Finland are currently managed by specific ministries, leading to a fragmented approach and contradictory policies. The Prime Minister's Office aims for a future where ministries evaluate their interconnections on biodiversity during policy development, focusing on multiple dimensions beyond just the economy.
The design questions
1. How is biodiversity understood and what are the motivations, goals, and objectives in the Ministry and in the vertical ecosystem?
2. How does policy coherence on biodiversity look from the agency, institute and service providing entity’s perspective?
3. What kind of structures enable collaboration between different actors in policy planning and implementation?
The solution
We approached the challenge by establishing that for policy coherence to happen, shared understanding of the multiple values of nature is needed. The Nature Dialogue is both a method and a tool to bring people together to build dialogue around multiple values of nature.
RESEARCH
“ What do we know about policy coherence and vertical ecosystem? ”
The vertical ecosystem
The scope of our team has been in exploring opportunities for mainstreaming biodiversity in policy implementation, through building cross-cutting linkages between the vertical actors and the Ministry of Environment. This is what we call the “vertical ecosystem” — the agencies, the institutes, and the service provisioning entities.
Desktop research
Through the desktop research, we started to gain a deeper understanding of the dynamics of policy coherence for biodiversity. The reviewed materials include:
Biodiversity and sustainability policy coherence frameworks and reports.
International, national and local biodiversity strategies and programme.
Governance toolkits and measuring tool.
Research papers related to policy coherence and biodiversity.
Science-policy platforms and panel.
In addition, we studied the agencies, institutes and service providing entities to gain understanding of these varied actors and their roles.
Through the research, we learned that the root causes of nature loss are social (IPBES, 2022) [1], making people to be the key in the system of policy coherence.
Ethnographic research
We conducted 7 remote interviews including stakeholders from a variety of actors whose work is around policy implementation: ELY centres, Metsähallitus, Luke, Syke, Motiva and Sitra. These agencies, institutes, and service providing entities do the crucial work of making policies actually happen. In addition to these vertical actors, we interviewed stakeholders from the Ministry of Environment and from the Prime Minister’s Office to gain a holistic understanding of the public administration system.
Findings
Based on the research, we started to notice emerging patterns during the analysis, conducted with affinity mapping in Miro.
After several rounds of refinement, we arrived at the top four highlighted findings:
[1] Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). (2022). Summary for policymakers of the methodological assessment of the diverse values and valuation of nature of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). In Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research). https:// doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6832427
Finding #1
Biodiversity is both abstract and concrete, leading to varied interpretations based on personal values.
Finding #2
Some structures prevent civil servants from taking action towards policy coherence.
Finding #3
The relationship between the Ministry and its agencies is often seen as one-sided.
Finding #4
Change agents are vital for cross-organizational collaboration, influenced by their personality and values.
SYSTEM ANALYSIS
“ What do these findings mean in the whole policy systems? ”
Systems map
While the system is ever changing, this is our “snapshot”, or interpretation of how the system is looking and functioning at present.
Forest of insights
Based on the findings, these insights formed the important basis of our understanding of the vertical ecosystem.
“Policy coherence demands quite a lot of honesty and not everyone wants the same things at the same time.”
- Interviewee from Metsähallitus
“Everyone has an agenda for climate change and this is why it is moving forward. For biodiversity it is not this case.”
- Interviewee from Ministry of Environment
“I have grown into biodiversity and thought about it all my life. I’m living in a forest by the lake, I’m a nature guy. My hobby is oriented that way."
- Interviewee from ELY
“I have been involved in several policy planning cycles, but am not sure my comments are being taken into consideration”
- Interviewee from ELY
Insight #2
Differing interpretations of biodiversity exist
Collaboration is difficult without shared understanding. This can turn into conflicts which can slow down processes and hinder policy implementation.
Insight #3
Civil servants express strong emotional and personal values towards nature
Biodiversity is a specialized field, and those working in it are often deeply committed to their work for emotional, personal, and societal reasons.
Insight #4
Policy coherence is about people
While people intially are highly motivated, not having their needs met by the system puts a strain on that motivation.
Insight #1
Policy coherence is not the natural state of governance
Within the democratic tradition lies the practice of divisions and silos. Due to that, the process of achieving a coherent policy for biodiversity is challenging.
DESIGN INTERVENTION
“ Where can we start to intervene? "
The chosen intervention
Based on the insights, we initially considered an idea that could create the most impact: facilitating nature and relational connections to reposition the value of nature. We chose this because facilitating political will is crucial for policy coherence to happen, as the existence of administrative structures and knowhow do not guarantee coherence (Prime Minister’s Office Publications, 2009) [2].
[2] Prime Minister’s Office Publications. (2009). Mainstreaming climate policy and policy coherence. A background report for the compiling of the foresight report of Vanhanen’s second government. https:// valtioneuvosto.fi/documents/10616/622958/ J2109_Mainstreaming+climate+policy+and+p olicy+coherence.pdf
Idea refinement
We then conducted four expert interviews in this phase of the project to validate our concept idea, predominantly from the vertical sector. From these validation interviews, we learned about further resources and some practicalities to take into account.
Takeaway #1
A Senior Specialist at the Ministry of the Environment noted their efforts to incorporate the IPBES (2020) report on valuing nature into their policy work. Although they recognized its importance, they struggled to apply these methods practically.
Takeaway #2
There is a need to make this concept actionable. Our research indicated that most biodiversity collaborations occurred within project teams.
Takeaway #3
The concept of role-playing emerged naturally during our interview with an expert at Luke. We had also considered this as a useful tool for facilitating a values-based understanding.
FINAL PROPOSAL
The Nature Dialogue
Spotlight on the multiple values of nature
The Nature Dialogue focuses on recognizing and respecting worldviews, values, and traditional knowledge to develop more comprehensive policies that take into account the various ways in which people perceive and value nature. This, in turn, results in more favorable outcomes for both people and the natural environment.
From misunderstanding based on hidden values to understanding based on visible values
The secret ingredients of The Nature Dialogue
The archetypes bring the concept of multiple values of nature closer to people by relating to human archetypes and nudging them into thinking of and reflecting on their viewpoints of nature and others.
1. The tool: The four archetypes
With the help of the archetypes, role-play extends human capability by exploring how an individual and his character get along and how they interact with one another and other characters.
2. The method: The role-play & dialogue
The Nature Dialogue action plan
Values of The Nature Dialogue
Scalability
The proposal is designed to be scalable and adaptable across different contexts and locations. Its modular structure allows for flexibility in various projects and organizations, enabling broader adoption and impact among stakeholders and ministries.
Shared understanding
The Nature Dialogue fosters a comprehensive understanding of nature's diverse values, leading to informed and inclusive decision-making. This structured process encourages stakeholders to consider ecological, cultural, economic, and social factors, resulting in balanced and sustainable project solutions.
Strengthened relational connections
Role-playing allows participants to better understand and appreciate each other's viewpoints and enhances communication and collaboration among stakeholders. The archetypes serve as effective tools for facilitating discussions, helping to bridge gaps in understanding, and creating a common language for diverse participants.
Effortless application
The adaptable framework complements and enhances current practices without requiring significant changes. Apart from facilitation training, participants can adopt the activity with minimal disruption while the positive benefits are immediate.
The final proposal presentation
KEY LEARNINGS
“ What have I learned? "
Research skills
To be honest, digesting all of this policy systems, biodiversity knowledge in only 4 months was a huge challenge for me considering I haven’t familiarized myself with these topics before 😥. However, as George S. Patton Jr. quoted that pressure makes diamonds 💎, I treated this project as an opportunity to learn something new, something niche (what are the chances you get to work with policy systems, right?) to broaden my knowledge while fostering work ethics in service design projects.
It was nearly 20 mind maps from several biodiversity and sustainability policy coherence frameworks and reports, strategies, governance toolkits and measuring tool, etc; plus ethnographic research in order to arrive at our final proposal. I can’t say that we covered everything to go forward but we managed to draw the most insights from the most key resources.
Systems mapping
Even though I haven’t mapped a system before, I was super excited to take this task in the project. At first it was really messy as you can see from the sketch. The challenge was how to interpret these quick sketches into a comprehensive but simple enough map that showcase the relationship and feedback between actors. It took me an Easter break to complete the first draft of the map (without tension relationship) using these guidelines:
Use Ministry of Environment visual identity (color palette, font)
Highlight key stakeholders in the vertical system
Embracing biodiversity, environment theme within the map
Creating a breatheable map with sufficient spacing
Before
Takeaway #1:
Do not aim for research perfectionism but strive in set timeline and iterate when needed.
After
Takeaway #2:
Following guidelines provides the foundation of the systems map without losing its core identity and purpose.
