Yadvinder Malhi writes:

For much of the modern era, the global narrative of economic development has been imagined as a human story unfolding against a backdrop of nature as an externality to be exploited. Forests, rivers, soils and species appear as resources to be managed, inputs to be optimised, or constraints to be overcome. Human wellbeing advances; nature reduces. In some ways, this narrative has delivered. The condition and welfare of billions of humans have been improved beyond recognition.

Yet this model of progress is breaking. The defining pressures of the 21st century suggest that reducing nature to an exploitable commodity is no longer viable. Climate change, biodiversity loss, disrupted ecosystems and rising natural-disaster risks all point to degradation of the natural world as a systemic risk to human prosperity. My field of ecology teaches us that human lives are not merely supported by nature: they are entangled with it, emerge from it, are enmeshed in it, nourished by it, and dependent on it in countless ways, from local to planetary. Humanity is an intimate part of nature, so development that undermines the living world ultimately undermines itself.

But what if the story of human development were not a trade-off? What if we could craft a narrative of development that did not ignore the interconnections between human prosperity and the flourishing of the rest of the living world? If so, how could we define and measure this expanded notion of development?

These questions motivated a paper we published last year in Nature, led by the US ecologist Erle Ellis, with colleagues from the UN Human Development Report Office, and several other academics in fields ranging from history to anthropology and psychology. We argued that what is missing from contemporary debates is not more evidence of environmental decline (we have plenty of that) but an aspirational narrative of what progress should look like in a human-dominated planet. It called for a reframing of development as flourishing with nature.

To achieve that, we proposed a new ranking of countries called the ‘Nature Relationship Index’, which the UN will report annually, starting in late 2026. We believe flourishing is possible for both us and the nonhuman natural world. Following up on these plans is at the heart of the work that brought us to Hangzhou this week. It’s early days and the final ranking is not ready to share yet, but already our work has thrown up a few key debates and surprises.

Incorporating nature relationship into the measure of development must not mean a retreat from human development, nor a nostalgic return to some past condition that ignores the grinding poverty that has been the reality for most of humanity for most of history. Humans are now a planetary force, and most ecosystems are shaped by human activity. The question is how to direct that influence, and whether it supports long-term mutual flourishing with the natural world, or long-term mutual decline.

Narratives matter here because societies do not act on data alone. Environmental discourse today is rich in warnings and speaks fluently about planetary boundaries, carbon budgets, extinction rates and ecological overshoot. These concepts have an important role, but they function mainly as limits, telling us what must not be exceeded, what must be constrained. Stories of limits can sometimes spark new innovation. But such narratives can be balanced by aspirational stories of what we are trying to achieve, in addition to what we are trying to avoid. [Continue reading…]