Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40562921›Full record

ReviewNature2025

An aspirational approach to planetary futures.

Erle C Ellis, Yadvinder Malhi, Hannah Ritchie, Jasper Montana, Sandra Díaz, David Obura, Susan Clayton, Melissa Leach, Laura Pereira, Emma Marris and 9 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Erle C EllisDepartment of Geography and Environmental Systems, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, Baltimore, MD, USA. ece@umbc.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-2006-3362
Yadvinder MalhiLeverhulme Centre for Nature Recovery, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3503-4783
Hannah RitchieOxford Martin School, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Jasper MontanaEnvironmental Change Institute, School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3405-2549
Sandra DíazLeverhulme Centre for Nature Recovery, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0012-4612
David OburaCORDIO East Africa, Mombasa, Kenya.ORCID 0000-0003-2256-6649
Susan ClaytonDepartment of Psychology, The College of Wooster, Wooster, OH, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2343-6865
Melissa LeachSocial Anthropology and Cambridge Conservation Initiative (CCI), University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Laura PereiraGlobal Change Institute, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-4996-7234
Emma MarrisIndependent researcher, Portland, OR, USA.
Michael MuthukrishnaDepartment of Psychological and Behavioural Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.
Bojie FuState Key Laboratory of Regional and Urban Ecology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID 0000-0002-9920-9802
Peter FrankopanFaculty of History, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Molly K GraceDepartment of Biology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1978-615X
Samira BarzinEnvironmental Change Institute, School of Geography and the Environment, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Krushil WateneUniversity of Auckland, Auckland Central, Auckland, New Zealand.
Nicholas DepskyHuman Development Report Office (HDRO), United Nations Development Programme, New York, NY, USA.
Josefin PasanenHuman Development Report Office (HDRO), United Nations Development Programme, New York, NY, USA.
Pedro ConceiçãoHuman Development Report Office (HDRO), United Nations Development Programme, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0009-0002-0677-1968

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prevailing frameworks to address planetary environmental challenges tend to focus on setting goals, targets, or boundaries to limit human harm to ecosystems or species. Here we propose an aspirational approach aimed at empowering people to shape a better future for all of life on Earth. We do this by building on the human development approach and its supporting metrics, especially the Human Development Index (HDI), a broadly influential framework that has contributed to decades of human progress by measuring and promoting people's capabilities to lead the lives that they value. Rather than assessing the state or dynamics of the biosphere, we propose the Nature Relationship Index (NRI), which would focus on measuring the progress of nations towards delivering mutually beneficial relationships among people and the rest of the living world in terms that people widely understand and value. Through an open-ended process informed by expert consultation, international concept testing and indicator development, the NRI could help to incentivize progress towards a world in which humanity thrives together with the rest of life on Earth. We explore the challenges and opportunities of developing a robust NRI and invite broader participation to facilitate this development in collaboration with the United Nations Development Programme Human Development Report.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesEarth, PlanetSustainable DevelopmentEcosystemForecastingGoalsHumansUnited Nations

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.