Oteros-Rozas, E., B. Martín-López, T. Daw, E. L. Bohensky, J. Butler, R. Hill, J. Martin-Ortega, A. Quinlan, F. Ravera, I. Ruiz-Mallén, M. Thyresson, J. Mistry, I. Palomo, G. D. Peterson, T. Plieninger, K. A. Waylen, D. Beach, I. C. Bohnet, M. Hamann, J. Hanspach, K. Hubacek, S. Lavorel and S. Vilardy 2015. Participatory scenario planning in place-based social-ecological research: insights and experiences from 23 case studies. Ecology and Society 20(4):32.http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-07985-200432

The global COVID-19 pandemic is affecting people’s work-life balance across the world. For academics, confinement policies enacted by most countries have implied a sudden switch to home-work, a transition to online teaching and mentoring, and an adjustment of research activities. In this article we discuss how the COVID-19 crisis is affecting our profession and how it may change it in the future. We argue that academia must foster a culture of care, help us refocus on what is most important, and redefine excellence in teaching and research. Such re-orientation can make academic practice more respectful and sustainable, now during confinement but also once the pandemic has passed. We conclude providing practical suggestions on how to renew our practice, which inevitably entails re-assessing the social-psychological, political, and environmental implications of academic activities and our value systems.

Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) have the mandate of promoting sustainability through addressing the Agenda 2030. However, how this is being understood and framed in both discourse and practice by HEIs remains an underexplored issue. This article interrogates the concept of sustainability embraced by ten key HEIs networks at global and regional levels while identifying and discussing the main pathways for action displayed. We rely on HEIs networks’ data from available online documents related to the Agenda 2030. “Greening” is the dominant sustainability discourse among the global and many regional HEIs networks, that is, the one that refers to the links between people, planet and profit. Two other discourses are minor and regional, “resilience” and “alternative”. The “alternative” discourse is the only one entailing a critical approach to the Agenda 2030 goals. All networks promote changes in HEIs organizational culture to embed sustainability values in strategic planning, academic and managerial work. Yet there is a need for further engagement with society to readdress HEIs societal role. Deep and critical reflection of the worldviews, contradictions and tensions in the discourses and practices proposed by HEIs networks at global and regional scales is also needed to build common pathways toward sustainability.

The Convention on Biological Diversity is defining the goals that will frame future global biodiversity policy in a context of rapid biodiversity decline and under pressure to make transformative change. Drawing on the work of Indigenous and non-Indigenous scholars, we argue that transformative change requires the foregrounding of Indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ rights and agency in biodiversity policy. We support this argument with four key points. First, Indigenous peoples and local communities hold knowledge essential for setting realistic and effective biodiversity targets that simultaneously improve local livelihoods. Second, Indigenous peoples’ conceptualizations of nature sustain and manifest CBD’s 2050 vision of “Living in harmony with nature.” Third, Indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ participation in biodiversity policy contributes to the recognition of human and Indigenous peoples’ rights. And fourth, engagement in biodiversity policy is essential for Indigenous peoples and local communities to be able to exercise their recognized rights to territories and resources.