Catalogue of transformative intervention methods for various enabling players and contexts. Report No D2.4 of the Horizon Europe Project 101082212 – PLANET4B

BETTER DECISIONS FOR BIODIVERSITY AND PEOPLE Horizon Europe Project PLANET4B CATALOGUE OF TRANSFORMATIVE INTERVENTION METHODS FOR VARIOUS ENABLING PLAYERS AND CONTEXTS 1.1.5 2 PLANET4B receives funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101082212. This project is funded by UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) under the UK government’s Horizon Europe funding guarantee. This work has received funding from the Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI). Views and opinions are of those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union, European Commission, the government of the United Kingdom, or the government of Switzerland. The European Union, the European Commission, the government of the United Kingdom, or the government of Switzerland cannot be held responsible for them. iii Key deliverable information Deliverable number D2.4 Deliverable title Catalogue of transformative intervention methods for various enabling players and contexts Task leader Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg (MLU) Corresponding author Alex Franklin Dissemination level Public Status Final Deliverable description A catalogue of transformative intervention methods and synthesis of lessons to which Work Package 3 and 4 activities of the Horizon Europe Project PLANET4B will provide feedback on. Version Status Date Authors/Reviewers 0.1 Draft 17/10/2025 Authors: Alex Franklin (CU); Claire Lyons (CU); Ilkhom Soliev (MLU); Barbara Smith (CU); Lindy Binder (CU) 0.2 Draft 20/10/2025 Reviewer: Agnes Zolyomi (MLU) 0.3 Draft 21/10/2025 Authors: Alex Franklin (CU); Claire Lyons (CU); Ilkhom Soliev (MLU); Barbara Smith (CU); Lindy Binder (CU) 1.0 Final 27/10/20205 Reviewer: Torsten Wähler (MLU) Project acronym PLANET4B Project title understanding Plural values, intersectionality, Leverage points, Attitudes, Norms, behaviour and social lEarning in Transformation for Biodiversity decision making Starting date 01st November 2022 Duration 36 months Website https://planet4b.eu/ Project coordination and scientific lead team Ilkhom Soliev; Alex Franklin; Agnes Zolyomi; Torsten Wähler iv Contributors to action/intervention directly leading to this deliverable Alexander E. Aas-Hanssen (OOF); Jackie Abell (CU); Håkon Aspøy (NINA); David Barton (NINA); Mahsa Bazrafshan (FiBL); Maura Benegiamo (UNIPI); Tuva Beyer Broch (NINA); Lindy Binder (CU); Reidun Bolsø (OOF); Marta Bonetti (UNIPI); Céire Booth (WCMC); Yennie Bredin (NINA); Geraldine Brown (CU); Gianluca Brunori (UNIPI); Maryna Bykova (CGE); Rafal P. Chudy (NINA); Judith Conway (CU); Kármen Czett (ESSRG); Helene Figari (NINA); Andreas Flach (FUG); Roberto Gronda (UNIPI); Sven Grüner (MLU); Vegard Gundersen (NINA); Robert Home (FiBL); Edit Hunyadi (MLU); Johan Hval (OOF); Cristina Y. A. Inoue (RU); Julian Jäger (MLU); Sandra Karner (IFZ); Eszter Kelemen (ESSRG); Berit Köhler (NINA); Mariann Kovács (ESSRG); Mirjam Krauser (FUG); Theresa Kühne (MLU); Julia Leventon (CG); Borbála Lipka (ESSRG); Blanka Louckova (CG); Geeta Ludhra (DC); Subash Ludhra (DC); Milena Marchesi (RU); Vinícius Mendes (RU); Andreas Motschiunig (FUG); Pedro Navarro Gambín (UNIPI); Patricia Ofori-Amanfo (CG); György Pataki (ESSRG); Andreea-Cezara Pletea (TERHA); Ammalia Podlaszewska (CGE); Ghezal Sabir (FiBL); Katharina Santer (FUG); Zafar Saydaliev (CGE); Mirjam Schleiffer (FiBL); Christina Seliger (FUG); Dmitriy Shorin (MLU); Elif Tugba Simsek (CG); David Steinwender (IFZ); Anne Olga Syverhuset (NINA); Lina Tennhardt (FiBL); Simeon Vaňo (CG); Daniele Vergamini (UNIPI); Matteo Villa (UNIPI); Ingrid Visseren-Hamakers (RU); Torsten Wähler (MLU); Agnes Zolyomi (MLU) Recommended citation Franklin, A., Lyons, C., Soliev, I., & Smith, B. (2025). Catalogue of transformative intervention methods for various enabling players and contexts. Report No D2.4 of the Horizon Europe Project 101082212 – PLANET4B. Brussels: European Research Executive Agency. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17250964 Rights and license This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The Creative Commons Attribution license allows re-distribution and re-use of a licensed work on the condition that the creator is appropriately credited. Read more. Acknowledgements The PLANET4B team thank Netfly for graphic design work; Kieren Jones for all line drawings; the volunteer time of the PLANET4B Learning Community and Stakeholder Board members, which was fundamental for the adaptation and validation of the methods upon which the course is based, and also the PLANET4B consortium case study partner leads. v List of abbreviations and acronyms Acronym Definition CG CzechGlobe – Global Change Research Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences CGE Culture Goes Europe CU Coventry University ESSRG Environmental Social Science Research Group FiBL Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FUG Forum Urban Gardening IFZ Interdisciplinary Research Centre for Technology, Work and Culture MLU Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg NINA Norwegian Institute for Nature Research OOF Oslo og Omland Frilfutsråd – Greater Oslo Council for Outdoor Recreation PLANET4B understanding Plural values, intersectionality, Leverage points, Attitudes, Norms, behaviour and social lEarning in Transformation for Biodiversity decision making RU Radboud University UNEP-WCMC UN Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre UNIPI University of Pisa 1 Table of Contents Key deliverable information ..................................................................................... iii Acknowledgements .................................................................................................. iv List of abbreviations and acronyms ......................................................................... v Executive summary ................................................................................................... 2 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 2 2 Methodology: Developing the catalogue of biodiversity engagement methods ..................................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Origins, selection and adaptation of methods for inclusion in the downloadable Catalogue ............................................................................................................................ 3 2.2 Expanding access: online catalogue and digital search tool .................................. 4 3 Results: Catalogue of biodiversity engagement methods .................................. 5 3.1 Presenting the Catalogue of biodiversity engagement methods ............................ 5 3.2 Limitations .................................................................................................................... 6 4 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 6 References .................................................................................................................. 8 Statement on data availability ................................................................................. 10 Statement on ethics ................................................................................................. 10 Annex ........................................................................................................................ 10 2 Executive summary • This report presents a curated catalogue of biodiversity engagement methods designed to support inclusive, reflexive, and transformative biodiversity engagement. • The catalogue features 18 methods for biodiversity engagement, arranged in thematic categories including storytelling, sensory, game-based, behaviour, dialogue and debriefing methods. • The featured methods have been trialled within the PLANET4B project, including across a wide range of social-ecological contexts. • The catalogue is designed to spark curiosity and support initial orientation. It offers clear, accessible overviews of selected methods, encouraging users to explore extended descriptions, resources, and training materials via the carefull courses and resources lighthouse platform: care-full-courses.com. • The catalogue is also available within the care-full courses and resources platform as a digital tool with an expanded, searchable method repository. 1 Introduction The biodiversity crisis represents an existential and wicked challenge, characterised by complex interdependencies, persistent knowledge–action gaps, and entrenched socio-political structures that resist change (IPBES, 2019; IPBES, 2024). Despite growing awareness and policy commitments, responses often fail to disrupt the direct and indirect drivers of biodiversity loss or to foster meaningful public engagement, resulting in solutions that lack cultural resonance, local ownership, and long-term effectiveness (Davila et al., 2021; Barton et al., 2024). This disconnect is compounded by governance approaches that privilege technocratic expertise over experiential, emotional, and relational forms of knowing (Fischer & Riechers, 2019; Franklin, 2022). To address these limitations, a core concern of the PLANET4B project has been to explore the potential of three sets of methods to catalyse more inclusive, reflexive, and transformative forms of biodiversity decision-making: creative and arts-based, deliberative, and behavioural methods (including experiential games, framing and heuristics testing). Applied within PLANET4B as forms of research-based intervention, these methods sets have been developed and adapted to act not merely tools for understanding, but rather to serve equally as action-oriented forms of intentional practice aimed at unsettling dominant paradigms, legitimising diverse knowledge systems, and contributing to systemic change. Many of the engagement methods explored within PLANET4B have piloted across the project’s 11 case studies. This provided an opportunity to test the methods across a diverse range of settings – including five place-based and six sectoral – each offering distinct contextual challenges and opportunities. Central to this process was collaboration with a wide array of stakeholders and research participants, whose contributions shaped the adaptation and application of the methods. This deliverable presents a curated catalogue of transformative engagement methods drawn from this applied work. 3 The catalogue is intended for a broad audience of key enabling players (including policymakers, civil society organisations and private sector actors). It is available in two complementary formats: a downloadable PDF version (see Annex) showcasing 18 methods and an expanded online search tool (featuring 50+ methods), hosted on the PLANET4B Care-full Courses and Resources digital platform (Deliverable 5.9). Together, these formats provide a structured entry point and gradual progression into more sustained engagement with the creative and participatory approaches explored across the project’s case studies and beyond. This progression supports the inclusive uptake of engagement methods by a full range of actors, in ways that respond to the biodiversity crisis while remaining sensitive to intersectional dynamics and attuned to the plurality of values, attitudes, and norms shaping decision-making. The remainder of this report is structured as follows: Section 2 outlines the methodology underpinning the development of the catalogue, including the selection, adaptation, and validation of methods across PLANET4B’s case studies. Section 3 presents an overview of the catalogue itself, organised into five thematic categories, and highlights its conceptual framing and pedagogical orientation. The full PDF version of the catalogue – featuring 18 curated methods – is included in Annex 1, while the Results section serves primarily as a navigational guide to its contents. Section 4 concludes with reflections on the catalogue’s intended use and future development. 2 Methodology: Developing the catalogue of biodiversity engagement methods 2.1 Origins, selection and adaptation of methods for inclusion in the downloadable Catalogue The methodological foundation of the catalogue of transformative methods is derived in Work Packages (WP) 2 and 3 of the PLANET4B project. Whilst WP2 was focused towards the identification, adapting, development and provision of consortium training in the use of the three main methods sets (creative and arts-based, deliberative, and behavioural methods), WP3 co-ordinated the case study based empirical research. Meanwhile, the theoretical foundation for the catalogue was provided by WP1, including especially the review of behavioural theories (Deliverable 1.2, see also Deliverable 1.7) and the close attention afforded to intersectionality and researcher positionality (see Deliverable 1.3). The methods featured within the catalogue predominately originate from the long-list of 100 methods (Deliverable 2.1), of which a sub-set of 28 methods were then selected for adaptation and testing within the individual case studies (Deliverable 2.2). The 11 case studies provided a rich and extended opportunity to explore how transdisciplinary research-based intervention can support and advance pro-biodiversity behaviour and decision-making across interpersonal, intrapersonal, and institutional scales. Core to this was a study design which centred the empirical work around the participation of learning communities (within the 5 place-based case studies) and stakeholder advisory boards (within the 6 sector-based case studies) (Deliverable 3.1). Over a 12–18 month period, these transdisciplinary communities of researchers and expert volunteer participants, contributed to the review and testing of sub-set of 28 methods. The results produced grounded insights into their practical application, contextual relevance and 4 transformative potential for fostering inclusive and transformative change in real-world settings (see especially, Deliverable 3.3). The catalogue draws directly from this body of work, ensuring that the methods included are not abstract or idealised, but have been tested in real-world settings and informed by iterative feedback from a diversity of societal groups. The featured methods reflect a balance between method type (across the three main PLANET4B method sets) and practical applicability, including suitability for different settings and user groups, and consideration of varying budgets, timeframes, and facilitation resources. The final selection was also informed by criteria such as accessibility, adaptability, emotional and cognitive engagement potential, and capacity to act at different leverage points within biodiversity decision-making systems (Soliev et al., 2025; Leventon et al., 2021; Deliverable 2.2). There is, however, an overall bias towards methods targeting higher leverage points – such as shifting mindsets, worldviews, and underlying paradigms (Meadows, 1999; Abson et al., 2017; Soliev et al., 2025). This emphasis reflects the project's broader commitment to engaging with the complexity of biodiversity decision-making by recognising intersectional experiences, embracing diverse knowledge systems, and attending to the plurality of values and norms that shape human–nature relationships. In doing so, the selected methods contribute to more inclusive and transformative engagement practices capable of challenging dominant paradigms and supporting systemic change. The catalogue is intended for a diverse range of actors with the potential to advance biodiversity considerations in decision-making, including policy professionals, civil society organisations, business sustainability champions, and researchers. It has been designed to support both newcomers to creative engagement methods and experienced facilitators seeking to expand their methodological repertoire. Produced in two formats – an online search tool featuring an extended database of 50+ methods, and a downloadable version showcasing a curated subset of 18 methods – the catalogue aims to foster curiosity and support ethical and context-sensitive application. It is particularly relevant for those working at the interface of policy, practice, and public engagement, with a desire to contribute to achieving more just and transformative biodiversity outcomes. 2.2 Expanding access: online catalogue and digital search tool The catalogue has been designed to be informative both as a stand-alone resource and as a complement to the PLANET4B Care-full Courses and Resources platform: care-full-courses.com (Deliverable 5.9). In addition to hosting the full digital catalogue of methods (together with interactive search tool filters), the digital platform contains the PLANET4B Educational Courses, and a range of additional curated project resources (for a detailed description of the full contents and structure of the platform see Deliverable 5.9). The downloadable PDF version of the catalogue thus serves as an entry point to the digital platform. Its graphic design and concise format are intended to spark curiosity and support initial orientation, particularly for users unfamiliar with participatory approaches. In parallel, the method summaries contained with the digital version of the catalogue are cross-referenced with the corresponding educational course modules (each specifically targeted towards a key enabling player), allowing users to move Catalogue of Biodiversity Engagement Methods Foreword Have you ever wondered how to engage colleagues, family members, your local community, or pupils in thinking differently about nature? Or how to spark more meaningful action for biodiversity through your projects, campaigns, or policies? Then this Catalogue of Methods is for you. Biodiversity – the variety of life on Earth – is disappearing at an alarming rate. This loss affects not only ecosystems but also the health, wellbeing, and resilience of societies. Reversing this trend requires more than technical fixes; it calls for transformative change – a deep shift in how we think, act, and organise our societies. This catalogue is one of several outputs that reflect the collaborative, transdisciplinary ethos of the PLANET4B project. It showcases a curated set of methods specifically adapted to enhance nature-society relations and support pro-biodiversity decision-making. The methods are designed not only to inform but to provoke reflection, dialogue, and action across sectors and communities. Within PLANET4B they have been used to engage people in ways that are inclusive, context-sensitive, and transformative. We hope you will find in this catalogue both inspiration and practical tools to foster meaningful change in how biodiversity is understood, valued, and acted upon in a diversity of settings within education, business, policy and society at large. Contents Catalogue of Biodiversity Engagement Methods The PLANET4B Coordination Team About PLANET4B 4 Why This Catalogue? 5 How to Use This Catalogue 5 Thematic Overview: Method Types 6 & Themes Intersectional Considerations 7 Method Catalogue Storytelling & Expression Participatory Filmmaking 8 Participatory Theatre 10 Biodiversity Storytelling 12 Photovoice 14 Community Mapping 16 Biodiversity Photo Contest 18 Sensory & Material Engagement Biodiversity in the Cupboard 20 Drawing in Nature Workshop 22 Vegetable Exhibition 24 Biodiversity Cookbook 26 Play & Game-Based Learning Who Am I? 28 PATHBREAK: Biodiversity JENGA® 30 PATHBREAK: A Biodiversity–Food– 32 Governance Game Systems and Behaviour Systems Mapping 34 iNaturalist Biodiversity Observation 36 Nudging Experiments for 38 Biodiversity Prioritisation  Dialogue&Reflection Photo Interview 40 Debriefing 42 Understanding Transformative 44 Potential: The Reflexivity–Situatedness Matrix (RSM) Credits & Acknowledgements 47 Further Resources 48 54 About PLANET4B Biodiversity – the variety of life on Earth – is disappearing faster than ever before. Forests, wetlands, and coral reefs are being lost; species are vanishing; and the ecosystems that provide us with food, clean air, water, and climate regulation are under growing pressure. In short, biodiversity forms the very foundation of human wellbeing – yet, despite decades of warnings, meaningful action has often fallen short. Accordingly, the PLANET4B project (understanding Plural values, intersectionality, Leverage points, Attitudes, Norms, Behaviour and social learning in Transformation for Biodiversity decision-making) asked two simple but profound questions: Why do we know so much about the crisis, yet act so little to stop it? and how can we change that? To find some answers to these questions, we looked at how our values, social expectations, everyday habits, and ways of learning influence the choices we make that affect biodiversity. In simple terms, what we care about, what feels normal, how we behave, and what we were taught all shape how we treat the natural world. Through a series of eleven case studies (ranging from school gardens impacts on pupils through integrating disabled children to nature to enabling migrant youth in experiencing nature) bringing together academic researchers, charitable and private sector practitioner organisations, educators and community partners across Europe, we co-created methods that help prioritise biodiversity while supporting inclusive change at individual, community, and political levels. Why This Catalogue? Who this Catalogue is for: This catalogue showcases a selection of methods adapted and used within one or more of PLANET4B’s eleven case studies. Each method has been chosen for its potential to support biodiversity-related transformation through inclusive, creative, and context-sensitive engagement. The aim is to provide an easy-to-use overview of a range of different methods, for practitioners, educators, policymakers and community leaders seeking inspiration or guidance. While the catalogue offers concise introductory summaries, more detailed accounts – including implementation guides, case study examples, and facilitation tips – can be accessed via the Care-Full Courses and Resources platform. The catalogue is intended for a wide range of audiences, including: • Civil society and community organisers – who may wish to use it to plan inclusive engagement activities or adapt methods to local contexts. • Educators and facilitators – who may want to draw on it to support experiential learning, storytelling, or creative reflection. • Policymakers and institutional actors – who may find inspiration for participatory processes, behavioural interventions, or citizen science initiatives. • Businesses and sustainability teams – who may like to use the methods to support biodiversity awareness, employee engagement, and environmental-social-governance related initiatives. • Researchers – who can draw upon the different featured methods as forms of research-based intervention to better understand and support transformation at intrapersonal, interpersonal, and institutional levels. Whether you are designing a workshop, planning a campaign, embedding biodiversity into workplace culture, or exploring new ways to connect people with nature, this catalogue – in combination with the Care-Full Courses and Resources platform – offers a starting point for action, learning, and change. 76 ThematicOverview: Method Types & Themes The methods in this catalogue are grouped into five thematic categories, each offering a distinct approach to engaging with biodiversity-positive transformation. These categories reflect the diverse ways people connect with nature, make decisions, and co-create change. Many methods combine elements across categories, and their transformative potential is shaped by context, facilitation, and participant agency. A framework (called the Reflexivity-Situatedness Matrix (RSM)), described toward the end of the catalogue, helps readers see how the different methods create change within individuals, among people, and within institutions – and how these approaches can be combined to make a stronger impact. Methods that centre personal and collective narratives, creative expression and cultural voice. These approaches elevate lived experience and support emotional and political engagement with biodiversity. Methods that involve tactile, culinary, spatial, or embodied interaction with biodiversity-related themes. These approaches foster mindfulness, curiosity and ecological awareness through direct experience. Methods that use structured play, challenge or simulation to explore biodiversity concepts and systems. These approaches support experiential learning, systems thinking and collaborative problem-solving. Methods that subtly influence decision-making by shaping environments, defaults and social norms. These approaches include nudging, mapping, and citizen science and can be particularly effective for institutional and policy-level change. Methods that facilitate structured conversation, critical thinking and collective sense-making. These approaches support trust-building, plural knowledges and inclusive deliberation. IntersectionalConsiderations Biodiversity loss is deeply entangled with social inequalities. Who has access to nature, whose knowledge is valued and who participates in decision-making are all shaped by intersecting factors such as gender, ethnicity, age, disability, migration, religion and socio-economic status. This catalogue reflects a commitment to inclusive practice by showcasing methods that surface underrepresented voices, challenge exclusionary norms, and support plural knowledges. Many of the methods featured within this catalogue have been specifically adapted during PLANET4B to reflect the lived experiences of groups whose perspectives are often under-represented, including children with disabilities, ethnic minority groups, urban youth and faith-based communities. Facilitators who choose to use the methods are encouraged to reflect on their own positionality, build trust with participants, and cocreate safe spaces for dialogue and expression. Intersectionality is not just a lens for analysis – it is a practical approach to designing biodiversity engagement that is socially just, culturally relevant and responsive to diverse needs. EthicsofCare Every method in this catalogue is only as good as the approach taken to deliver it. Care-full research practice means thinking not just about what we do, but how we do it – with attention to safety, respect, and inclusion. Whether you’re facilitating a photo interview, running a biodiversity game, or hosting a community mapping session, it’s important to create spaces where people feel valued, heard, and protected. This includes practical considerations: ensuring venues are safe and accessible, avoiding emotionally difficult settings, and being mindful of how people are represented. For example, some participants may not feel comfortable sharing personal stories or being photographed – these choices must always be respected. Facilitators should offer clear information about how contributions will be used, and participants should be free to opt out at any time. If you’re collecting data, ethical approval may be needed, and you should use consent forms and participant information sheets. But ethics is not just about forms – it is about trust, transparency, and care. The CareFull Courses and Resources platform was created to support this kind of thoughtful, relational practice. We encourage all users of this catalogue to approach each method with curiosity, humility, and a commitment to care. Storytelling and Expression Sensory and Material Engagement Play and Game-Based Learning Behavioural and Choice Architecture Dialogue and Reflection 9 Context of Use: Used in multiple PLANET4B case studies to support inclusive storytelling and biodiversity engagement. For example, in the Brazil (Trade & Global Value Chains) case study, Indigenous youth used participatory Filmmaking to document a protest for education rights, amplifying their voices and connecting local struggles to broader biodiversity and justice concerns. How It Worked: Participants were trained in basic filmmaking and ethics, then supported to film their own stories. Facilitators provided guidance while stepping back to allow creative autonomy. Films were collaboratively reviewed and edited with participants shaping narrative, style and dissemination strategies. Engagement&Participation: The method fostered deep engagement through co-creation, reflection and shared decision-making. Participants shaped the direction, filmed each other and decided how their stories were told and shared. Safe spaces and ethical dialogue were central throughout. Outcomes&Insights: • Strengthened confidence and creative agency of participants • Fostered new relationships and collective action • Raised visibility of marginalised perspectives • Encouraged emotional and political engagement with biodiversity Strengths & Considerations: Strengths: • Highly adaptable across contexts and communities • Supports deep reflection and storytelling • Builds skills and confidence • Can catalyse personal, collective, and policy change • Offers rich material for advocacy and education Considerations: • Requires significant time, resources, and ethical care • Participants need support with technical and emotional aspects • Consent and representation must be revisited throughout • Safety and privacy must be carefully managed • Facilitators must balance support with creative autonomy Participants: • 5-15 people per group • Ideally drawn from communities or groups with lived experience or a stake in the issue Estimated Timeframe: • Minimum: 3 sessions over 2–4 weeks • Longer timeframes allow deeper engagement and impact Budget Level: • Medium to High • Costs may include equipment, editing, space hire, travel and dissemination To empower participants to tell their own stories through film, fostering reflection, dialogue and advocacy around biodiversity-related issues. This method supports inclusive representation, skillbuilding and transformative engagement by placing creative control in the hands of those most affected. Materials Needed: • Cameras or smartphones • Editing software and suitable editing space • Storage devices (e.g. USBs, SD cards) • Flipcharts, sticky notes, markers • Worksheets (filming techniques, ethics) • Resources for screening (e.g. projector, venue, QR codes) • Institutionally approved ethical information and consent forms (if collecting data) Skills Required: • Group facilitation and inclusive communication • Project coordination and ethical oversight • Storyboard script writing and/ or visualisation • Technical filmmaking (filming, editing, sound) • Outreach and marketing • Adaptability and ethical awareness MethodinPractice Key Features Purpose Participatory Filmmaking Method Catalogue Storytelling and Expression 11 Context of Use: Used in the PLANET4B education case study in Hungary with secondary school students. The play Blindspot, developed by Káva Theatre Group and WWF Hungary, explored the commodification of a healing plant and its ecological and social consequences. Students stepped into roles within a fictional company, navigating tensions between economic growth and biodiversity loss. How It Worked: Actors introduced a scenario, then invited participants to intervene, take on roles and shape the narrative. Participants debated dilemmas, improvised responses, and explored alternative futures. The session concluded with a reflective dialogue linking the performance to real-world contexts. Engagement&Participation: Participants engaged through acting, directing, and discussion. The method allowed for varied levels of involvement, including observation. Facilitators ensured emotional safety and inclusivity, with space for multiple viewpoints and creative expression. Outcomes&Insights: • Deepened understanding of biodiversity-related trade-offs • Fostered emotional literacy and moral reasoning • Strengthened group cohesion and empathy • Sparked dialogue on systemic change and personal agency • Enabled creative exploration of alternative futures Strengths & Considerations: Strengths: • Highly engaging and emotionally resonant • Supports critical thinking and collaborative learning • Adaptable to diverse groups and themes • Encourages embodied and experiential understanding • Can catalyse dialogue, reflection and action Considerations: • Requires skilled facilitation and ethical care • Not all participants may feel comfortable performing • Emotional intensity may arise; support must be available • Preparation and co-creation can be time-intensive • Budget and logistics need careful planning • Facilitators must balance support with creative autonomy Participants: • Recommended group size: 20–35 • Suitable for school groups, Learning Communities, or community organisations • Works best when participants have some familiarity with one another Estimated Timeframe: • Single session: ~3 hours (including warm-up, performance, and debrief) • Extended formats: multi-session cocreation over weeks/months Budget Level: • Medium to High • Costs may include facilitator or theatre group fees, venue hire, props, refreshments, and travel To explore complex social and ecological issues through interactive performance, enabling participants to reflect on values, emotions, and decision-making. This method fosters empathy, critical thinking and collective imagination – making it especially powerful for engaging with biodiversity, justice and systemic change. Materials Needed: • Large room with space for movement • Basic props, scenery, and costumes • Refreshments • Transport support for participants and facilitators • Optional: audio-visual equipment for documentation • Institutionally approved ethical information and consent forms (if collecting data) Skills Required: • Group facilitation and emotional sensitivity • Drama-based methods (role-play, improvisation) • Project coordination and logistics • Adaptability and ethical awareness MethodinPractice Key Features Purpose Participatory Theatre Method Catalogue Storytelling and Expression 13 Biodiversity Storytelling Context of Use: Used in the PLANET4B Austrian case study with a Learning Community of migrant women co-creating a biodiverse urban garden. Participants shared stories about meaningful fruits or vegetables, linking personal memories to biodiversity. The session concluded with a communal meal featuring the foods discussed. How It Worked: Storytellers prepared personal narratives in advance. During the workshop, stories were shared in small groups, followed by a plenary discussion. Facilitators introduced factsheets to connect stories to nature and culture. The session ended with a shared meal, reinforcing themes of connection and care. Engagement&Participation: Participants engaged through storytelling, listening and reflection. Facilitators created a safe, inclusive space with co-negotiated group rules. The method encouraged emotional expression, cultural exchange, and mutual respect. Outcomes&Insights: • Strengthened trust and group cohesion • Elevated experiential and cultural knowledge • Fostered emotional connection to biodiversity • Inspired follow-up learning and community action • Reframed who is seen as a knowledge-holder Strengths & Considerations: Strengths: • Accessible and low-cost • Builds trust and empathy • Connects biodiversity to everyday life • Validates diverse forms of knowledge • Adaptable to many formats and audiences Considerations: • Sensitive topics may arise (e.g. food insecurity, migration) • Requires careful facilitation and ethical clarity • Some participants may prefer non-verbal storytelling formats • Preparation time needed for factsheets and recruitment • Group dynamics and emotional safety must be actively supported Participants: • Ideal group size: 6–8 storytellers • Plenary discussion can include up to 15 participants • Suitable for age 11+, adaptable across cultures and contexts Estimated Timeframe: • ~2 weeks’ notice for storytellers to prepare • ~2–3 hours facilitator prep (e.g. factsheets) • 2-hour workshop, optionally followed by a shared meal Budget Level: • Low • Main costs: facilitator time, refreshments, venue, transport support To connect personal narratives with ecological and biodiversity-related themes, using storytelling as a tool for reflection, trust-building, and collective learning. This method makes abstract concepts tangible by grounding them in everyday experiences, particularly through food, memory and cultural identity. Materials Needed: • Factsheets or information cards on selected fruits/vegetables • Comfortable indoor or outdoor space (weather permitting) • Institutionally approved ethical information and consent forms (if collecting data) • Optional: food samples, illustrated resources, feedback tools Skills Required: • Group facilitation and inclusive communication • Workshop planning and recruitment • Research and preparation of ecological/ cultural facts • Sensitivity to emotional and cultural dynamics • Adaptability and ethical awareness MethodinPractice Key Features Method Catalogue Storytelling and Expression Purpose 15 Photovoice Context of Use: Used in the PLANET4B UK case study as part of participatory filmmaking with a Learning Community exploring nature–society relations among Black, Asian and ethnic minority communities. A variant (photo interview) was used in the Swiss case study on organic farming and religion. How It Worked: Participants responded to a shared question through photography. They reflected on their images, developed captions and shared stories in facilitated discussions. Selected photos were exhibited with accompanying narratives, sparking dialogue and advocacy. Engagement&Participation: Participants had ownership over the process, with flexible timing and modes of engagement. Facilitators supported reflection and storytelling while ensuring ethical care. Peer support and journaling deepened the experience. Outcomes&Insights: • Elevated personal and community perspectives • Fostered emotional connection to biodiversity • Strengthened group cohesion and trust • Enabled advocacy through visual storytelling • Influenced public and policy audiences Strengths & Considerations: Strengths: • Accessible and adaptable • Encourages creative and critical reflection • Builds confidence and agency • Supports inclusive dialogue and advocacy • Can be used for exhibitions, campaigns and policy engagement Considerations: • Requires ethical sensitivity around consent and representation • Emotional topics may arise; support must be available • Preparation and facilitation time needed • Impact depends on thoughtful dissemination and follow-up • Not all participants may be confident with photography; training helps Participants: • Group size: 10–35 • Can be adapted for individuals or smaller groups • Suitable for new or existing communities; introductory sessions recommended Estimated Timeframe: • Minimum: 2 sessions • Photo-taking period: ~2 weeks (flexible) • Optional: training workshops and exhibitions Budget Level: • Low to Medium • Costs may include equipment, printing, venue hire, refreshments, and facilitator time To enable individuals and communities to document and reflect on their lived experiences through photography, fostering dialogue, critical awareness and advocacy. In biodiversity contexts, Photovoice helps make issues visible and actionable – encouraging ecological relationships and emotional responses, will exposing structural inequalities. Materials Needed: • Cameras or smartphones • Flipcharts, sticky notes, markers • Institutionally approved ethical information and consent forms (if collecting data) • Display materials (e.g. clip frames, foam boards, digital screens) • Optional: journals, audio recorders, exhibition space Skills Required: • Facilitation and inclusive communication • Project coordination and logistics • Adaptability and ethical awareness • Storytelling and caption development • Strategic planning for dissemination and impact MethodinPractice Key Features Method Catalogue Storytelling and Expression Purpose 17 Community Mapping Context of Use: Used in the PLANET4B Austrian case study with a Learning Community of migrant women. The group mapped an unused plot near their community garden, developed a plan, and successfully negotiated with the city council to transform it into an edible, biodiverse green space. How It Worked: Participants worked in small groups to annotate maps with ecological, cultural and social insights. They identified priorities, barriers and opportunities for transformation. The process was supported by facilitators and followed by further planning and action. Engagement&Participation: The method encouraged collaborative visioning, storytelling and spatial reflection. Participants contributed through drawing, discussion, and mapping exercises. Facilitators ensured inclusivity, supported emotional responses and helped translate ideas into action. Outcomes&Insights: • Strengthened community identity and agency • Created a shared vision for space transformation • Enabled dialogue with local authorities • Highlighted biodiversity priorities and social needs • Fostered long-term stewardship and advocacy Strengths & Considerations: Strengths: • Visually engaging and inclusive • Builds collective knowledge and action • Adaptable to diverse contexts and goals • Supports spatial justice and ecological awareness • Can influence planning and policy Considerations: • Requires careful facilitation of group dynamics • Emotional or contested topics may arise • Follow-up support is essential for impact • Mapping alone may not lead to change without resources or partnerships • Accessibility and familiarity with maps must be considered Participants: • Recommended group size: 8–50 • Suitable for age 12+ • Works well with existing groups or learning communities; introductory sessions recommended for new groups Estimated Timeframe: • ~2 sessions of ~2 hours • Can be condensed (e.g. Dotmocracy - voting on ideas with sticky dots: 10–15 mins) or extended over weeks Budget Level: • Medium to High • Mapping itself is low-cost, but follow-up actions (e.g. planning, campaigning, implementation) may require significant resources To enable participants to share knowledge, experiences, and visions for a specific place, identifying ecological, cultural and social features. This method supports inclusive planning, strengthens local voices, and can catalyse transformation of public or green spaces, particularly in biodiversity and justice contexts. Materials Needed: • Large, printed base maps (e.g. Google Maps, OpenStreetMap, or hand-drawn) • Visual tools: markers, stickers, photos, magazines • Comfortable, accessible space (indoor or outdoor) • Institutionally approved ethical information and consent forms (if collecting data) • Refreshments • Optional: digital mapping tools, 3D models, sensory materials Skills Required: • Facilitation and emotional sensitivity • Project management and logistics • Technical mapping or design skills (optional) • Advocacy and campaign planning • Ability to support inclusive, reflective dialogue • Adaptability and ethical awareness MethodinPractice Key Features Method Catalogue Storytelling and Expression Purpose 19 Biodiversity Photo Contest Context of Use: Used in the PLANET4B Hungarian case study to highlight agrobiodiversity. Participants submitted photos across five categories, showcasing gardens, seeds and farming practices. Winners received seed-related prizes and the contest helped build visibility and community around biodiversity. How It Worked: Organisers defined themes, promoted the contest, and managed submissions. Judges selected winners based on creativity, relevance and storytelling. Photos were displayed online and in exhibitions, sparking dialogue and further engagement. Engagement&Participation: Participants reflected on their relationship with nature through photography. The method supported multilingual and non-verbal expression, making it accessible and inclusive. Public voting and exhibitions extended participation beyond contributors. Outcomes&Insights: • Increased awareness and appreciation of biodiversity • Strengthened local identity and pride • Fostered community connections and knowledge exchange • Generated visual content for advocacy and education • Inspired follow-up initiatives and storytelling Strengths & Considerations: Strengths: • Accessible and engaging for all skill levels • Encourages creative expression and reflection • Builds community and visibility around biodiversity • Flexible and scalable across contexts • Can be adapted to include storytelling or audio elements Considerations: • Requires clear ethical guidance on safety and consent • Judging must avoid bias toward high-tech equipment • Impact depends on thoughtful dissemination and follow-up • Accessibility and inclusion must be actively supported • Not all participants may be confident with photography; training helps Participants: • Open to all: hobbyists, gardeners, students, conservationists • Suitable for individuals or groups; inclusive of children and non-verbal participants • Can be run locally or online Estimated Timeframe: • Flexible: from a few hours to several months (e.g. in PLANET4B the photo contest ran for 3 months) • Additional time needed for judging and exhibition planning Budget Level: • Low to Medium • Costs may include prizes, promotion, exhibition materials, and facilitator time To engage individuals and communities in documenting biodiversity through photography, fostering awareness, creativity, and advocacy. This method celebrates diverse relationships with nature and can generate powerful visual material for exhibitions, campaigns and community-building. Materials Needed: • Camera or smartphone • Submission platform (online or physical) • Institutionally approved ethical information and consent forms (if collecting data) • Clear judging criteria and anonymised entry system • Optional: prizes (e.g. seed kits, vouchers), exhibition space, tools library Skills Required: • Project coordination and promotion • Ethical oversight and accessibility planning • Photography and storytelling support • Judging and exhibition curation • Community engagement and outreach MethodinPractice Key Features Method Catalogue Storytelling and Expression Purpose 33 PATHBREAK: A Biodiversity– Food–GovernanceGame Context of Use: Piloted by PLANET4B international consortium members, students at the Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg, and the Urban Youth Learning Community in Germany, as well as with groups not part of the project. Participants explored biodiversity decisionmaking through role-play, experiencing systemic complexity and social dilemmas. How It Worked: Players assumed roles with varied social positions and interests. Through structured rounds, they made decisions, voted and negotiated. Facilitators guided gameplay and supported reflection, helping participants connect the experience to broader governance and biodiversity issues. Engagement&Participation: The method encouraged active participation, empathy, and critical dialogue. Facilitators supported inclusive engagement and adapted pacing to group dynamics. Outcomes&Insights: • Deepened understanding of biodiversity governance • Surfaced tensions and trade-offs in decision-making • Built empathy across roles and perspectives • Strengthened group dialogue and collaboration • Inspired real-world reflection and action Strengths & Considerations: Strengths: • Immersive and thought-provoking • Supports systems thinking and social learning • Adaptable across sectors and settings • Encourages reflection and real-world relevance • Open access and low-cost Considerations: • Requires skilled facilitation and preparation • Emotional or complex themes may arise • Impact depends on quality of debrief and framing • Best used in a quiet, uninterrupted space • The game does not result in a clear ‘winner’ • Follow-up reflection enhances learning Participants: • Minimum: 7 players • Maximum: 14 players (2 facilitators recommended for larger groups) • Suitable for age 13+, including adults at university level and beyond, as well as mixed groups in participatory stakeholder workshops Estimated Timeframe: • Preparation: 2–3 hours (first-time facilitators) • Setup: 30 minutes • Gameplay: ~90 minutes • Debrief: 30–60 minutes • Total session: ~2.5–3 hours Budget Level: • Low • Game is open access and free to download • Costs may include printing, venue hire, refreshments and optional documentation To explore the complex relationships between biodiversity, food systems, and governance through collaborative role-play. PATHBREAK invites participants to step into diverse roles – farmers, policymakers, citizens – and navigate real-world dilemmas, tradeoffs and decision-making processes. The game fosters critical thinking, empathy and systems awareness. Materials Needed: • Printed gameboard and role cards; Tokens for indicators • Laptop with internet access; Projector or screen (recommended) • Facilitator manual • Spreadsheet for tracking decisions (included in the Web App) • Post-game survey (included in the Web App) • Institutionally approved ethical information and consent forms (if collecting data, also included in the Web App) • Optional: camera or recorder (with consent) Skills Required: • Group facilitation and inclusive communication • Conflict management and intercultural sensitivity • Ability to explain rules and guide gameplay • Framing reflection and linking to real-world relevance • Adaptability and ethical awareness • Optional: experience in teaching or stakeholder engagement MethodinPractice Key Features Purpose Method Catalogue Play and Game-Based Learning 35 Systems Mapping Context of Use: Used in business and sustainability contexts to explore issues such as biodiversity volunteering, ethical procurement or workplace culture. The method helps identify barriers, enablers, and opportunities for change by mapping direct and indirect influences on a chosen issue. How It Worked: Participants defined a central issue and used an ‘onion model’ to map factors influencing it – starting with direct elements (e.g. policies, access) and expanding to indirect ones (e.g. culture, norms). Enablers and barriers were identified, prioritised and used to develop realistic change pathways. Engagement&Participation: The method encouraged open dialogue, reflection, and co-creation. Participants contributed insights from lived experience, helping surface emotional, relational and structural dynamics. Mapping was participatory and iterative, with space for diverse voices. Outcomes&Insights: • Clarified complex sustainability challenges • Identified actionable priorities and leverage points • Fostered shared understanding across roles and departments • Supported inclusive planning and relational change • Created a visual tool for ongoing dialogue and alignment Strengths & Considerations: Strengths: • Accessible and low-cost • Supports deep reflection and systems thinking • Adaptable to many contexts and issues • Encourages inclusive participation and shared ownership • Can be digitised and revisited over time Considerations: • Requires skilled facilitation to manage group dynamics • Emotional or narrative insights may emerge; support needed • Impact depends on follow-up and integration into planning • Mapping should be positioned as a process, not a one-off • Visual clarity and documentation are key for sharing outcomes Participants: • Ideal group size: 8–15 • Suitable for cross-functional teams, community groups or multistakeholder workshops Estimated Timeframe: • 1–1.5 hours (plus time for introductions and icebreakers if needed) • Can be extended across multiple sessions Budget Level: • Low • Main costs: staff time, facilitation, optional printing or digital platform access To visually and collaboratively explore the relationships, behaviours, and structures that shape sustainability and biodiversity-related challenges. Systems mapping helps surface hidden dynamics, identify leverage points, and support inclusive planning and change-making across organisations, communities or teams. Materials Needed: • Large paper or whiteboard (or online tools like Miro/MURAL) • Sticky notes in multiple colours • Markers or pens • Institutionally approved ethical information and consent forms (if collecting data) • Optional: stickers for prioritisation, camera/scanner for documentation • Optional: refreshments or venue hire Skills Required: • Facilitation and inclusive communication • Visual thinking and note synthesis • Adaptability and ethical awareness • Optional: systems thinking or stakeholder engagement experience MethodinPractice Key Features Purpose Method Catalogue Behavioural and Choice Architecture 37 iNaturalist Biodiversity ObservationContext of Use: In PLANET4B, the method was tested among project partners as friendly photo-sharing challenge to promote workplace biodiversity engagement. It encouraged consortium members to observe nature in everyday settings – both during and outside of work – and contribute to ecological data. How It Worked: Participants used iNaturalist to record species. Monthly newsletters updated participants with the number of species observed so far, highlighting three recent observations. Themes included ‘purple plants’ and ‘spotted in Budapest’ following a consortium meeting there. Engagement&Participation: The method encouraged curiosity, creativity and collaboration. Participants reflected on their observations, shared stories, and connected across departments. It supported both individual mindfulness and collective ecological awareness. Outcomes&Insights: • Increased attentiveness to everyday nature • Strengthened wellbeing and outdoor engagement • Fostered team-building and cross-departmental dialogue • Contributed to biodiversity data and reporting • Inspired micro-actions and site-level improvements Strengths & Considerations: Strengths: • Accessible and low-cost • Supports citizen science and ecological learning • Encourages reflection and storytelling • Adaptable across age groups and settings • Can be embedded in wellbeing or sustainability programmes Considerations: • Requires basic tech support for app use • Impact depends on follow-up and visibility of outcomes • Data interpretation may need ecological framing • Privacy and safety guidance should be provided • Works best when linked to seasonal cycles Participants: • Anyone with access to a smartphone or camera • Suitable for individuals, teams, or whole organisations • Can be adapted for younger audiences using Seek (no account required) Estimated Timeframe: • Open-ended or time-bound (e.g. 1-day BioBlitz, month-long challenge) • Flexible formats: lunchtime walks, weekend safaris, seasonal campaigns Budget Level: • Low • Costs may include prizes, printed materials or borrowed devices To engage individuals and teams in observing, identifying, and sharing wildlife sightings through a citizen science platform. iNaturalist fosters connection to nature, supports ecological learning, and contributes to real-time biodiversity data. It is a flexible method that blends reflection, wellbeing, and environmental action. Materials Needed: • Smartphone or camera • iNaturalist or Seek app • Institutionally approved ethical information and consent forms (if collecting data) • Optional: shared board or chat group, printed guides, prizes • Optional: Miro board or feedback platform for reflection Skills Required: • Basic tech guidance (app use) • Facilitation of reflection and storytelling • Ability to link observations to broader biodiversity themes • Adaptability and ethical awareness • Optional: ecological framing or data interpretation MethodinPractice Key Features Purpose Method Catalogue Behavioural and Choice Architecture 39 Nudging Experiments for Biodiversity Prioritisation Context of Use: Used in PLANET4B to test how nudges – framed around social norms and emotional appeal – could influence biodiversity-conscious shopping behaviour. A survey experiment assessed intended behaviours, while a field experiment in supermarkets tested real-world responses using trolley inserts and follow-up questionnaires. How It Worked: Participants were exposed to biodiversity-related messages (e.g. fact-based social norms, emotional appeals) and asked about their shopping intentions or observed in real settings. Data was collected via surveys and receipts. Analysis compared control and treatment groups to assess impact. Engagement&Participation: Participants engaged passively (via exposure to nudges) and actively (via surveys or interviews). The method allowed for broad reach, including groups less likely to participate in traditional research. Facilitators ensured ethical standards and clear communication. Young people accompanied the research throughout its different phases - learning about the method earlier and later contributing to its design, setup in the field, and finally serving as enumerators. Outcomes&Insights: • Identified effective nudges for biodiversity prioritisation • Highlighted differences between intended and actual behaviour • Informed institutional strategies for retail and policy settings • Demonstrated potential for scalable, low-cost interventions • Supported inclusive engagement across social groups, including by providing a learning opportunity for the involved young researchers Strengths & Considerations: Strengths: • Low-cost and scalable • Suitable for both research and practice • Can reach diverse and hard-to-reach populations • Can generate actionable insights for institutional change • Supports ethical, non-coercive behaviour change Considerations: • Ethical approval and informed consent are essential • Impact depends on careful framing and context • Deception must be avoided; transparency is key • Best used with follow-up reflection or complementary methods Participants: • General public (via surveys) or participants of real-world decisionmaking situations (e.g. shoppers; commuters; patients; policymakers) • Suitable for quota-representative samples or diverse field settings Estimated Timeframe: • Survey design and piloting: several weeks • Field experiment: 1–2 days per site • Data analysis and reporting: variable depending on scope Budget Level: • Low to Medium • Costs may include survey platform access, printing materials, staff time and incentives To subtly influence behaviour by activating social norms and emotional responses that support biodiversity-conscious decision-making. Nudging experiments use low-cost, non-coercive interventions – such as messages, images, or default options – to steer choices without restricting freedom. This method is particularly suited to retail, policy and research contexts. Materials Needed: • Survey instruments (digital or paper) • Nudging materials (e.g. trolley inserts, posters, messages) • Institutionally approved ethical information and consent forms (if collecting data) • Data collection tools (e.g. receipts, questionnaires) • Optional: collaboration agreements with field sites (e.g. supermarkets) Skills Required: • Experimental design and data analysis • Ethical oversight and informed consent procedures • Stakeholder engagement and communication • Optional: behavioural science or social psychology expertise MethodinPractice Key Features Purpose Method Catalogue Behavioural and Choice Architecture 41 Photo Interview Context of Use: Used in the PLANET4B Swiss case study to explore how religious beliefs influence farming practices and biodiversity attitudes. Farmers shared photos and video clips, which were later exhibited to highlight the connection between faith and ecological stewardship. How It Worked: Participants took or selected images on a theme (e.g. nature, farming, belief). Interviews were guided by open-ended questions, allowing participants to interpret and reflect on their photos. Visual and verbal data were analysed together and used in public exhibitions. Engagement&Participation: Participants led the conversation through their images. The method supported agency, emotional depth, and diverse forms of expression. It was adapted to suit different comfort levels, technical access, and cultural contexts. Outcomes&Insights: • Fostered personal reflection and ecological awareness • Strengthened community dialogue and shared purpose • Created visual outputs for exhibitions and advocacy • Informed policy and institutional priorities • Built lasting networks and collaborative potential Strengths & Considerations: Strengths: • Accessible and adaptable • Supports emotional and visual expression • Encourages participant agency and storytelling • Can be used for exhibitions, reports, or campaigns • Suitable for sensitive or complex topics Considerations: • Requires ethical care and informed consent • Emotional responses may arise; support needed • Impact depends on follow-up and visibility of outputs • Works best when integrated into broader engagement strategy • Visual analysis must respect participant meaning and context Participants: • Typically, 1:1 (interviewer and interviewee) • Can be adapted for pairs, small groups, or focus groups • Suitable for all ages; format should be tailored to context Estimated Timeframe: • Preparation: 1+ weeks for participants to take/select images • Interview: 45–90 minutes • Analysis and follow-up: variable depending on scope Budget Level: • Low to Medium • Costs may include printing, travel, equipment and participant gifts To explore personal, cultural, and environmental perspectives through visual storytelling. Photo interviews invite participants to reflect on and share images that represent their experiences, values or beliefs. This method supports emotional expression, critical reflection, and deeper engagement with biodiversity and social change. Materials Needed: • Camera or smartphone (participant or provided) • Institutionally approved ethical information and consent forms (if collecting data) • Recording tools (audio or notes) • Optional: display materials (frames, boards, screens) • Optional: exhibition or digital gallery platform Skills Required: • Active listening and open questioning • Facilitation and emotional sensitivity • Ethical awareness and consent management • Analytical thinking and visual interpretation • Basic photography and digital handling MethodinPractice Key Features Purpose Method Catalogue Dialogue and Reflection 43 Debriefing Context of Use: Used across PLANET4B case studies and during multiple PLANET4B in-house consortium events to reflect on methods such as participatory theatre, drawing workshops, and biodiversity games. In the UK case study, for example, and during the final PLANET4B project event participants added reflections to a paper tree. In Hungary, debriefing with school students was co-facilitated by case leads and by external experts. How It Worked: Facilitators guided open-ended discussions using prompts, creative tools, and group activities. Participants reflected on emotions, insights and future actions. Debriefing was adapted to suit different ages, cultures and settings. Engagement&Participation: Participants shared thoughts through conversation, drawing, walking, or object-based reflection. The method supported emotional safety, inclusivity and diverse forms of expression. Co-facilitation and participant-led formats were encouraged. Outcomes&Insights: • Supported personal reflection and empowerment • Strengthened group cohesion and trust • Identified pathways for action and advocacy • Informed programme design and institutional strategy • Created outputs for exhibitions, reports or campaigns Strengths & Considerations: Strengths: • Accessible and adaptable • Enhances impact of other methods • Supports emotional and cognitive processing • Can be creative, informal, or structured • Valuable for both participants and facilitators Considerations: • Requires sensitivity to group dynamics and emotional responses • Format should match context and participant needs • Ethical care and consent are essential • Impact depends on quality of facilitation and follow-up • Works best when integrated into broader engagement strategy Participants: • Ideal group size: 6–12 • Can be scaled up with multiple sessions or adapted for smaller groups • Suitable for all ages; format should be tailored to context Estimated Timeframe: • 45 minutes to 2 hours • Can be held immediately after the method or in a separate session (1–2 days to 2–3 weeks later) Budget Level: • Low • Costs may include space hire, refreshments, printed materials, and facilitation time To support reflection, emotional processing, and learning after a participatory or creative method. Debriefing helps participants make sense of their experience, share insights, and identify next steps. It strengthens personal and group impact and can also inform institutional learning or reporting. Materials Needed: • Paper, pens, mood cards, symbolic objects, drawing tools • Institutionally approved ethical information and consent forms (if collecting data) • Optional: audio recorder, camera (with consent) • Optional: digital collaboration or voting platforms (e.g. Padlet, Mentimeter) Skills Required: • Group facilitation and inclusive communication • Emotional sensitivity and trust-building • Conflict resolution and time management • Ethics and project coordination MethodinPractice Key Features Purpose Method Catalogue Dialogue and Reflection 4544 Understanding Transformative Potential:TheReflexivity–Situatedness Matrix (RSM) 1.IntroducingtheRSM In PLANET4B, we explored not just what methods support biodiversity-related transformation, but how and why they work in different contexts. To help make sense of this, we developed a simple but powerful tool: the Reflexivity–Situatedness Matrix (RSM). The RSM helps understand how interventions trigger change by focusing on two key dimensions: • Reflexivity: How deeply a method engages people in conscious reflection and intentional change. • Situatedness: How embedded a method is in a specific place, context or community. Together, these dimensions offer a way to think about the transformative potential of different methods – whether they shift everyday choices, spark deep reflection, build change through local relationships, or facilitate thinking on values and worldviews that are deemed to be rather universal. The RSM also helps identify how methods can be combined to support change at individual (intra-personal), community (interpersonal) and institutional levels. 2. Why These Dimensions Matter • Reflexivity helps distinguish between: • High: Deep, intentional reflection (e.g., storytelling, immersive workshops) • Low: Subtle nudges or default choices (e.g., framing, choice architecture) • Situatedness helps distinguish between: • High: Locally grounded, context-specific interventions • Low: Interventions with abstract contexts and focusing on rather universal concepts These distinctions help clarify how different methods work and what kinds of change they are likely to support. 3. How the RSM Supports Transformation The RSM helps identify how methods contribute to transformation at different levels: • Intrapersonal: Shifts in individual beliefs, values, and awareness • Interpersonal: Changes in relationships, group dynamics and shared understanding • Institutional: Influence on norms, policies and systems It also supports reflection on: • Power dynamics within partnerships • Temporal dimension and selection of methods as an iterative learning process of aligning methods to actors, their contextual settings and their everyday lives • Equity and inclusion, especially in how knowledge and decision-making are shared • The role of different actors in shaping change 4. Interpreting Methods through the RSM The methods in this catalogue vary not only in format and audience, but also in how they engage with transformation. The RSM offers a lens to interpret these differences. Some methods invite deep reflection and personal transformation; others shift norms or behaviours through subtle cues. Some are rooted in specific places and communities, while others are designed to be widely applicable across contexts or support reflections on rather universal concepts and in abstract contexts. By considering where each method sits on the reflexivity and situatedness spectrum, we can better understand its transformative potential. This perspective also helps facilitators and decision-makers combine methods in strategic ways – layering interventions to support change at multiple levels. 5.UsingtheRSMtoGuideTransformativePractice The RSM is a practical tool for: • Strategic planning of interventions based on context, goals and available resources • Combining methods across the matrix to deepen impact • Matching interventions to the needs of different audiences and settings It encourages thoughtful design and sequencing of interventions, helping practitioners build more inclusive, effective and context-sensitive approaches to biodiversityrelated transformation. 46 You can read more about the RSM in this open access scientific paper. Credits&Acknowledgements PLANET4B receives funding from the European Union’s Horizon Europe research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101082212. This project is funded by UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) under the UK government’s Horizon Europe funding guarantee. This project receives funding from the Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation (SERI). Partnership based on diversity and strong collaboration. Partners Funders Reflexivity (A) Situatedness High: Change in mind Low: Change in environment Creative interventions mixing lab and place Board/card and mixed strategy games In-person behavioral field games Online behavioral games Building capacity and motivation Activation of social norms and affection Lab and artifactual game experiments Channeling attention framing, nudging Art-based and creative lab-like interventions Place-based deliberative interventions Role-playing games Low: Universal values and action High: Place-specific values and action Transformations via intrapersonal change Transformations via interpersonal change Transformations via institutional change Reflexivity (B) Situatedness High: Change in mind Low: Change in environment 2a Biodiversity storytelling 1 Pathbreak: Biodiversity-FoodGovernance Game 5 Mainstreaming engaging methods (e.g., exhibition, iNaturalist, games in a classroom) 3 Choice architecture methods (e.g., nudging, framing) 2b Participatory film 2c Participatory Theater Low: Universal values and action High: Place-specific values and action Transformations via intrapersonal change Transformations via interpersonal change Transformations via institutional change 4 Research interventions: systems mapping, deliberative workshops, interviews FurtherResources Find these and more engagement methods at Care-full-courses.com PLANET4B.eu PLANET4B Methodological Framework for Intersectionality Analysis Care-full-courses.com/care-full-resources PLANET4B (2025) Catalogue of Biodiversity Engagement Methods. Project 101082212 – PLANET4B. Brussels: European Research Executive Agency. www.care-full-courses.com