Diverse values of nature for sustainability.

Twenty-five years since foundational publications on valuing ecosystem services for human well-being1,2, addressing the global biodiversity crisis3 still implies confronting barriers to incorporating nature's diverse values into decision-making. These barriers include powerful interests supported by current norms and legal rules such as property rights, which determine whose values and which values of nature are acted on. A better understanding of how and why nature is (under)valued is more urgent than ever4. Notwithstanding agreements to incorporate nature's values into actions, including the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)5 and the UN Sustainable Development Goals6, predominant environmental and development policies still prioritize a subset of values, particularly those linked to markets, and ignore other ways people relate to and benefit from nature7. Arguably, a 'values crisis' underpins the intertwined crises of biodiversity loss and climate change8, pandemic emergence9 and socio-environmental injustices10. On the basis of more than 50,000 scientific publications, policy documents and Indigenous and local knowledge sources, the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) assessed knowledge on nature's diverse values and valuation methods to gain insights into their role in policymaking and fuller integration into decisions7,11. Applying this evidence, combinations of values-centred approaches are proposed to improve valuation and address barriers to uptake, ultimately leveraging transformative changes towards more just (that is, fair treatment of people and nature, including inter- and intragenerational equity) and sustainable futures.

Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices (KAP) Regarding the COVID-19 Outbreak in Côte d'Ivoire: Understanding the Non-Compliance of Populations with Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions.

At the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak, preventive measures seemed the most appropriate method to control its spread. We assessed the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of the Ivorian public regarding preventive measures, conducting a hybrid survey across the country. Participants were invited to complete a questionnaire online, by phone, or face-to-face. Chi-squared, Fisher's exact, and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare the frequency of responses regarding compliance with preventive measures. Data were validated for 564 individuals. Over one-third of respondents believed that COVID-19 was related to non-natural causes. Though the disease was perceived as severe, respondents did not consider it to be highly infectious. Overall, 35.6% of respondents fully trust health officials in the management of the pandemic, and 34.6% trusted them moderately. Individuals who believed COVID-19 was a disease caused by a pathogen and the well-educated were likely to comply with preventive measures. About 70% of respondents stated that their daily expenses had increased due to preventive measures. The study concludes that beyond unfavorable socioeconomic conditions, the level of knowledge regarding COVID-19 and trust in the government/health system are more likely to influence compliance with preventive measures such as self-reporting, physical distancing, the use of face masks, and eventually the acceptability of vaccines.