| 1. |
- Islar, Mine, et al.
(författare)
-
Diverse values of nature for sustainability
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Nature. - 0028-0836 .- 1476-4687. ; 620, s. 813-823
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- 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.
|
|
| 2. |
- Kenter, Jasper O., et al.
(författare)
-
Cultural Values Related to Marine and Coastal Environments
- 2024. - 2
-
Ingår i: Treatise on Estuarine and Coastal Science. - : Academic Press. - 9780323910422 - 9780323907989 ; , s. 166-179
-
Bokkapitel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Cultural values of the coast and sea are rooted in specific land and seascapes, material and non-material heritage, including language and cultural practices. The way they are managed matters greatly for our quality of life. Concepts of cultural values include broad, overarching values, specific values ascribed to particular aspects of the marine environment, diverse value indicators, and the diverse contributions of culture to society. This chapter presents the typology of values developed by the Intergovernmental Science Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), including four life frames (living from, with, in, and as nature) that are used to organize the typology. We build on this conceptual foundation to develop key aspects and types of cultural values in more detail. We then present a diverse range of qualitative and quantitative methods to assess cultural values and discuss five case studies from the UK and Sweden, pertaining to relational values of wild swimming, economic assessment of living fishing heritage, deliberation on value conflicts in fjord management, cultural values of seaweed farming, and understanding local values of marine management in the context of the life frames. Finally, we consider the implications of these diverse cases for how cultural values are to be understood, including with regard to place, relationality, substitutability of value, power relations, framing conflicts, participation, method integration, sectoral integration in management, and the potential of harnessing cultural values for transformation towards sustainability and justice.
|
|
| 3. |
- Isacs, Lina, PhD, et al.
(författare)
-
What does value pluralism mean in practice? An empirical demonstration from a deliberative valuation
- 2023
-
Ingår i: People and Nature. - : Wiley. - 2575-8314. ; 5:2, s. 384-402
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The intensified call for value pluralism within research on valuation in environmental decision-making responds to the recognition that neoclassical economic approaches to environmental valuation do not sufficiently account for important aspects of human–nature relations. However, few studies have explored how value plurality actually plays out in social deliberative reasoning and decision-making in practice, and these studies have mostly been deductive and quantitative.In his essay ‘Are choices trade-offs?’ Alan Holland (2002) goes to the heart of differences in conceptions of value and rationality between neoclassical and ecological economics. These conceptions differ in terms of whether values are seen as commensurable or incommensurable, whether people's choices amount to willing exchanges of gains and losses between different values and whether unwillingness to trade values off for net gain is irrational.Addressing Holland's question, we present a quasi-experimental study on deliberative valuation of marine issues on the Swedish west coast, where we considered how local citizens and politicians approached values in their reasoning and choice-making. Mixing quantitative and qualitative empirical material, we used an abductive analytical approach, iterating between data and theory to link our observations and interpretations to prevalent understandings of value, valuation and deliberation in the literature.The results demonstrate the relevance of value pluralism for environmental policy by showing the prevalence of preference uncertainty and intrapersonal value conflicts in participants' reasoning and interaction. Value conflicts played out as the inability to achieve multiple transcendental values that participants aspired to, including conflicts between social and environmental goals. Rather than attempting to commensurate different value dimensions, participants sought to avoid moral conflicts, showed emotional anguish when value conflicts came to the fore and tried to bridge conflicting aspirations and experiences through inclusive reason-giving and compromise.Thus, choices were not resolved through rational trade-offs, supporting Holland's claim and challenging the neoclassical trade-off model of choice. Incommensurability appeared as deliberate positions grounded in participants' experiences rather than as irrationality. Legitimately resolving value conflicts thus demands reason-sensitive means for deciding upon the sacrifices to be made and supporting public participation in environmental decision-making in ways that reveal peoples' actual moral considerations.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Kenter, Jasper O., et al.
(författare)
-
Loving the mess : navigating diversity and conflict in social values for sustainability
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Sustainability Science. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1862-4065 .- 1862-4057. ; 14:5, s. 1439-1461
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper concludes a special feature of Sustainability Science that explores a broad range of social value theoretical traditions, such as religious studies, social psychology, indigenous knowledge, economics, sociology, and philosophy. We introduce a novel transdisciplinary conceptual framework that revolves around concepts of ‘lenses’ and ‘tensions’ to help navigate value diversity. First, we consider the notion of lenses: perspectives on value and valuation along diverse dimensions that describe what values focus on, how their sociality is envisioned, and what epistemic and procedural assumptions are made. We characterise fourteen of such dimensions. This provides a foundation for exploration of seven areas of tension, between: (1) the values of individuals vs collectives; (2) values as discrete and held vs embedded and constructed; (3) value as static or changeable; (4) valuation as descriptive vs normative and transformative; (5) social vs relational values; (6) different rationalities and their relation to value integration; (7) degrees of acknowledgment of the role of power in navigating value conflicts. In doing so, we embrace the ‘mess’ of diversity, yet also provide a framework to organise this mess and support and encourage active transdisciplinary collaboration. We identify key research areas where such collaborations can be harnessed for sustainability transformation. Here it is crucial to understand how certain social value lenses are privileged over others and build capacity in decision-making for understanding and drawing on multiple value, epistemic and procedural lenses.
|
|
