TY - JOUR

T1 - Loving the mess

T2 - navigating diversity and conflict in social values for sustainability

AU - Kenter, Jasper O.

AU - Raymond, Christopher M.

AU - van Riper, Carena J.

AU - Azzopardi, Elaine

AU - Brear, Michelle R.

AU - Calcagni, Fulvia

AU - Christie, Ian

AU - Christie, Michael

AU - Fordham, Anne

AU - Gould, Rachelle K.

AU - Ives, Christopher D.

AU - Hejnowicz, Adam P.

AU - Gunton, Richard

AU - Horcea-Milcu, Andra Ioana

AU - Kendal, Dave

AU - Kronenberg, Jakub

AU - Massenberg, Julian R.

AU - O’Connor, Seb

AU - Ravenscroft, Neil

AU - Rawluk, Andrea

AU - Raymond, Ivan J.

AU - Rodríguez-Morales, Jorge

AU - Thankappan, Samarthia

N1 - An open call for Special Feature abstracts was publicised in February 2018 in Sustainability Science (Raymond et al. 2018 ). Forty-seven submissions were received, of which 18 were selected by the co-editors (CR, AR, CvR, DK, JK) based on criteria including academic quality from peer review of abstracts, disciplinary and geographic diversity, and gender balance. An author from each paper was invited to attend a workshop at the University of York, UK, funded by the Valuing Nature Programme. The goals of the workshop were to identify linkages across papers, facilitate deliberation on broader social values knowledge across diverse disciplines, and synthesise this new knowledge in a collective article. A diversity of perspectives were represented, including environmental science and ecology, human geography, sociology, psychology, ecological and mainstream economics, anthropology, philosophy, and business and religious studies. Publisher Copyright: © 2019, The Author(s).

PY - 2019/9/2

Y1 - 2019/9/2

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Ecosystems Research

KW - Ecosystem services

KW - Environmental values

KW - Epistemology

KW - Interdisciplinarity

KW - Knowledge brokering

KW - Nature’s contributions to people

KW - Relational values

KW - Shared values

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85064468094&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/f45c8853-5203-3344-9978-397ee8241e51/

U2 - 10.1007/s11625-019-00726-4

DO - 10.1007/s11625-019-00726-4

M3 - Journal articles

AN - SCOPUS:85064468094

VL - 14

SP - 1439

EP - 1461

JO - Sustainability Science

JF - Sustainability Science

SN - 1862-4065

IS - 5

ER -