Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring multiple dimensions of values and valuing: a conceptual framework for mapping and translating values for social-ecological research and practice

  • Special Feature: Original Article
  • Theoretical traditions in social values for sustainability
  • Published:
Sustainability Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Social values underpin complex social-ecological challenges, such as sustainability. However, there are many ways of conceptualising values and valuing, and this divergence limits conversations across research disciplines, hindering the practical incorporation of values into sustainability decision making. We identify two key tensions in the disparate and fragmented ways of understanding the nature of values: context dependence and level of abstractness. We consider how these tensions apply across a breadth of concepts relevant to understanding the importance of socio-ecological systems to people, including valued attributes and assets, cultural values, and connection to place. We propose a conceptual framework structured by these tensions to orient multiple value concepts in relation to each other. We present the conceptual framework as being ontologically plural, and epistemologically flexible, providing a framework for mapping value concepts across different levels of abstractness and context dependency. The framework offers a means to span the breadth of value concepts and acts as a starting point for fostering cross-disciplinary conversations. We discuss the implications of the framework for researchers engaging with multiple theoretical traditions, as well as for practitioners grappling with how to make sense of what is important to the communities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson N et al (2018) Core values underpin the attributes of forest that matter to people. Int J Forest Res 91(5):629–640

    Google Scholar 

  • Beilin R, Reid K (2015) It’s not a ‘thing’ but a ‘place’: reconceptualising ‘assets’ in the context of fire risk landscapes. Int J Wildland Fire 24:130–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bracken LJ, Oughton EA (2006) What do you mean? The importance of language in developing interdisciplinary research. Trans Inst Br Geogr 31(3):371–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandenburg AM, Carroll MS (1995) Your place or mine? The effect of place creation on environmental values and landscape meanings. Soc Nat Resour 8:381–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown TC (1984) The concept of value in resource allocation. Land Econ 60:231–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown G (2005) Mapping spatial attributes in survey research for natural resource management: methods and applications. Soc Nat Resour 18(1):17–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown G, Donovan S (2012) Measuring change in place values for environmental and natural resource planning using public participation GIS (PPGIS): results and challenges for longitudinal research. Soc Nat Resour 27(1):36–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunson MW, Baker MA (2016) Translational training for tomorrow’s environmental scientists. J Environ Stud Sci 6:295–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryce R, Irvine K, Church A, Fish R, Ranger S, Kenter JO (2016) Subjective well-being indicators for large-scale assessment of cultural ecosystem services Ecosyst Serv 21(B):258–269

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan KMA, Balvanera P, Benessaiah K et al (2016) Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 9:1462–1465

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chaudhary S, McGregor A, Houston D, Chettri N (2015) The evolution of ecosystem services: a time series and discourse-centered analysis. Environ Sci Policy 54:25–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christie M, Martín-López B, Church A, Siwicka E, Szymonczyk P, Keune H, Sauterel JM, Kretsch C (2019) Inclusive valuation of nature’s contributions to people in Europe and Central Asia. Sustain Sci (in review)

  • Costanza R, de Groot R, Braat L, Kubiszewski I, Fioramonti L, Sutton P, Farber S, Grasso M (2017) Twenty years of ecosystem services: how far have we come and how far do we still need to go? Ecosyst Serv 28:1–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crotty M (1998) The foundations of social research: meaning and perspective in the research process. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Daily GC, Ellison K (2002) The new economy of nature. the quest to make conservation profitable. Island Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Dart J, Davies R (2003) A dialogical, story-based evaluation tool: the most significant change technique. Am J Eval 24:137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Datler G, Jagodzinski W, Schmidt P (2013) Two theories on the test bench: internal and external validity of the theories of Ronald Inglehart and Shalom Schwartz. Soc Sci Res 42:906–925

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (2011) Sage handbook of qualitative research. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Dovers S (2005) Clarifying the imperative of integration research for sustainable environmental management. J Res Prac 1(2):1–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Fish R, Church A, Winter M (2016) Conceptualising cultural ecosystem services: A novel framework for research and critical engagement Ecosyst Serv 21(B):208–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher AJ (2017) Applying critical realism in qualitative research: methodology meets method. Int J Soc Res Method 20:181–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford RM, Anderson NM, Nitschke CR, Bennett LT, Williams KJH (2017) Psychological values and cues as a basis for developing socially relevant criteria and indicators for forest management. For Policy Econ 78:141–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford RM, Rawluk A, Williams KJH (2019) Managing values in disaster planning: current strategies, challenges and opportunities for incorporating values of the public. Land Use Policy 81:131–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freitag RC, Abramson DB, Chalana M, Dixon M (2014) Whole community resilience: an asset-based approach to enhancing adaptive capacity before a disruption. J Am Plan Assoc 80:324–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons M, Limoges C, Nowotny H, Schwartzman S, Scott P, Trow M (1994) The new production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Gómez-Baggethun E, Ruiz-Pérez M (2011) Economic valuation and the commodification of ecosystem services. Prog Phys Geogr 35(5):613–628

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graeber D (2001) Toward an anthropological theory of value: the false coin of our own dreams. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Graham S, Barnett J, Fincher R, Hurlimann A, Morteux C, Waters E (2013) The social values at risk from sea-level rise. Environ Impact Assess Rev 41:45–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham S, Barnett J, Fincher R, Mortreux C, Hurlimann A (2015) Towards fair local outcomes in adaptation to sea-level rise. Clim Change 130:411–424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guba EG, Lincoln YS (1998) Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) The landscape of qualitative research: theories and issues. Sage, Thousand Oaks, pp 195–220

    Google Scholar 

  • Harré R (2012) Approaches to realism. Studia Philosophica Estonica 5(2):23–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Inglehart R (1977) The silent revolution: changing values and political styles among western publics. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • IPBES (2018) Natures contributions to people. In: IPBES consultation and
capacity building workshop. Bonn, Germany, 4–6 June 2018 


  • Ives CD, Kendal D (2014) The role of social values in the management of ecological systems. J Environ Manage 144:67–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ives C, Kidwell J (2019) Religion and social values for sustainability. Sustain Sci (in review)

  • Justus J et al (2009) Buying into conservation: intrinsic versus instrumental value. Trends Ecol Evol 24(4):187–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendal D, Ford RM, Anderson NM, Farrar A (2015) The VALS: a new tool to measure people’s general valued attributes of landscapes. J Environ Manag 163:224–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenter JO (2018) IPBES: don’t throw out the baby whilst keeping the bathwater; put people’s values central, not nature’s contributions. Eco Serv 33(A):40–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenter JO et al (2015) What are shared and social values of ecosystems? Ecol Econ 111:86–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klain SC, Olmsted P, Chan KMA, Satterfield T (2017) Relational values resonate broadly and differently than intrinsic or instrumental values, or the new ecological paradigm. PLoS ONE 12(8):e0183962

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kronenberg J, Andersson E (2019) Integrating social values with other value dimensions: parallel use vs. combination vs. full integration. Sustain Sci (in review)

  • Kruger TM, Beilin R (2014) A ‘responsibility for place’ - firefighter deployment, local knowledge and risk. Int J Wildland Fire. 23:577–584

  • MacMynowski DP (2007) Pausing at the brink of interdisciplinarity: power and knowledge at the meeting of social and biophysical science. Ecol Soc 12:20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manfredo MJ, Bruskotter JT, Teel TL, Fulton D, Schwartz SH, Arlinghaus R, Oishi S, Uskul AK, Redford K, Kitayatna S, Sullivan L (2017) Why social values cannot be changed for the sake of conservation. Conserv Biol 31:772–780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markauskaite L, Goodyear P (2016) Epistemic fluency and professional education: innovation, knowledgeable action and actionable knowledge. Springer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • McIntyre N, Moore J, Yuan M (2008) A place-based, values-centered approach to managing recreation on Canadian Crown lands. Soc Nat Res 21:657–670

    Google Scholar 

  • Milcu A, Abson DJ, Apetrei C, Riechers M, Dușe I-A, Dorninger C, Lam D, Freeth R, Lang DJ (2019) Values in transformational sustainability science: four discourses for change. Sust Sci (in review)

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island Press, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller TR, Wiek A, Sarewitz D, Robinson J, Olsson L, Kriebel D, Loorbach D (2014) The future of sustainability science: a solutions-oriented research agenda. Sustain Sci 9:239–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moon K, Blackman D (2014) A guide to understanding social science research for natural scientists. Conserv Biol 82:1167–1177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor S, Kenter J (2019) Making intrinsic values work; a communicative approach to integrating intrinsic values of non-human nature with ecosystem services. Sust Sci (in review)

  • O’Neill SJ, Handmer J (2012) Responding to bushfire risk: the need for transformative adaptation. Environ Res Let 7:1–7

    Google Scholar 

  • Phoenix C, Osborne NJ, Redshaw C, Moran R, Stahl-Timmins W, Depledge MH, Fleming LE, Wheeler BW (2013) Paradigmatic approaches to studying environment and human health: (Forgotten) implications for interdisciplinary research. Environ Sci Policy 25:218–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawluk A, Ford RM, Williams KJ (2018) Value-based scenario planning: exploring multifaceted values in natural disaster planning and management. Ecol Soc 23(4):2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rawluk A, Ford RM, Neolaka FL, Williams KJ (2017) Public values for integration in natural disaster management and planning: a case study from Victoria. Aust J Environ Manage 185:11–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raymond CM, Kenter J (2016) Transcendental values and the valuation and management of ecosystem services. Ecosyst Serv 21:241–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raymond CM, Bryan BA, MacDonald DH, Cast A, Strathearn S, Grandgirard A, Kalivas T (2009) Mapping community values for natural capital and ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 68:1301–1315

  • Redford KH, Adams WM (2009) Payment for ecosystem services and the challenge of saving nature. Conserv Biol 23:785–787

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed P, Brown G (2003) Values suitability analysis: a methodology for identifying and integrating public perceptions of ecosystem values in forest planning. J Environ Plann Manag 46(5):643–658

  • Reid K, Beilin R (2015) Making the landscape “home”: narratives of bushfire and place in Australia. Geoforum 58:95–103

  • Rokeach M (1973) The nature of human values. The Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz SH (1994) Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of human values? J Soc Issues 50:19–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz SH (2012) An overview of the Schwartz theory of basic values. On Read Psych Culture 2:1–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Stålhammar S, Thorén H (2019) Three perspectives on relational values. Sustain Sci (in review)

  • Star SL, Griesemer JR (1989) Institutional ecology, ‘Translations’ and boundary objects: amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology. Soc Stud Sci 19:387–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stedman R (2003) Is it really just a social construction? The contribution of the physical environment to sense of place. Soc Nat Res 16:671–685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson J (2008) The cultural values model: an integrated approach to values in landscapes. Landsc and Urban Plan 84:127–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart J (2006) Value conflict and policy change. Rev Policy Res 23:183–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stolte JF, Fender S (2007) Framing social values: an experimental study of culture and cognition. Soc Psych Quart 70:59–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tadaki M, Sinner J, Chan KMA (2017) Making sense of environmental values: a typology of concepts. Ecol Soc 22(1):7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trainor S (2006) Realms of value: conflicting natural resource values and incommensurability. Environ Values 15:3–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Kerkhoff L, Lebel L (2006) Linking knowledge and action for sustainable development. Annu Rev Environ Resour 31:445–477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Riper CJ, Thiel A, Penker M, Braito M, Landon AC, Thomsen J, Tucker CM (2018) Incorporating multilevel values and the governance of social-ecological systems. Ecol Soc 23(3):25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Riper C, Winkler-Schor S, Stamberger L, Keller R, Braito M, Raymond C, Eriksson M, Golebie E, Johnson D (2019) Integrating multi-scale values and pro-environmental behavior in a protected area (in review)

  • Williams KJ, Ford RM, Rawluk A (2017) Strategies and tools for incorporating values of the Victorian public in strategic bushfire risk decision making. University of Melbourne, Melbourne Australia

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams KJH, Ford R, Rawluk A (2018) Values of the public at risk of wildfire and its management. Int J Wild Fire (in review)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Ecosystem and Forest Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia

    Andrea Rawluk, Rebecca Ford, Nerida Anderson & Kathryn Williams

Authors
  1. Andrea Rawluk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rebecca Ford
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nerida Anderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kathryn Williams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea Rawluk.

Additional information

Handled by Christopher M. Raymond, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Sweden.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rawluk, A., Ford, R., Anderson, N. et al. Exploring multiple dimensions of values and valuing: a conceptual framework for mapping and translating values for social-ecological research and practice. Sustain Sci 14, 1187–1200 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0639-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-0639-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation