Editorial overview: theoretical traditions in social values for sustainability

Christopher M. Raymond, Jasper O. Kenter, Carena J. van Riper, Andrea Rawluk, Dave Kendal

Research output: Contribution to journalEditorial

Abstract

This special feature provides an impression of the plurality of social values for sustainability, taking into account theoretical traditions within mainstream and heterodox economics; positive, social and environmental psychology; human geography; anthropology; sociology; religious and indigenous studies and business management. Papers in this issue respond to questions of: how do we conceptualise social values; how do we integrate or share social values; what are processes for learning about and mechanisms for forming and changing social values; and what are the associations between social values and behaviour or well-being? Consistent with post-normal science, we suggest that there is no one correct way of conceptualising, assessing, integrating or activating social values for sustainability. We present five arguments: (1) the plurality of social values can be conceptualised along many different dimensions, with reference to value, epistemic and procedural lenses; (2) values are nested in different hierarchies, resulting in the potential for different forms of value articulations and pathways of value expression; (3) not all social values are pre-formed and readily drawn upon, instead needing pathways of deliberation or intervention to be activated; (4) social values may change through different processes or pathways of intervention, and; (5) power matters in the formation and assessment of social values. We discuss the tensions that arise when attempting to integrate different perspectives and introduce the notion of ‘navigation’ to begin to address these tensions. Navigation requires scholars to adopt a more critical and reflexive approach to value enquiry than is currently espoused in sustainability science and practice.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1173-1185
Number of pages13
JournalSustainability Science
Volume14
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2 2019

Fingerprint

Social Values
sustainability
Values
navigation
social value
Social Psychology
Geography
Anthropology
Sociology
human geography
anthropology
Social Behavior
social behavior
social association
environmental psychology
Lenses
Reference Values
business management
learning
Economics

Keywords

  • Deliberation
  • Ecosystem services
  • Environment
  • Integrated valuation
  • Non-monetary valuation
  • Social values

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Global and Planetary Change
  • Health(social science)
  • Geography, Planning and Development
  • Ecology
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Nature and Landscape Conservation
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Cite this

Editorial overview : theoretical traditions in social values for sustainability. / Raymond, Christopher M.; Kenter, Jasper O.; van Riper, Carena J.; Rawluk, Andrea; Kendal, Dave.

In: Sustainability Science, Vol. 14, No. 5, 02.09.2019, p. 1173-1185.

Research output: Contribution to journalEditorial

Raymond, Christopher M. ; Kenter, Jasper O. ; van Riper, Carena J. ; Rawluk, Andrea ; Kendal, Dave. / Editorial overview : theoretical traditions in social values for sustainability. In: Sustainability Science. 2019 ; Vol. 14, No. 5. pp. 1173-1185.
@article{5dc74768d7f64aa49d84cf8ddad533d2,
title = "Editorial overview: theoretical traditions in social values for sustainability",
abstract = "This special feature provides an impression of the plurality of social values for sustainability, taking into account theoretical traditions within mainstream and heterodox economics; positive, social and environmental psychology; human geography; anthropology; sociology; religious and indigenous studies and business management. Papers in this issue respond to questions of: how do we conceptualise social values; how do we integrate or share social values; what are processes for learning about and mechanisms for forming and changing social values; and what are the associations between social values and behaviour or well-being? Consistent with post-normal science, we suggest that there is no one correct way of conceptualising, assessing, integrating or activating social values for sustainability. We present five arguments: (1) the plurality of social values can be conceptualised along many different dimensions, with reference to value, epistemic and procedural lenses; (2) values are nested in different hierarchies, resulting in the potential for different forms of value articulations and pathways of value expression; (3) not all social values are pre-formed and readily drawn upon, instead needing pathways of deliberation or intervention to be activated; (4) social values may change through different processes or pathways of intervention, and; (5) power matters in the formation and assessment of social values. We discuss the tensions that arise when attempting to integrate different perspectives and introduce the notion of ‘navigation’ to begin to address these tensions. Navigation requires scholars to adopt a more critical and reflexive approach to value enquiry than is currently espoused in sustainability science and practice.",
keywords = "Deliberation, Ecosystem services, Environment, Integrated valuation, Non-monetary valuation, Social values",
author = "Raymond, {Christopher M.} and Kenter, {Jasper O.} and {van Riper}, {Carena J.} and Andrea Rawluk and Dave Kendal",
year = "2019",
month = "9",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1007/s11625-019-00723-7",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "1173--1185",
journal = "Sustainability Science",
issn = "1862-4065",
publisher = "Springer Japan",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Editorial overview

T2 - theoretical traditions in social values for sustainability

AU - Raymond, Christopher M.

AU - Kenter, Jasper O.

AU - van Riper, Carena J.

AU - Rawluk, Andrea

AU - Kendal, Dave

PY - 2019/9/2

Y1 - 2019/9/2

N2 - This special feature provides an impression of the plurality of social values for sustainability, taking into account theoretical traditions within mainstream and heterodox economics; positive, social and environmental psychology; human geography; anthropology; sociology; religious and indigenous studies and business management. Papers in this issue respond to questions of: how do we conceptualise social values; how do we integrate or share social values; what are processes for learning about and mechanisms for forming and changing social values; and what are the associations between social values and behaviour or well-being? Consistent with post-normal science, we suggest that there is no one correct way of conceptualising, assessing, integrating or activating social values for sustainability. We present five arguments: (1) the plurality of social values can be conceptualised along many different dimensions, with reference to value, epistemic and procedural lenses; (2) values are nested in different hierarchies, resulting in the potential for different forms of value articulations and pathways of value expression; (3) not all social values are pre-formed and readily drawn upon, instead needing pathways of deliberation or intervention to be activated; (4) social values may change through different processes or pathways of intervention, and; (5) power matters in the formation and assessment of social values. We discuss the tensions that arise when attempting to integrate different perspectives and introduce the notion of ‘navigation’ to begin to address these tensions. Navigation requires scholars to adopt a more critical and reflexive approach to value enquiry than is currently espoused in sustainability science and practice.

AB - This special feature provides an impression of the plurality of social values for sustainability, taking into account theoretical traditions within mainstream and heterodox economics; positive, social and environmental psychology; human geography; anthropology; sociology; religious and indigenous studies and business management. Papers in this issue respond to questions of: how do we conceptualise social values; how do we integrate or share social values; what are processes for learning about and mechanisms for forming and changing social values; and what are the associations between social values and behaviour or well-being? Consistent with post-normal science, we suggest that there is no one correct way of conceptualising, assessing, integrating or activating social values for sustainability. We present five arguments: (1) the plurality of social values can be conceptualised along many different dimensions, with reference to value, epistemic and procedural lenses; (2) values are nested in different hierarchies, resulting in the potential for different forms of value articulations and pathways of value expression; (3) not all social values are pre-formed and readily drawn upon, instead needing pathways of deliberation or intervention to be activated; (4) social values may change through different processes or pathways of intervention, and; (5) power matters in the formation and assessment of social values. We discuss the tensions that arise when attempting to integrate different perspectives and introduce the notion of ‘navigation’ to begin to address these tensions. Navigation requires scholars to adopt a more critical and reflexive approach to value enquiry than is currently espoused in sustainability science and practice.

KW - Deliberation

KW - Ecosystem services

KW - Environment

KW - Integrated valuation

KW - Non-monetary valuation

KW - Social values

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85071420274&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85071420274&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11625-019-00723-7

DO - 10.1007/s11625-019-00723-7

M3 - Editorial

AN - SCOPUS:85071420274

VL - 14

SP - 1173

EP - 1185

JO - Sustainability Science

JF - Sustainability Science

SN - 1862-4065

IS - 5

ER -