No abstract

The public justification for nature conservation currently rests on two pillars: hedonic (instrumental) values, and moral values. Yet, these representations appear to do little motivational work in practice; biodiversity continues to decline, and biodiversity policies face a wide implementation gap. In seven EU countries, we studied why people act for nature beyond professional obligations. We explore the motivations of 105 committed actors for nature in detail using life-history interviews, and trace these back to their childhood. Results show that the key concept for understanding committed action for nature is meaningfulness. People act for nature because nature is meaningful to them, connected to a life that makes sense and a difference in the world. These eudemonic values (expressing the meaningful life) constitute a crucial third pillar in the justification of nature conservation. Important policy implications are explored, e.g. with respect to public discourse and the encounter with nature in childhood.

No abstract

Relational values reflect the qualities of the relationships between humans and nature, such as care, social bonding, place attachment and spiritual meanings. In this perspective article, we argue that understanding relational values is vital for nature conservation, and we identify how incorporation of these values may function as leverage points for achieving more effective nature policy. We discuss the distinctive features of the concept of relational values and elaborate how relational values strongly influence people's perceptions of, engagement with and action for nature. Relational values can also provide important deep leverage points for policy interventions aiming to support citizen's contribution to nature conservation, to strengthen biodiversity policy and the relationship between people and nature. Based on three realms of leverage (re-think, restructure and reconnect), we distinguish six routes through which relational values can be integrated in policies and practices of nature conservation: (1) incorporation of pluralized meanings of nature; (2) the uptake of relational language in policy discourse; (3) a prioritization of landscape-based policy; (4) empowering citizens in nature conservation; (5) reorienting nature education to stimulate people's personal bond with nature; and (6) using digital technology to stimulate new relationships with nature.

Environmental activism, defined as a range of difficult pro-environmental behaviors, is analyzed within the conceptual framework of Significance Quest Theory (SQT). In Study 1, 40 interviews were carried out on two groups of people in the European Union: Committed Actors for Nature (CANs, n = 25) versus Committed Actors for Society (CASs, n = 15). Results demonstrated that Significance Quest (SQ) motivates each group to be strongly committed to their chosen action and the main difference between them being in their ideology (pro-social vs. pro-environmental). In Study 2 ( N = 131), the relationship between SQ and intention to enact difficult pro-environmental behaviors was assessed. Results suggested that the higher the SQ, the higher the tendency to enact difficult pro-environmental behaviors, but not average or easy ones. Moreover, the higher the pro-environmental ideology, the stronger the indirect effect of SQ on difficult behavior through willingness to sacrifice.

No abstract

SummaryDevelopment NGOs are increasingly adopting so-called managerial working methods. This paper explores the changing belief systems and practices of Northern development NGOs as well as the strains arising from this pressure. We draw upon a literature review and case studies of two Northern development NGOs and their Southern counterparts in Ghana, India and Nicaragua. Our findings show that managerialist ideas and practices clash with a number of values, views and goals that 'traditionally' have been widely shared in the private aid channel. To ensure that their actual practices remain consistent with their belief systems, Northern development NGOs cannot avoid making tough choices that will have key consequences for their future relevance and identity.

No abstract