Ecosystem services as a post-normal field of science

Ainscough, Jacob; Wilson, Meriwether; Kenter, Jasper O.

doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.021

Cited by 41 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The importance of inter-and transdisciplinary research and assessment approaches 675 identified in our survey also gains strong support within the ecosystem services literature 676 (Ainscough et al, 2018;Albert et al, 2017;Carmen et al, 2018;Costanza et al, 2017;Steger 677 et al, 2018). This acts as a guiding principle in the broad sense that it rejects narrow 678 disciplinary approaches to ecosystem service assessment and valuation, supporting the 679 norm of collaborative working and respect for different knowledge types.…”

supporting

confidence: 60%

Navigating pluralism: Understanding perceptions of the ecosystem services concept

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

supporting

confidence: 60%

Navigating pluralism: Understanding perceptions of the ecosystem services concept

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Democratic debate and decision-making entails weighing the often-conflicting values, interests and purposes of diverse stakeholders. The deliberative turn (Rodela 2012) and increased attention to post-normal approaches in ecosystem management (Ainscough et al 2018) has meant increased attention to justice with regard to whose values are considered and whose voice is heard (Kenter et al 2019). Articulating the interests of non-humans has a long history (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…MtHPR can extend this principle to value articulation with regard to the more-than-human world, potentially altering the way in which familiar human-nature relationships are perceived. This links with the post-normal science position that, at least in relation to complex issues, claims to truth are always limited and value laden (Ainscough et al 2018). This is because decisions around environmental management involve normative stances on desired outcomes.…”

Section: Post-normal Science: Including Multiple Knowledges and Valuementioning

confidence: 92%

“…Consideration of and deliberation between multiple perspectives is also an important element of post-normal science (Funtowicz and Ravetz 1994;Ainscough et al 2018). Post-normal science focuses on the principle of quality that incorporates issues of uncertainty, risk and multiple perspectives (Funtowicz and Ravetz 1994;Pellizzoni 2003;Ainscough et al 2018). Funtowicz and Ravetz (1994, p. 198) describe the principle of quality as enabling us "to manage the irreducible uncertainties and ethical complexities that are central to the resolution of issues in post-normal science.…”

Section: Post-normal Science: Including Multiple Knowledges and Valuementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Making intrinsic values work; integrating intrinsic values of the more-than-human world through the Life Framework of Values

O’Connor

Kenter

2019

Sustain Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper addresses central limitations of ecosystem services and nature's contributions to people (NCP) by developing a novel approach to consideration of intrinsic values of nature. Intrinsic values are seen as bundled with values of ecosystem services and NCP within the Life Framework, an innovative, comprehensive and easy to communicate framework of values. Building on work by John O'Neill, values are conceived of as related to living with, from, in and as the world. These frames are related to but distinct from more formal ethical justifications of intrinsic, instrumental and relational values, which straddle the four Life Frames. Focusing on intrinsic values, we conceive these as ends without reference to humans as valuers, but which nonetheless can be articulated by people. We draw on more-than-human participatory research and post-normal science to promote the articulation and deliberation of perspectives and interests of the more-than-human world by an extended peer community. This clearly differentiates our approach from both rights-based intrinsic value and utilitarian existence value approaches, although it is inclusive of them. The approach is demonstrated by an elaborate integrated marine ecosystem valuation, where we investigate associations between intrinsic and relational values and the four Life frames. The Life Framework, operationalised through the post-normal, more-than-human participatory approach, operationalises articulated intrinsic values in a way that puts them on an equal footing with values of ecosystem services and NCP, providing an opportunity to bridge and reconcile these different types of value through deliberation. This enhances the recognition and procedural justice of valuation, while at the same time retaining the practical advantages that the ecosystem services framework brings.

show abstract

“…This means that no single disciplinary framework can fully integrate the many understandings of social values. We adopt a post-normal view grounded in epistemic pluralism that suggests there is no 'one correct way' of conceptualising social values; each provides a limited perspective to be scrutinised in democratic debate and decision-making (Funtowicz and Ravetz 1993;Ainscough et al 2018). Post-normal science addresses complex, wicked problems, where facts are uncertain, stakes are high, and decisions are urgent.…”

Section: Theoretical Traditions In Social Values For Sustainabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Loving the mess: navigating diversity and conflict in social values for sustainability

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Ecosystem services as a post-normal field of science

Cited by 41 publications

References 70 publications

Navigating pluralism: Understanding perceptions of the ecosystem services concept

Navigating pluralism: Understanding perceptions of the ecosystem services concept

Making intrinsic values work; integrating intrinsic values of the more-than-human world through the Life Framework of Values

Loving the mess: navigating diversity and conflict in social values for sustainability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About