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

Abstract

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.

Editorial overview: theoretical traditions in social values for sustainability

“…The division of instrumental benefits of the environment into use and non-use (or passive-use) values is well-established (Arrow et al 1993;Carson et al 2001;Tinch et al 2019). In parallel, philosophical arguments have been made about the structure of the worth of nature in-and for itself, building on the long tradition of studying intrinsic values in environmental ethics (Rolston 1988;Callicott 1992;O'Neill 1992;Muraca 2011;Davidson 2013;Batavia and Nelson 2017;Piccolo 2017;O'Connor and Kenter 2019). Most recently, there has been a renaissance of attention to relational values, defined by Chan et al (2016) as preferences, principles and virtues about humannature relationships.…”

“…Given the different perspectives on social values presented here, one needs to question whether empirical approaches to value integration are always possible, necessary or desirable. In many papers in this special feature, values from different lenses are narrated as opposed to empirically integrated (Gould et al 2019;Ives and Kidwell 2019;O'Connor and Kenter 2019). Christie et al (2019b) demonstrate how values could be elicited in parallel by drawing on the multiple evidence-based approach adopted by IPBES, without going into the details of value conflicts within and across theoretical traditions, and pointing out that IPBES has thus far lacked sufficient knowledge of processes for reconciling plural values and addressing value conflicts.…”

“…Papers identify different processes or pathways of change, including healthy values pathways where the emphasis is on aligning actions with intrinsic as opposed to an extrinsic value orientation and value activation pathways where the emphasis is on aligning actions with specific character strengths and virtues (Raymond and Raymond 2019). Also, there are pathways of value change associated with deliberative valuation (Ravenscroft 2019;O'Connor and Kenter 2019), in addition to processes associated with changes in group composition (e.g., immigration, emigration), maturation (e.g., ageing and socialization) and socioecological context (e.g., sudden changes to physical context wrought by climate change) (Kendal and Raymond 2018).…”

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

“…Chan et al 2018Chan et al , 2016Muraca 2016;IPBES 2016;Christie et al 2019b). Several contributions to this feature have considered relational values and their relation with shared, social, instrumental and intrinsic values (Calcagni et al 2019;Stålhammar and Thorén 2019;Gould et al 2019;O'Connor and Kenter 2019). Both relational and social strands of thinking evolved, at least in relation to ecosystem assessment and valuation, from increasing recognition of the limitations of mainstream economic valuation and its instrumental value assumptions.…”

Unveiling Intrinsic Value in Biodiversity Accounting: A Challenge for Accountants in Indonesia

“…J. Jones, , 2010Maseyk et al, 2016). While the non-metric approach is an intrinsic measurement that takes into account all values of life (O'Connor & Kenter, 2019;Sheng et al, 2019;Sizemore, 2015). The existence of those valuation methods shows that the measurement of intrinsic value is not only discourse in biodiversity but also can be developed in a policy that will affect the development of accounting in biological disclosure.…”