Relational values of nature: leverage points for nature policy in Europe

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.

Understanding relational values in cultural landscapes in Romania and Germany

“…We found that higher levels of relational values and intrinsic values were linked to a positive attitude towards environmental conservation, as well as more frequent use of local natural goods (Admiraal et al, 2017;Knippenberg et al, 2018;van den Born et al, 2017). This could suggest that people with higher relational values are more likely to support conservation agendas (Mattijssen et al, 2020;Topp et al, 2021). Our results showed that the involvement in environmental conservation groups or projects did not have any significant influence on relational values, suggesting that is it not the active involvement per se that is linked to stronger relational values, but rather that strong relational values underpin a positive perception of conservation.…”

A transformative mission for prioritising nature in Australian cities

“…Urban communities are diverse, and supporting different communities’ innovative practices with nature is an important pathway to inclusive and diverse nature-positive cities that have broad public support and engagement. Importantly, nature is place-based and so are people’s relationships to those places within cities and the biodiversity that constitutes them (Fish et al 2016 ; Mattijssen et al 2020 ). It is important to ensure that communities of practice that act on protecting, valuing, stewarding nature are not only recognised but further empowered to innovate with nature (Frantzeskaki et al 2019 ).…”

Human-nature connectedness as leverage point

“…Yet, beneficial effects of connections between humans and nature are widely recognized for sustainability (Folke et al 2011;Zylstra et al 2014). Benefits include positive outcomes for health (Maller et al 2006;Shanahan et al 2016), the cognitive development of children (Taniguchi et al 2005;Giusti 2019), and overall happiness and well-being (Capaldi et al 2014). As an attempt to combine this longstanding work of many disciplines, the notion of human-nature connectedness comprises a wide range of concepts and means to operationalize notions of human-nature interactions (Ives et al 2017).…”

“…So far, the least integrated values are relational values, which reflect the qualities of the relationship between nature and humans (Chan et al 2016). Based on the nature policy of Europe, the contribution by Mattijssen et al (2020) show the importance of such values for policy and discuss several routes through which incorporation of relational values into nature policies can lead to transformation in the three realms of leverage by Abson et al (2017): re-think (e.g. pluralized meanings of nature, relational language), re-structure (e.g.…”