Understanding relational values in cultural landscapes in Romania and Germany

Abstract

In environmental conservation, academics and practitioners articulate a wide range of values to convey attributes of nature to decisionmakers. The diversity regarding theoretical conceptualisations related to values is high (Horcea-Milcu et al., 2019)-from individual, shared or social values to monetary values, or held and assigned values, as well as intrinsic or instrumental values (Dietz et al., 2005; Kenter et al., 2015; Rawluk et al., 2018). One debate stemming from this diversity is between the acknowledgement of intrinsic and instrumental values (Tallis & Lubchenco, 2014). To bridge intrinsic and instrumental values of nature, a new framing has emergedrelational values (Muraca, 2011). Relational values can be defined as preferences and principles about human-nature relationships (Chan

The importance of relational values in gaining people’s support and promoting their involvement in social-ecological system management: A comparative analysis

“…Therefore, the exploratory factor analysis was conducted to the whole set as well as the three value classes. Prior studies have used the exploratory factor analysis has been used to investigate if relational values relate to different latent traits than ones for instrumental and intrinsic values (See et al, 2020;Riechers et al, 2021a). The correlation coefficients among the three value classes demonstrated how respondents' valuation of each class related (or differed) (See et al, 2020).…”

“…To make the value statement items concise, we chose the four most important ecosystem services (Uehara et al, 2021). To date, there seems to be no established quantitative scale of relational values agreed upon among scholars (Kleespies and Dierkes, 2020a;Riechers et al, 2021a). Hence, we adopted the value statements developed by Uehara et al (2020) for an area that surrounded the Seto Inland Sea but was outside the current study areas, whose items were drawn from Chan et al (2016).…”

“…As relational values are highly contextdependent (Himes and Muraca, 2018;West et al, 2020), it was desirable to adapt a scale tested in a similar context. The intrinsic value statements were drawn from See et al (2020) and Riechers et al (2021a). An unbalanced, small number of items for intrinsic values is not desirable (See et al, 2020).…”

“…Further, empirical studies can corroborate the theoretical discussion of relational values and contribute to SES management in practice. For example, empirical findings on the relationship between intrinsic, instrumental, and relational values have been mixed (See et al, 2020;Riechers et al, 2021a).…”

“…Although certain studies assert that relational values are a promising deep leverage point (Chan et al, 2020;Uehara et al, 2020;Riechers et al, 2021b) as they are connected to proenvironmental behavior and attitudes and promote sustainable SES use (Jones et al, 2016;Van den Born et al, 2017;Kleespies and Dierkes, 2020a), empirical studies are, once again, limited (Uehara et al, 2019a;Shin et al, 2022). Klain et al (2017) suggested the potential contribution of relational values to the value-belief-norm theory to better understand proenvironmental behavior; however, most empirical studies of relational values focus on understanding its compositions, latent traits (Klain et al, 2017;Kleespies and Dierkes, 2020a;See et al, 2020;Uehara et al, 2020;Riechers et al, 2021a;Saito et al, 2021), andpredictors (Arias-Arevalo et al, 2017;Kleespies and Dierkes, 2020b;See et al, 2020;Shishany et al, 2020;Riechers et al, 2021a).…”