TY - JOUR
T1 - Nature’s value, philosophies, theories, and concepts
T2 - a critical review and suggestions for future indigenous research
AU - Damoah, Elizabeth
AU - Connor, Jeffery D.
AU - Sangha, Kamaljit K.
AU - Cooper, Bethany
AU - Poelina, Anne
PY - 2024/10
Y1 - 2024/10
N2 - Numerous publications on natural resource valuations consider contexts where environmental assets at risk are significant to Indigenous Peoples and their estates. In the last two decades alone, many applied studies have aimed at investigating the ‘value’ of socio-environmental outcomes from the perspectives of the general populations including Indigenous Peoples. The term ‘value’ is often invoked in varying contexts ranging from empirical research to natural resource management (NRM) strategies and policies. Underpinning all valuation exercises is a conceptual approach to defining and analysing value, which is contextual given that different philosophies and worldviews consider nature’s ‘value’ differently. Our objective was to understand value philosophies underpinning diverse NRM ‘value’ paradigms and to evaluate compatibility with Indigenous Peoples’ value attribution. We conducted a systematic search for publications on nature studies from multiple databases using a Boolean strategy. The processes for literature identification and selection are presented in a PRISMA flowchart. The study then critically reviewed and synthesized insights from the literature on the interpretations, conceptualizations, and elicitations of value, particularly in contexts where NRM influences Indigenous estates. We found that philosophical perspectives define how ‘value’ is conceptualised and evaluated. Most studies reviewed rested on the economic paradigm grounded in anthropocentric utilitarian value-framing, and limited studies considered a relational value lens that reflects Indigenous Peoples’ value attribution for the natural environment. A relational lens sits outside of the usual ‘instrumental versus intrinsic’ value dichotomy and deems human-nature connections coupled, and worthy in themselves. The paper demonstrates the commonalities and inconsistencies across diverse value conceptualizations and describes emerging pluralistic approaches consistent with Indigenous value attribution. A novel framework for understanding and bridging the different conceptual and analytical valuation lenses, particularly on water, is presented ensuring that multiple, complex, and distinct value dimensions are empirically bridged in studies involving Indigenous Peoples.
AB - Numerous publications on natural resource valuations consider contexts where environmental assets at risk are significant to Indigenous Peoples and their estates. In the last two decades alone, many applied studies have aimed at investigating the ‘value’ of socio-environmental outcomes from the perspectives of the general populations including Indigenous Peoples. The term ‘value’ is often invoked in varying contexts ranging from empirical research to natural resource management (NRM) strategies and policies. Underpinning all valuation exercises is a conceptual approach to defining and analysing value, which is contextual given that different philosophies and worldviews consider nature’s ‘value’ differently. Our objective was to understand value philosophies underpinning diverse NRM ‘value’ paradigms and to evaluate compatibility with Indigenous Peoples’ value attribution. We conducted a systematic search for publications on nature studies from multiple databases using a Boolean strategy. The processes for literature identification and selection are presented in a PRISMA flowchart. The study then critically reviewed and synthesized insights from the literature on the interpretations, conceptualizations, and elicitations of value, particularly in contexts where NRM influences Indigenous estates. We found that philosophical perspectives define how ‘value’ is conceptualised and evaluated. Most studies reviewed rested on the economic paradigm grounded in anthropocentric utilitarian value-framing, and limited studies considered a relational value lens that reflects Indigenous Peoples’ value attribution for the natural environment. A relational lens sits outside of the usual ‘instrumental versus intrinsic’ value dichotomy and deems human-nature connections coupled, and worthy in themselves. The paper demonstrates the commonalities and inconsistencies across diverse value conceptualizations and describes emerging pluralistic approaches consistent with Indigenous value attribution. A novel framework for understanding and bridging the different conceptual and analytical valuation lenses, particularly on water, is presented ensuring that multiple, complex, and distinct value dimensions are empirically bridged in studies involving Indigenous Peoples.
KW - environmental value
KW - indigenous water ontologies
KW - indigenous water values
KW - pluralistic valuation
KW - relational value
KW - value conceptualizations
KW - value pluralism
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85206216735&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1088/1748-9326/ad7f6e
DO - 10.1088/1748-9326/ad7f6e
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85206216735
SN - 1748-9326
VL - 19
SP - 1
EP - 19
JO - Environmental Research Letters
JF - Environmental Research Letters
IS - 11
M1 - 113004
ER -