The Life Framework of Values and living as nature; towards a full recognition of holistic and relational ontologies
The Life Framework of Values and living as nature; towards a full recognition of holistic and relational ontologies
复制标题
人生价值观框架和自然生活；
DOI：
10.1007/s11625-022-01159-2
复制
发表时间：
2022
影响因子：
6
通讯作者：
Seb O’Connor
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Kenter;Seb O’Connor
生命价值框架将我们体验和思考自然的丰富方式与自然的多种方式联系起来。本文根据neuteeleers等人的意见，进一步完善和阐明了生命框架（可持续科学14(1):4,2020,10.1007/s11625-020-00825-7）。他们支持将其应用于超越与生态系统服务和自然对人类的贡献相关的工具主义和人类中心主义，但对我们在奥尼尔等人的环境价值观中加入生命作为自然的框架持批评态度。劳特利奇，伦敦，2008)最初的三个（生活在自然世界中，生活在自然世界中，与自然生活在一起），以及我们定义内在价值和关系价值的方式。我们认为，框架的原始呈现是作为关注自然的独特来源。作为框架的生活，以自然与人的一体为特征，呈现出一种独特的关注来源，而不是由原来的三个框架充分代表的。虽然生命框架对内在、工具和关系价值的不同定义是开放的，但我们提出了与多种伦理体系兼容的直接解释，并能有效地为审议过程服务。我们证明，内在的、工具的和关系的价值并不是一对一映射到生命框架上的，因为每个框架都有多重价值证明。虽然生命框架的一个主要目的是促进在评估和政策中认识到一套更具包容性的价值观，但它也可以使价值观的组织、沟通、评估、衔接和审议更加有效。它还为可持续发展转型提供了多种杠杆，特别是充分认识到对人与自然的整体和关系理解。
The Life Framework of Values links the richness of ways we experience and think of nature with the diverse ways nature matters. In this paper, we further develop and clarify the Life Framework in response to comments by Neuteleers et al. (Sustain Sci 14(1):4, 2020, 10.1007/s11625-020-00825-7). They supported its application to move beyond the instrumentalism and anthropocentrism associated with ecosystem services and nature’s contributions to people, but were critical of our addition of the living as nature frame to O’Neill et al.’s (Environmental values. Routledge, London, 2008) original three (living from, in and with the natural world), and of the way we defined intrinsic and relational values. We argue that the original presentation of the frames was as distinct sources of concern for nature. The living as frame, characterised by oneness between nature and people, presents a unique source of concern not adequately represented by the original three frames. Whilst the Life Framework is open to diverse definitions of intrinsic, instrumental, and relational values, we present straightforward interpretations that are compatible with multiple ethical systems and can effectively serve deliberative processes. We demonstrate that intrinsic, instrumental, and relational values do not map onto the life frames one-to-one, as each frame layers multiple value justifications. Whilst a key purpose of the Life Framework is to facilitate recognition of a more inclusive set of values in valuation and policy, it can also enable more effective organisation, communication, assessment, bridging and deliberation of values. It also provides multiple levers for sustainability transformation, particularly by fully recognising holistic and relational understandings of people and nature.
影响因子：
7.6
作者：
Fish, Robert;Church, Andrew;Winter, Michael
通讯作者：
Winter, Michael
生态系统服务研究的实践：反思性地评估南太平洋的环境
影响因子：
4.1
作者：
Hunter, Chelsea E.;Lauer, Matthew
通讯作者：
Lauer, Matthew
编辑概述：可持续发展社会价值观的理论传统
影响因子：
6
作者：
Raymond C
通讯作者：
Raymond C