BarrS. W. and PollardJ.2016. ‘Geographies of transition: Narrating environmental activism in an age of climate change and “Peak Oil”’. Environment and Planning A49(1): 47–64. Crossref.
2.
BergsmaE.2016. ‘Geographers versus managers: Expert-influence on the construction of values underlying flood insurance in the United States’. Environmental Values25, 687–705. Crossref.
3.
BüchsM., HintonE. and SmithG.. 2015. “‘It helped me sort of face the end of the world”: The role of emotions for third sector climate change engagement initiatives’. Environmental Values24: 621–640. Crossref.
4.
BlewittJ.2006. The Ecology of Learning: Sustainability, lifelong learning and everyday lifeLondon: Earthscan.
5.
Del CorsoJ.-P., PhuongT.D., NguyenG. and KephaliacosC.. 2017. ‘Acceptance of a payment for ecosystem services scheme: The decisive influence of collective action’. Environmental Values26: 177–202.
6.
DemerittD.2001. ‘The construction of global warming and the politics of science’. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 91: 307–337. Crossref.
7.
HowellR. and AllenS.. 2017. ‘People and planet: Values, motivations and formative influences of individuals acting to mitigate climate change’. Environmental Values26: 131–155.
8.
HulmeM.2009. Why We Disagree about Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crossref.
9.
Katz-GerroT., GreenspanI., HandyF. and LeeH.-Y.. 2017. ‘The relationship between value types and environmental behaviour in four countries: Universalism, benevolence, conformity and biospheric values revisited’. Environmental Values26: 223–249.
10.
KearyM.2016. ‘The New Prometheans: Technological optimism in climate change mitigation modelling. Environmental Values25: 72–78. Crossref.
11.
KopecM.2017. ‘Game theory and the self-fulfilling climate tragedy’. Environmental Values26: 203–222.
12.
LaneS.N., OdoniN., LandströmC., WhatmoreS.J., WardN. and BradleyS.. 2011. ‘Doing flood risk science differently: An experiment in radical scientific method’. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers36: 15–36. Crossref.
13.
OppenheimerM.2005. ‘Defining dangerous anthropogenic interference: The role of science, the limits of science’. Risk Analysis25:1399–1407. Crossref.
14.
OwensS.2000. ‘Engaging the public: Information and deliberation in environmental policy’. Environment and Planning A32: 1141–1148. Crossref.
15.
SchwartzS.H.2012. ‘An overview of the Schwartz theory of basic values’. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2: 11–31. Crossref.
16.
SuchmanM.C.1995. ‘Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches’. Academy of Management Review20: 571–610.
17.
SpashC.L.2007. ‘Deliberative monetary valuation (DMV): Issues in combining economic and political processes to value environmental change’. Ecological Economics63: 690–699. Crossref.
18.
VargasA., LoA., HowesM. and RohdeN.. 2017. ‘The problem of inclusion in deliberative environmental valuation’. Environmental Values26: 157–176.
19.
WhatmoreS.J.2009. ‘Mapping knowledge controversies: Science, democracy and the redistribution of expertise’. Prog Hum Geogr. 33: 587–598. Crossref.
20.
WynneB.1992. ‘Uncertainty and environmental learning: Reconceiving science and policy in the preventive paradigm’. Global Environmental Change2: 111–127. Crossref.
21.
YıldırımS. and CandanB.. 2015. ‘Segmentation of green product buyers based on their personal values and consumption values’. Environmental Values24: 641–661. Crossref.