There has been a recent spate of publications on how we should evaluate change to ecological systems, some of which have introduced the concept of ‘relational values’. Environmental ethicists have, with a few exceptions, not engaged with this debate. We survey the literature on relational values, noting that most advocates of the concept introduce relational values as an additional type of value, in addition to ‘instrumental’ and ‘intrinsic’ values. In this paper, we explore the idea that all environmental values are ultimately relational. We explore how such an approach can be articulated, and discuss the implications of this concept for the future of environmental ethics and value studies. One key implication is to suggest a stronger role for empirical ethnography.
Arias-ArévaloP., Gómez-BaggethunE., Martín-LópezB. and RincónM.. 2018. ‘Widening the evaluative space for ecosystem services: A taxonomy of plural values and valuation methods’. Environmental Values27: 29–53. Crossref.
2.
BataviaC. and NelsonM.P.. 2017. ‘For goodness sake! What is intrinsic value and why should we care?’ Biological Conservation209: 366–76. Crossref.
3.
BlomquistW. and IngramH.M.. 2003. ‘Boundaries seen and unseen’. Water International28 (2): 162–9. Crossref.
4.
BromleyD.2006. Sufficient Reason: Volitional Pragmatism and the Meaning of Economic Institutions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Crossref.
5.
CallicottJ.B.1999. Beyond the Land Ethic: More Essays in Environmental Philosophy. Buffalo, NY: SUNY Press.
6.
CampbellJ.1988. The Inner Reaches of Outer Space: Metaphor as Myth and as Religion. Novato, CA: New World Library.
7.
CarpenterS.R., MooneyH.A., AgardJ.. 2009. ‘Science for managing ecosystem services: Beyond the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment’. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences106: 1305–12. Crossref.
8.
ChanK.M.A., BalvaneraP., BenessaiahK.. 2016. ‘Opinion: Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment’. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences113 (6): 1462–5. Crossref.
9.
CostanzaR., d'ArgeR.de GrootR.. 1997. ‘The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital’. Nature387 (6630): 253–60. Crossref.
10.
DailyG.1997. Ecosystem Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems. Washington, DC: Island Press.
11.
DíazS., DemissewS., CarabiasJ.. 2015. ‘The IPBES Conceptual Framework — connecting nature and people’. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability (Series Open Issue)14: 1–16. Crossref.
FreemanD.M.2011. Implementing the Endangered Species Act on the Platte Basin Water Commons. Boulder, CO: University Press of Colorado. Crossref.
14.
FreemanA.M., HerrigesJ.A. and KlingC.L.. 2014. The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: Theory and Methods. Abingdon: Routledge.
15.
GouldR.K., KlainS.C., ArdoinN.M.. 2015. ‘A protocol for eliciting nonmaterial values through a cultural ecosystem services frame’. Conservation Biology29 (2): 575–86. Crossref.
16.
GouldR.K. and LincolnN.K.. 2017. ‘Expanding the suite of Cultural Ecosystem Services to include ingenuity, perspective, and life teaching’. Ecosystem Services25: 117–27. Crossref.
17.
GraeberD.2001. Toward an Anthropological Theory of Value: The False Coin of Our Own Dreams. New York: Palgrave.
18.
HarrisonH.L., KochalskiS., ArlinghausR. and AasØ.. 2018. “‘Nature's little helpers”: A benefits approach to voluntary cultivation of hatchery fish to support wild Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) populations in Norway, Wales, and Germany’. Fisheries Research204: 348–60. Crossref.
19.
HimesA. and MuracaB.. 2018. ‘Relational values: The key to pluralistic valuation of ecosystem services’. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability35: 1–7. Crossref.
20.
HourdequinM.2015. Environmental Ethics: From Theory to Practice. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
21.
JacksonS. and PalmerL.R.. 2015. ‘Reconceptualizing ecosystem services: Possibilities for cultivating and valuing the ethics and practices of care’. Progress in Human Geography39 (2): 122–45. Crossref.
JaxK., CalestaniM., ChanK.M.. 2018. ‘Caring for nature matters: A relational approach for understanding nature's contributions to human well-being’. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability (Series Sustainability Challenges: Relational Values)35: 22–9. Crossref.
24.
JohnsonM.1993. Moral Imagination: Implications of Cognitive Science for Ethics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
KlainS.C., OlmstedP., ChanK.M.A. and SatterfieldT.. 2017. ‘Relational values resonate broadly and differently than intrinsic or instrumental values, or the New Ecological Paradigm’. PLOS ONE12 (8). Crossref.
27.
KlainS.C., SatterfieldT.A. and ChanK.M.A.. 2014. ‘What matters and why? Ecosystem services and their bundled qualities’. Ecological Economics107: 310–20. Crossref.
28.
LeachW.D., PelkeyN.W. and SabatierP.A.. 2002. ‘Stakeholder partnerships as collaborative policymaking: Evaluation criteria applied to watershed management in California and Washington’. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management21 (4): 645–70. Crossref.
29.
Lopes-FernandesM. and Frazão-MoreiraA.. 2017. ‘Relating to the wild: Key actors' values and concerns about lynx reintroduction’. Land Use Policy66: 278–87. Crossref.
30.
MaierD.S. and FeestA.. 2016. ‘The IPBES Conceptual Framework: An unhelpful start’. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics29 (2): 327–47. Crossref.
31.
MaldonadoM.2012. Real Green: Sustainability after the End of Nature. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Books.
32.
Martinez-AlierJ., MundaG. and O'NeillJ.. 1998. ‘Weak comparability of values as a foundation for ecological economics’. Ecological Economics26: 277–86.
33.
MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being. Washington, DC: Island Press. Crossref.
34.
MuracaB.2011. ‘The map of moral significance: A new axiological matrix for environmental ethics’. Environmental Values20 (3): 375–96. Crossref.
35.
MuracaB.2016. ‘Relational values: A Whiteheadian alternative for environmental philosophy and global environmental justice’. Balkan Journal of Philosophy8 (1): 19–38. Crossref.
36.
MuradianR. and PascualU.. 2018. ‘A typology of elementary forms of human-nature relations: A contribution to the valuation debate’. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability35: 8–14. Crossref.
37.
NeuteleersS.2020. ‘A fresh look at “relational” values in nature: Distinctions derived from the debate on meaningfulness in life’. Environmental Values29 (4): 461–79. Crossref.
38.
NortonB.G.1992. ‘Epistemology and environmental values’. The Monist75: 208–26.
39.
NortonB.G.2005. Sustainability: A Philosophy of Adaptive Ecosystem Management. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
40.
NortonB.G.2015. Sustainable Values, Sustainable Change: A Guide to Environmental Decision Making. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
41.
NortonB.G.2017. ‘A situational understanding of environmental values and evaluation’. Ecological Economics138: 242–8. Crossref.
42.
O'NeillJ.2002. Ecology, Policy, and Politics: Human Wellbeing and the Natural World. London: Routledge.
43.
O'NeillJ., HollandA. and LightA.. 2008. Environmental Values. London: Routledge.
44.
PiccoloJ.J.2017. ‘Intrinsic values in nature: Objective good or simply half of an unhelpful dichotomy?’ Journal for Nature Conservation37: 8–11. Crossref.
45.
PlumwoodV.2002. Environmental Culture: The Ecological Crisis of Reason. New York, NY: Routledge.
46.
RaymondC.M., SinghG.G., BenessaiahK.. 2013. ‘Ecosystem services and beyond: Using multiple metaphors to understand human–environment relationships’. BioScience63 (7): 536–46. Crossref.
47.
RieprichR. and SchneggM.. 2015. ‘The value of landscapes in Northern Namibia: A system of intertwined material and nonmaterial services’. Society & Natural Resources28 (9): 941–58. Crossref.
48.
RolstonH.III1988. Environmental Ethics: Duties to and Values in the Natural World. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
49.
SabatierP.A., FochtW., LubellM., TrachtenbergZ.. 2005. Swimming Upstream: Collaborative Approaches to Watershed Management. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Crossref.
50.
ScottT.2015. ‘Does collaboration make any difference? Linking collaborative governance to environmental outcomes’. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management34 (3): 537–66. Crossref.
51.
TallisH. and LubchencoJ.. 2014. ‘Working together: A call for inclusive conservation’. Nature News515 (7525): 27. Crossref.
52.
TaylorP.1986. Respect for Nature: A Theory of Environmental Ethics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
53.
TEEB.2010. The Economics of Ecosystems And Biodiversity: Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature: A Synthesis of the Approach, Conclusions and Recommendations Of TEEB.www.teebweb.org/about/the-initiative/ (accessed 28 July 2020).
54.
VucetichJ.A., BruskotterJ.T. and NelsonM.P.. 2015. ‘Evaluating whether nature's intrinsic value is an axiom of or anathema to conservation’. Conservation Biology29 (2): 321–33. Crossref.
