{"title":"What can methods for assessing worldviews and broad values tell us about socio-environmental conflicts?","authors":"Begüm Özkaynak , Roldan Muradian , Paula Ungar , Diana Morales","doi":"10.1016/j.cosust.2023.101316","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Socio-environmental conflicts are manifestations of disputes regarding nature or disagreements over the distribution of costs and benefits resulting from nature's transformation induced by human activities. These conflicts often result from divergent worldviews and broad values, which shape the way people interact with and value nature in a profound way. Interestingly, even though they are well-known in their fields, methods for assessing worldviews and broad values are not used as often when addressing sustainability challenges as they should be. By exploring the literature on worldviews and broad value assessment, this review identifies four alternative methods — consensus analysis, ethical analysis, framing analysis, and </span>worldview assessment — that can facilitate dialog in socio-environmental conflict settings. It highlights the usefulness and potential of these methods as a value-centered leverage for transformative change.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":294,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability","volume":"64 ","pages":"Article 101316"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877343523000635","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
Abstract
Socio-environmental conflicts are manifestations of disputes regarding nature or disagreements over the distribution of costs and benefits resulting from nature's transformation induced by human activities. These conflicts often result from divergent worldviews and broad values, which shape the way people interact with and value nature in a profound way. Interestingly, even though they are well-known in their fields, methods for assessing worldviews and broad values are not used as often when addressing sustainability challenges as they should be. By exploring the literature on worldviews and broad value assessment, this review identifies four alternative methods — consensus analysis, ethical analysis, framing analysis, and worldview assessment — that can facilitate dialog in socio-environmental conflict settings. It highlights the usefulness and potential of these methods as a value-centered leverage for transformative change.
期刊介绍:
"Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability (COSUST)" is a distinguished journal within Elsevier's esteemed scientific publishing portfolio, known for its dedication to high-quality, reproducible research. Launched in 2010, COSUST is a part of the Current Opinion and Research (CO+RE) suite, which is recognized for its editorial excellence and global impact. The journal specializes in peer-reviewed, concise, and timely short reviews that provide a synthesis of recent literature, emerging topics, innovations, and perspectives in the field of environmental sustainability.