What are we protecting? Rethinking relational values and nature(s)

References

• Benjaminsen TA, Svarstad H. 2019. Political ecology. In: Fath B, editor. Encyclopedia of ecology. 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier; p. 391–7.
   Google Scholar
• Blaser M. 2009. Political ontology. Cult Stud. 23(5–6):873–896. doi: 10.1080/09502380903208023.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blaser M. 2013. Ontological conflicts and the stories of peoples in spite of Europe: toward a conversation on political ontology. Curr Anthropol. 54(5):547–568. doi: 10.1086/672270.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blaser M. 2014. Ontology and indigeneity: on the political ontology of heterogeneous assemblages. Cult Geogr. 21(1):49–58. doi: 10.1177/1474474012462534.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borie M, Hulme M. 2015. Framing global biodiversity: IPBES between mother earth and ecosystem services. Environ Sci Policy. 54:487–496. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2015.05.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell S, Gurney L. 2020. Mapping and navigating ontologies in water governance: the case of the Ganges. Water Int. 45(7–8):847–864. doi: 10.1080/02508060.2020.1812268.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan KM, Balvanera P, Benessaiah K, Chapman M, Díaz S, Gómez-Baggethun E, Gould R, Hannahs N, Jax K, Klain S. 2016. Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 113(6):1462–1465. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1525002113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chan KM, Gould RK, Pascual U. 2018. Editorial overview: relational values: what are they, and what’s the fuss about? Curr Opin Env Sust. 35:A1–A7. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2018.11.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Castro EV. 2004. Exchanging perspectives: the transformation of objects into subjects in Amerindian ontologies. Common Knowl. 10(3):463–484. doi: 10.1215/0961754X-10-3-463.
   Google Scholar
• De la Cadena M. 2010. Indigenous cosmopolitics in the Andes: conceptual reflections beyond “politics”. Cult Anthropol. 25(2):334–370. doi: 10.1111/j.1548-1360.2010.01061.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De la Cadena M, Blaser M, Eds. 2018. A world of many worlds. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Díaz S, Demissew S, Carabias J, Joly C, Lonsdale M, Ash N, Larigauderie A, Adhikari JR, Arico S, Báldi A. 2015. The IPBES conceptual framework—connecting nature and people. Curr Opin Env Sust. 14:1–16. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2014.11.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Escobar A. 2016. Thinking-feeling with the Earth: territorial struggles and the ontological dimension of the epistemologies of the south. AIBR. 11(1):11–32. doi: 10.11156/aibr.110102e.
   Google Scholar
• Escobar A. 2017. Sustaining the pluriverse: the political ontology of territorial struggles in Latin America. In: Brightman M, Lewis J, editors. The anthropology of sustainability: beyond development and progress. New York: Palgrave Macmillan; p. 237–256.
   Google Scholar
• Gould RK, Pai M, Muraca B, Chan K. 2019. He ʻike ʻana ia i ka pono (it is a recognizing of the right thing): how one indigenous worldview informs relational values and social values. Sustainability Sci. 14(5):1213–1232. doi: 10.1007/s11625-019-00721-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Himes A, Muraca B. 2018. Relational values: the key to pluralistic valuation of ecosystem services. Curr Opin Environ Sustainabilty. 35:1–7. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2018.09.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holbraad M, Pedersen MA. 2017. The ontological turn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• IPBES. 2012 Apr. Functions, operating principles and institutional arrangements of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.
   Google Scholar
• Kadykalo AN, López-Rodriguez MD, Ainscough J, Droste N, Ryu H, Ávila-Flores G, Le Clec’h S, Muñoz MC, Nilsson L, Rana S. 2019. Disentangling ‘ecosystem services’ and ‘nature’s contributions to people’. Ecosyst People. 15(1):269–287. doi: 10.1080/26395916.2019.1669713.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kenter JO, O’Connor S. 2022. The Life Framework of Values and living as nature; towards a full recognition of holistic and relational ontologies. Sustainability Sci. 17(6):2529–2542. doi: 10.1007/s11625-022-01159-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knippenberg L, De Groot WT, Van Den Born RJ, Knights P, Muraca B. 2018. Relational value, partnership, eudaimonia: a review. Curr Opin Environ Sustainabilty. 35:39–45. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2018.10.022.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Law J. 2015. What’s wrong with a one-world world? Distinktion: J Soc Theory. 16(1):126–139. doi: 10.1080/1600910X.2015.1020066.
   Google Scholar
• Lliso B, Arias‐Arévalo P, Maca‐Millán S, Engel S, Pascual U. 2022. Motivational crowding effects in payments for ecosystem services: exploring the role of instrumental and relational values. People Nat. 4(2):312–329. doi: 10.1002/pan3.10280.
   Google Scholar
• Mattijssen TJ, Ganzevoort W, Van Den Born RJ, Arts BJ, Breman BC, Buijs AE, van Dam RI, Elands BHM, de Groot WT, Knippenberg LW. 2020. Relational values of nature: leverage points for nature policy in Europe. Ecosyst People. 16(1):402–410. doi: 10.1080/26395916.2020.1848926.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mol A. 1999. Ontological politics: a word and some questions. Sociol Rev. 47(1):74–89. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-954X.1999.tb03483.x.
   Google Scholar
• Mol A. 2013. Mind your plate! The ontonorms of Dutch dieting. Soc Stud Sci. 43(3):379–396. doi: 10.1177/0306312712456948.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muradian R, Pascual U. 2018. A typology of elementary forms of human-nature relations: a contribution to the valuation debate. Curr Opin Environ Sustainabilty. 35:8–14. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2018.10.014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Connor S, Kenter JO. 2019. Making intrinsic values work; integrating intrinsic values of the more-than-human world through the life framework of values. Sustainability Sci. 14(5):1247–1265. doi: 10.1007/s11625-019-00715-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pascual U, Balvanera P, Díaz S, Pataki G, Roth E, Stenseke M, Watson RT, Dessane EB, Islar M, Kelemen E. 2017. Valuing nature’s contributions to people: the IPBES approach. Curr Opin Environ Sustainabilty. 26:7–16. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2016.12.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saxena AK, Chatti D, Overstreet K, Dove MR. 2018. From moral ecology to diverse ontologies: relational values in human ecological research, past and present. Curr Opin Environ Sustainabilty. 35:54–60. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2018.10.021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schröter M, Başak E, Christie M, Church A, Keune H, Osipova E, Oteros-Rozas E, Sievers-Glotzbach S, van Oudenhoven AP, Balvanera P. 2020. Indicators for relational values of nature’s contributions to good quality of life: the IPBES approach for Europe and Central Asia. Ecosyst People. 16(1):50–69. doi: 10.1080/26395916.2019.1703039.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheremata M. 2018. Listening to relational values in the era of rapid environmental change in the Inuit Nunangat. Curr Opin Environ Sustainabilty. 35:75–81. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2018.10.017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stålhammar S, Thorén H. 2019. Three perspectives on relational values of nature. Sustainability Sci. 14(5):1201–1212. doi: 10.1007/s11625-019-00718-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UNEP. 2010 June 11. Report of the third ad hoc intergovernmental and multi-stakeholder meeting on an intergovernmental science-policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services.
   Google Scholar
• West S, Haider LJ, Masterson V, Enqvist JP, Svedin U, Tengö M. 2018. Stewardship, care and relational values. Curr Opin Env Sust. 35:30–38. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2018.10.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yates JS, Harris LM, Wilson NJ. 2017. Multiple ontologies of water: politics, conflict and implications for governance. Environ Plan D. 35(5):797–815. doi: 10.1177/0263775817700395.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar