Ecosystem services and the idea of shared values
By K. Irvine, L. O’Brien, N. Ravenscroft, N. Cooper, Mark Everard, I. Fazey, M. Reed, J. Kenter. 2016
150 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Ecosystem services conceptualise the diverse values that ecosystems provide to humanity. This was recognised in the United Kingdom's National Ecosystem Assessment, which noted that appreciation of the full value of ecosystem services requires recognition of values that are shared. By operationalising the shared values concept, it is argued that the contribution of ecosystem services to human well-being can be represented more holistically. This paper considers current understanding of shared values and develops a new metanarrative of shared values beyond the aggregated utilities of individuals. This metanarrative seeks to conceptualise how values can be held both individually and communally, and what this means for identifying their scale and means of enumeration. The paper poses a new reading of the idea of shared values that reconciles the elicitation of pre-formed individual values with the formation and expression of shared social values. The implication is that shared values need to be conceived as normative constructs that are derived through social processes of value formation and expression. Shared values thus do not necessarily exist a priori; they can be deliberated through formal and informal processes through which individuals can separate their own preferences from a broader metanarrative about what values ought to be shared.
Subfields: Global and Planetary Change, Nature and Landscape Conservation
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/10c024f655d2e768290657780c0582d8ade2649e
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Global and Planetary Change
Citations in the corpus
- Recreational cultural ecosystem services: How do people describe the value? (2017, methodology): “…and ongoing developments of theory and method in relation to shared, plural and cultural values using deliberate techniques such as demonstrated by Irvine et al. (2016) and Kenter et al. (2016b) shows the determination to fundamentally challenge the utilitarian framing and the analytical…”