What does value pluralism mean in practice? An empirical demonstration from a deliberative valuation

People and Nature

article

Lina Isacs¹  Jasper O. Kenter³  Hanna Wetterstrand⁵  Cecilia Katzeff² 

[1] Department of Earth Sciences, Climate Change Leadership, Uppsala University;Department of Sustainable development, Environmental Sciences and Engineering ,(SEED), KTH Royal Institute of Technology;Ecologos Research;Department of Environment and Geography, University of York;Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University

关键词: abductive interpretive research;    deliberative democracy;    deliberative monetary valuation;    ecosystem services;    rationality;    social choice;    value conflict;    value pluralism;   

DOI  :  10.1002/pan3.10324

学科分类：护理学

来源: Wiley

【 摘 要 】

1. The intensified call for value pluralism within research on valuation in environmental decision-making responds to the recognition that neoclassical economic approaches to environmental valuation do not sufficiently account forimportant aspects of human–nature relations. However, few studies have explored how value plurality actually plays out in social deliberative reasoning anddecision-making in practice, and these studies have mostly been deductive andquantitative.2. In his essay ‘Are choices trade-offs?’ Alan Holland (2002) goes to the heart ofdifferences in conceptions of value and rationality between neoclassical andecological economics. These conceptions differ in terms of whether values areseen as commensurable or incommensurable, whether people's choices amountto willing exchanges of gains and losses between different values and whetherunwillingness to trade values off for net gain is irrational.3. Addressing Holland's question, we present a quasi-experimental study on deliberative valuation of marine issues on the Swedish west coast, where we considered how local citizens and politicians approached values in their reasoning andchoice-making. Mixing quantitative and qualitative empirical material, we usedan abductive analytical approach, iterating between data and theory to link ourobservations and interpretations to prevalent understandings of value, valuation and deliberation in the literature.4. The results demonstrate the relevance of value pluralism for environmental policy by showing the prevalence of preference uncertainty and intrapersonal valueconflicts in participants' reasoning and interaction. Value conflicts played out asthe inability to achieve multiple transcendental values that participants aspiredto, including conflicts between social and environmental goals. Rather than attempting to commensurate different value dimensions, participants sought toavoid moral conflicts, showed emotional anguish when value conflicts came tothe fore and tried to bridge conflicting aspirations and experiences through inclusive reason-giving and compromise.5. Thus, choices were not resolved through rational trade-offs, supportingHolland's claim and challenging the neoclassical trade-off model of choice.Incommensurability appeared as deliberate positions grounded in participants'experiences rather than as irrationality. Legitimately resolving value conflictsthus demands reason-sensitive means for deciding upon the sacrifices to bemade and supporting public participation in environmental decision-making inways that reveal peoples' actual moral considerations.

【 授权许可】

CC BY