Exploring the Value–Action Gap through Shared Values, Capabilities and Deforestation Behaviours in Guatemala

Abstract

SummaryUnderstanding drivers of deforestation is essential for developing any successful intervention to reduce forest degradation or loss, yet there remains relatively little consensus or clarity on how drivers should be identified and classified. To capture the full range of values and mediating factors that may contribute to land-use behaviours, an approach derived from a shared values perspective that includes a range of values associated with whole landscapes and ecosystems is required. We developed a model that combines behavioural theory with the Capability Approach as a conceptual framework through which to investigate the value–action gap. We used exploratory factor analysis (EFA) of Likert-scale responses to belief statements in order to identify land users’ shared values in the Sarstún Motagua region of Guatemala. We then qualify and quantify the role of capabilities in mediating between the shared values of different cultural groups of land users (Q’eqchi Maya and Ladinos) by comparing their factor scores with their self-reported forest cover change behaviours. Our results indicate that Maya and Ladinos share a set of values, but hold different value orientations that predict their behavioural intentions. We find that their different value orientations reflect behavioural intentions, but an understanding of the capabilities available to different groups is also necessary to fill the value–action gap. These findings have implications for behavioural theory, providing empirical links between shared values, capabilities and behaviour and identification of the role of value orientations, as well as demonstrating a useful approach for decision-makers seeking to understand drivers of change at landscape and whole-ecosystem levels.

Characterizing culture’s influence in land systems

“…(3) What sustainability outcomes are associated with different culture-land-use relationships? To answer these questions, we used an abductive approach 32 whereby we first coded the data using themes identified by previous synthetic causal studies linking structural Article https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-024-01381-z such as use of land or forest (versus exchange/market or instrumental values) 68,69 . Many of these different culturally derived values outweigh profitability considerations in the decision to maintain forests 49,70 or other land uses 59,71 (Fig.…”

“…One example is how certain cultural systems frame humans and nature as one entity or nature as life 33 . Trees can be loaded with religious meanings 40 , or forests can be seen as symbols for life 68,72 . By contrast, some meanings are oriented towards the more human-centric notion of economic development, or nature as a commodity 68,69 , cattle as an indicator of wealth 63 , or production landscapes can represent the importance of work and cleanliness 66 .…”

“…Trees can be loaded with religious meanings 40 , or forests can be seen as symbols for life 68,72 . By contrast, some meanings are oriented towards the more human-centric notion of economic development, or nature as a commodity 68,69 , cattle as an indicator of wealth 63 , or production landscapes can represent the importance of work and cleanliness 66 . In the case of amenity landowners, for example, these meanings may emerge from a certain idea of nature associating it with pre-industrial working landscapes or the idea of wilderness 73,74 (Fig.…”

The Tripartite Structure of Sustainability: a new educational approach to bridge the gap to wise and sustainable action

“…Noortgaete and De Tavernier (2014) point out that social psychology conceptualizes interpersonal closeness through the extent to which a person includes another as part of himself -this then leads to more empathy and willingness to help. Going a step further, Robb et al (2019) reported that nature could be experienced as part of one's conception of identity. This integrated way of relating to the nonhuman world seems typical for indigenous communities (Wilson and Schellhammer, 2021).…”

Operationalizing “One Health” as “One Digital Health” Through a Global Framework That Emphasizes Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits From the Use of Artificial Intelligence and Related Digital Technologies

“…Essentializing the “digital” may help to highlight the risk that digitalization could also exacerbate inequity in, for instance, an increasingly conspicuous digital divide owing to different pace of digitalization, data proliferation and fragmentation, and the uneven distribution of digital tools, resources, knowledge and skills. Whether as a standalone arrangement or otherwise as part of an international treaty, the ABS+ framework should bring together people and technology, and to sets out clear ethical and legal objectives in order to initiate change in cultural attitude, as well as social and institutional practices, and to overcome the value-action gap ( 37 ). Additionally, a different mindset is needed to ensure that the use of data should not be compliance driven (as it appears to be the case for the ABS framework and IHR), but should nurture a culture of learning, participation and good governance.…”