The Life Framework of Values and living as nature; towards a full recognition of holistic and relational ontologies

Abstract

The Life Framework of Values links the richness of ways we experience and think of nature with the diverse ways nature matters. In this paper, we further develop and clarify the Life Framework in response to comments by Neuteleers et al. (Sustain Sci 14(1):4, 2020, 10.1007/s11625-020-00825-7). They supported its application to move beyond the instrumentalism and anthropocentrism associated with ecosystem services and nature’s contributions to people, but were critical of our addition of the living as nature frame to O’Neill et al.’s (Environmental values. Routledge, London, 2008) original three (living from, in and with the natural world), and of the way we defined intrinsic and relational values. We argue that the original presentation of the frames was as distinct sources of concern for nature. The living as frame, characterised by oneness between nature and people, presents a unique source of concern not adequately represented by the original three frames. Whilst the Life Framework is open to diverse definitions of intrinsic, instrumental, and relational values, we present straightforward interpretations that are compatible with multiple ethical systems and can effectively serve deliberative processes. We demonstrate that intrinsic, instrumental, and relational values do not map onto the life frames one-to-one, as each frame layers multiple value justifications. Whilst a key purpose of the Life Framework is to facilitate recognition of a more inclusive set of values in valuation and policy, it can also enable more effective organisation, communication, assessment, bridging and deliberation of values. It also provides multiple levers for sustainability transformation, particularly by fully recognising holistic and relational understandings of people and nature.

TheCBDPost‐2020 biodiversity framework: People's place within the rest of nature

“…Artificially separating nature and culture has been discussed as an underlying cause of biodiversity loss (e.g. Bridgewater & Rotherham, 2019; Fletcher et al, 2021; Kenter & O'Connor, 2022). Viewing material interaction between people and the rest of nature as simply contributing to biodiversity loss is neither helpful nor accurate.…”

“…The framework, as its title suggests, is concerned with biodiversity—and yet documentation associated with it also uses the term ‘nature’. While there are many definitions of nature, in this perspective, we follow Kenter and O'Connor (2022) who see nature as: ‘conceived in many ways, ranging from abstract philosophical concepts to technical language of appraisal and policymaking, to everyday descriptions of the world around us’. For the avoidance of doubt, we use the term nature where others have, but preferentially use the term biodiversity.…”

“…Artificially separating nature and culture has been discussed as an underlying cause of biodiversity loss (e.g. Bridgewater & Rotherham, 2019;Fletcher et al, 2021;Kenter & O'Connor, 2022).…”

What are heritage values? Integrating natural and cultural heritage into environmental valuation

“…The frames are not mutually exclusive; for example, natural heritage may be seen as part of oneself (living as) and at the same time be important as place or space (living in) and as a source of sustenance (living from). Kenter and O'Connor (2022) point out that the living as frame can be seen as ontologically distinct from the others, but can also, through its particular ontological perspective, provide a lens through which to see the other frames in a more holistic, less dualistic way. The ways in which different value categories and their expression as heritage values link to the four Life Frames are summarised in Table 2.…”

“…Here, we use the Life Framework of Values to show how heritage and heritage values can be linked to ecosystem‐based management. The Life Framework of Values was developed to overcome unidirectional, instrumental framings of nature as a source of benefits for people by exploring different ways in which the natural world matters using the frames of living from, living in, living as and living with nature (Kenter & O'Connor, 2022; O'Connor & Kenter, 2019). By expanding beyond living from nature, the Life Framework offers a route for better integration and navigation of the multiple values and worldviews that shape human–nature interaction.…”