Grounding IPBES experts’ views on the multiple values of nature in epistemology, knowledge and collaborative science
This study identifies and analyses the underlying assumptions of experts involved in the first author meeting (FAM) of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES)’s Values Assessment, and how they shape understandings of the multiple values of nature....
Published in: | Environmental Science & Policy |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Elsevier
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/11336/141135 |
id |
ftconicet:oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/141135 |
---|---|
record_format |
openpolar |
spelling |
ftconicet:oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/141135 2023-10-09T21:47:20+02:00 Grounding IPBES experts’ views on the multiple values of nature in epistemology, knowledge and collaborative science Hakkarainen, Viola Anderson, Christopher Brian Eriksson, Max van Riper, Carena J. Horcea Milcu, Andra Raymond, Christopher M. application/pdf http://hdl.handle.net/11336/141135 eng eng Elsevier info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.12.003 info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901119307385?via%3Dihub#! http://hdl.handle.net/11336/141135 Hakkarainen, Viola; Anderson, Christopher Brian; Eriksson, Max; van Riper, Carena J.; Horcea Milcu, Andra; et al.; Grounding IPBES experts’ views on the multiple values of nature in epistemology, knowledge and collaborative science; Elsevier; Environmental Science & Policy; 105; 3-2020; 11-18 1462-9011 CONICET Digital CONICET info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/ INTERDISCIPLINARITY SOCIAL LEARNING SUSTAINABILITY https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.9 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5 info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion ftconicet https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.12.003 2023-09-24T18:24:38Z This study identifies and analyses the underlying assumptions of experts involved in the first author meeting (FAM) of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES)’s Values Assessment, and how they shape understandings of the multiple values of nature. We draw from survey data collected from 94 experts attending the FAM. Respondents self-report the tendencies and aims they bring to the assessment (i.e. motivation), the type and amount of evidence they require for knowledge to be valid (i.e. confirmation) and their epistemic worldviews (i.e. objectivity). Four clusters emerged that correspond to Pragmatist, Post-Positivist, Constructivist and Transformative epistemic worldviews. This result clarifies how different knowledge claims are represented in science-policy processes. Despite the proportionately higher number of social scientists in the Values Assessment, compared with previous IPBES assessments, we still found that fewer experts have Constructivist or Transformative worldviews than Pragmatist or Post-Positivist outlooks, an imbalance that may influence the types of values and valuation perspectives emphasised in the assessment. We also detected a tension regarding what constitutes valid knowledge between Post-Positivists, who emphasised high levels of agreement, and Pragmatists and Constructivists, who did not necessarily consider agreement crucial. Conversely, Post-Positivists did not align with relational values and were more diverse in their views regarding definitions of multiple values of nature compared to other clusters. Pragmatists emphasized relational values, while Constructivists tended to consider all value types (including relational values) as important. We discuss the implications of our findings for future design and delivery of IPBES processes and interdisciplinary research. Fil: Hakkarainen, Viola. University of Helsinki; Finlandia Fil: Anderson, Christopher Brian. Universidad Nacional de Tierra del Fuego, Antártida e Islas del ... Article in Journal/Newspaper Antártida Tierra del Fuego CONICET Digital (Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas) Environmental Science & Policy 105 11 18 |
institution |
Open Polar |
collection |
CONICET Digital (Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas) |
op_collection_id |
ftconicet |
language |
English |
topic |
INTERDISCIPLINARITY SOCIAL LEARNING SUSTAINABILITY https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.9 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5 |
spellingShingle |
INTERDISCIPLINARITY SOCIAL LEARNING SUSTAINABILITY https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.9 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5 Hakkarainen, Viola Anderson, Christopher Brian Eriksson, Max van Riper, Carena J. Horcea Milcu, Andra Raymond, Christopher M. Grounding IPBES experts’ views on the multiple values of nature in epistemology, knowledge and collaborative science |
topic_facet |
INTERDISCIPLINARITY SOCIAL LEARNING SUSTAINABILITY https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5.9 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/5 |
description |
This study identifies and analyses the underlying assumptions of experts involved in the first author meeting (FAM) of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES)’s Values Assessment, and how they shape understandings of the multiple values of nature. We draw from survey data collected from 94 experts attending the FAM. Respondents self-report the tendencies and aims they bring to the assessment (i.e. motivation), the type and amount of evidence they require for knowledge to be valid (i.e. confirmation) and their epistemic worldviews (i.e. objectivity). Four clusters emerged that correspond to Pragmatist, Post-Positivist, Constructivist and Transformative epistemic worldviews. This result clarifies how different knowledge claims are represented in science-policy processes. Despite the proportionately higher number of social scientists in the Values Assessment, compared with previous IPBES assessments, we still found that fewer experts have Constructivist or Transformative worldviews than Pragmatist or Post-Positivist outlooks, an imbalance that may influence the types of values and valuation perspectives emphasised in the assessment. We also detected a tension regarding what constitutes valid knowledge between Post-Positivists, who emphasised high levels of agreement, and Pragmatists and Constructivists, who did not necessarily consider agreement crucial. Conversely, Post-Positivists did not align with relational values and were more diverse in their views regarding definitions of multiple values of nature compared to other clusters. Pragmatists emphasized relational values, while Constructivists tended to consider all value types (including relational values) as important. We discuss the implications of our findings for future design and delivery of IPBES processes and interdisciplinary research. Fil: Hakkarainen, Viola. University of Helsinki; Finlandia Fil: Anderson, Christopher Brian. Universidad Nacional de Tierra del Fuego, Antártida e Islas del ... |
format |
Article in Journal/Newspaper |
author |
Hakkarainen, Viola Anderson, Christopher Brian Eriksson, Max van Riper, Carena J. Horcea Milcu, Andra Raymond, Christopher M. |
author_facet |
Hakkarainen, Viola Anderson, Christopher Brian Eriksson, Max van Riper, Carena J. Horcea Milcu, Andra Raymond, Christopher M. |
author_sort |
Hakkarainen, Viola |
title |
Grounding IPBES experts’ views on the multiple values of nature in epistemology, knowledge and collaborative science |
title_short |
Grounding IPBES experts’ views on the multiple values of nature in epistemology, knowledge and collaborative science |
title_full |
Grounding IPBES experts’ views on the multiple values of nature in epistemology, knowledge and collaborative science |
title_fullStr |
Grounding IPBES experts’ views on the multiple values of nature in epistemology, knowledge and collaborative science |
title_full_unstemmed |
Grounding IPBES experts’ views on the multiple values of nature in epistemology, knowledge and collaborative science |
title_sort |
grounding ipbes experts’ views on the multiple values of nature in epistemology, knowledge and collaborative science |
publisher |
Elsevier |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/141135 |
genre |
Antártida Tierra del Fuego |
genre_facet |
Antártida Tierra del Fuego |
op_relation |
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.12.003 info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901119307385?via%3Dihub#! http://hdl.handle.net/11336/141135 Hakkarainen, Viola; Anderson, Christopher Brian; Eriksson, Max; van Riper, Carena J.; Horcea Milcu, Andra; et al.; Grounding IPBES experts’ views on the multiple values of nature in epistemology, knowledge and collaborative science; Elsevier; Environmental Science & Policy; 105; 3-2020; 11-18 1462-9011 CONICET Digital CONICET |
op_rights |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ar/ |
op_doi |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.12.003 |
container_title |
Environmental Science & Policy |
container_volume |
105 |
container_start_page |
11 |
op_container_end_page |
18 |
_version_ |
1779310411848351744 |