Details
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | 101357 |
| Journal | Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability |
| Volume | 64 |
| Early online date | 19 Sept 2023 |
| Publication status | Published - Oct 2023 |
Abstract
There is broad agreement on the potential role of values to incite intentional transformative change toward sustainability. However, there is no proposed heuristic on how to mobilize values for sustainability transformation, especially in the context of multilevel decision-making. We aim to fill this gap based on a literature analysis conducted as part of Chapter 5 of the IPBES Values Assessment. We outline four modes of mobilizing values for sustainability transformation: enabling, including, shifting, and reflecting. They differ in terms of the mix of agency and conversely of outside steering needed for each value mobilization mode. We then explore key tensions and insights that emerge through this classification: interdependencies between the modes of mobilizing values, tensions between shifting versus enabling and including values, tensions between which values to shift and which values to enable, and tensions between levels of values intervention (individuals, community, and society).
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Environmental Science(all)
- General Environmental Science
- Social Sciences(all)
- General Social Sciences
Cite this
- Standard
- Harvard
- Apa
- Vancouver
- BibTeX
- RIS
In: Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, Vol. 64, 101357, 10.2023.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › Research › peer review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Modes of mobilizing values for sustainability transformation
AU - Horcea-Milcu, Andra Ioana
AU - Koessler, Ann Kathrin
AU - Martin, Adrian
AU - Rode, Julian
AU - Moreno Soares, Thais
N1 - Funding Information: We are thankful to three anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments and critiques. Adrian Martin is supported by Joint Programming Initiative " Connecting Climate Knowledge for Europe " (SOLSTICE), Consortium Agreement 2020-12-1.
PY - 2023/10
Y1 - 2023/10
N2 - There is broad agreement on the potential role of values to incite intentional transformative change toward sustainability. However, there is no proposed heuristic on how to mobilize values for sustainability transformation, especially in the context of multilevel decision-making. We aim to fill this gap based on a literature analysis conducted as part of Chapter 5 of the IPBES Values Assessment. We outline four modes of mobilizing values for sustainability transformation: enabling, including, shifting, and reflecting. They differ in terms of the mix of agency and conversely of outside steering needed for each value mobilization mode. We then explore key tensions and insights that emerge through this classification: interdependencies between the modes of mobilizing values, tensions between shifting versus enabling and including values, tensions between which values to shift and which values to enable, and tensions between levels of values intervention (individuals, community, and society).
AB - There is broad agreement on the potential role of values to incite intentional transformative change toward sustainability. However, there is no proposed heuristic on how to mobilize values for sustainability transformation, especially in the context of multilevel decision-making. We aim to fill this gap based on a literature analysis conducted as part of Chapter 5 of the IPBES Values Assessment. We outline four modes of mobilizing values for sustainability transformation: enabling, including, shifting, and reflecting. They differ in terms of the mix of agency and conversely of outside steering needed for each value mobilization mode. We then explore key tensions and insights that emerge through this classification: interdependencies between the modes of mobilizing values, tensions between shifting versus enabling and including values, tensions between which values to shift and which values to enable, and tensions between levels of values intervention (individuals, community, and society).
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85171800009&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.cosust.2023.101357
DO - 10.1016/j.cosust.2023.101357
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85171800009
VL - 64
JO - Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
JF - Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
SN - 1877-3435
M1 - 101357
ER -