Conceptualization of values as a human construct only goes part of the way in clarifying the nature and role of human values within SES. To advance this field, researchers from the many disciplines contributing to the study of SES should make further distinctions in their usage of the term values and in the breadth of scope they apply in studying values. We provide a review of the different ways in which the notion of values is used in the field of environmental and natural resource management (NRM), drawing particularly upon the individual dimensions of values, influenced by the psychology literature. This is followed by an overview of how studying values can enhance our understanding of SES dynamics and can be applied to strengthen the management of a SES.
Rokeach The Nature Of Human Values.pdf
DOWNLOAD: https://tinourl.com/2vKN3y
A cluster of held values is referred to as a value orientation and is usually applied to a particular topic, such as wildlife conservation (Lockwood 1999, Vaske and Donnelly 1999). A number of studies have been conducted to identify and map different types of environmental value orientations (Rolston 1988, Axelrod 1994, Bengston 1994, Steel et al. 1994, Stern and Dietz 1994, Stern et al. 1998, Manning et al. 1999, Vaske et al. 2001, Vugteveen et al. 2010). These studies build upon the ideas of Schwartz (1992), whose work has been highly influential in values research in psychology (e.g., Steg et al. 2005). Schwartz identifies 10 universal value types: self-direction, stimulation, hedonism, achievement, power, security, conformity, tradition, benevolence, and universalism, which are organized into a values system. Such a system structures and prioritizes values to meet universally important biological and social needs (Rokeach 1973, Schwartz 1996). The dynamic relationships and trade-offs that take place between the different universal value types cluster together to form a value orientation and guide behavior (Fulton et al. 1996, Schwartz 1996). This concept is used to understand differences in how people prioritize values and can be useful in understanding how a pattern of value-based preferences can become a culture or ethic. Some authors share the view that value orientations toward natural resources can be mapped along a continuum with an anthropocentric (human-centred) orientation at one end and a biocentric (nature-centred) orientation at the other (Steel et al. 1994, Fulton et al. 1996, Vaske and Donnelly 1999).
Further, SES literature seeks to understand the effects of different variables operating at different temporal scales: fast and slow variables (Walker et al. 2012). There is currently greater understanding of the nature and dynamics of ecological variables than of social variables (Kofinas and Chapin 2009, Armitage et al. 2012), including values. Armitage et al. (2012) assumed that variables that involve human agency are transient and open to change, making them difficult to identify and control. This observation is not consistent with theory on values, which are deemed to be very stable. Held values are more stable and slower to change in comparison to assigned values, whereas relational values are experience based and highly context dependant. Thus held values may provide a slow variable, that helps to anchor a SES (cf. Rotarangi and Stephenson 2014 on pivots of cultural resilience).
Theoretical research on values can improve our understanding of the contribution of cognitive dimensions within the coupled nature of SESs. A clearly conceptualized notion of values can be integrated with other SES concepts to enhance understanding of human-environment interactions. Applied values research can be used to guide managers in designing strategies that are in accordance with the key principles defined in SES literature, such as supporting pluralism, managing trade-off decisions, and shaping social goals and values to promote stewardship. When there is conflict between individuals or social groups with different sets of values, or different prioritizations of values, exploration and acknowledgement of these values can provide a basis for communication, stakeholder participation strategies, and design of more acceptable ways forward. It can assist with transparency and justification in management decisions in which prioritization among competing values is necessary. When decisions based on values compromise ecological function, as defined by biophysical studies, values research can provide an inclusive narrative for negotiating acceptable outcomes.
Studies about human values have gained prominence due to the important role this construct plays in the human behavior (Rokeach 1973), leading to the development of several theories on values, like those proposed by Rokeach (1973), Inglehart (1991) and Schwartz (1992). These theories are based on a dichotomous view of the nature of human values, where values are explained as having an individual nature or social nature. In turn, the societal approach to human values (Pereira et al. 2005) seeks to integrate these explanations, taking into account the need to integrate multiple levels of explanation of psychosocial phenomena in social psychology (Doise 1982). In this sense, this work aimed to test in a cross-cultural context (Brazil and Portugal) the hypotheses of content, structure and compatibility of this approach, as well as to adapt and test the construct validity of the Psychosocial Values Questionnaire (PVQ-24), the measure used in the societal approach, to study the values in adolescents.
In social psychology, the explanations about the nature of human values are mostly at the intra-personal level (Torres et al. 2001). In this sense, the sources of values are individual needs (Rokeach 1973), which are distributed hierarchically and organize the beliefs of individuals in a value system (Pereira et al. 2005). The models proposed by Rokeach (1973), Schwartz (1992) and Gouveia et al. (2014) are representative of this perspective. Another perspective understands values as abstract ideas, implicitly or explicitly shared, about what is right, good and desirable in a society or culture (Williams 1979). In this perspective, we can cite models that explain values at the cultural level, such as those proposed by Schwartz (2006), Inglehart (1977, 1989) and Hofstede (1980).
On the other hand, Inglehart (1989), from a sociological perspective, proposed that values represent cultural changes in the history of societies, that is, human values have a cultural nature since they are markers of cultural changes. Inglehart (1989) argued that the change from the feudal to the capitalist production system favored the emergence of materialist values, and that the economic stability of some post-industrial societies facilitated the emergence of post-materialist values. In this sense, the societies that have not solved basic social problems give more importance to materialistic goals, while societies that have reached a certain degree of resolution of these problems endorse post-materialistic goals. Studies conducted in different cultures (Bean and Papadakis 1994; Kidd and Lee 1997; Pereira and Camino 1999) have shown that materialist values are associated with concerns about economic stability and post-materialist values are associated with social and individual well-being and professional achievement.
According to Estramiana et al. (2014), these models are based on two assumptions about the nature of values, which also permeate other concepts studied in social psychology: the nature of values is individual, when they serve individual needs (Schwartz 1992), or the nature of values is social, when they emerge from cultural changes (Inglehart 1989). In an effort to overcome this opposition, a model was proposed seeking to articulate the individual and cultural conceptions of the human values through a societal approach.
The scientific study of human values has a long tradition in the fields of psychology and sociology. Values are conceived as guiding principles in life which transcend specific situations, may change over time, guide selection of behavior and events, and which are part of dynamic system with inherent contradictions [1]. The thinking about the nature of human values has been largely influenced by the work of Milton Rokeach. M. Rokeach defined the value concept as "an enduring belief that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct or end-state existence"[2]. Rokeach distinguished terminal values (such as world peace, wisdom, and happiness), which are preferred end-states of existence, and instrumental values (such as responsibility and cooperation), which are preferred modes of conduct [3]. This distinction is important because it addresses two major questions in life: "What do I want to achieve?" and "How do I want to achieve it?" [4]. The understanding of the values of nurses is especially important, since nurses constitute 80% of workforce in the healthcare system. In addition to that, nursing is one of the major constituents of healthcare. Today a nurse is not merely an obedient performer of tasks assigned by the physician. A nurse works in the same team together with the physician and other healthcare professionals. In addition to that, when improving their practice skills, nurses acquire more self-confidence and ability to cooperate with physicians as equal work partners. 2ff7e9595c
Comments