UDTR Global Rights of Nature Radar

Plural values of nature help to understand contested pathways to sustainability

Identification

Public canonical key

doi:10.1016/j.oneear.2024.04.003

Authors

Adrian Martin · Erik Gómez‐Baggethun · Martin F. Quaas · Ricardo Rozzi · Alejandra Tauro · Daniel P. Faith · Ritesh Kumar · Patrick John O’Farrell · Unai Pascual

Reported year

2024

Reported language

en

Source type

article

First detected

2026-11-09T19:13:16.534907+00:00

Last metadata observation

2026-11-09T19:13:16.534907+00:00

Last HTTP verification

Not checked

Institutions reported by the source

Basque Centre for Climate Change · El Colegio de Puebla, A.C. · German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research · Ikerbasque · Institute for Integrated Management of Material Fluxes and of Resources · Norwegian Institute for Nature Research · Norwegian University of Life Sciences · The University of Sydney · United Nations University · Universidad de Magallanes · University of Bern · University of East Anglia · University of North Texas · University of the Basque Country · University of the Western Cape · Wetlands International

Documentary abstract — original language

Despite globally agreed sustainability goals, advocacy for specific pathways of action remains highly contested. Disagreement about how best to advance sustainability can produce constructive debate but can also lead to marginalization, conflict, and inaction. This review uncovers how different "values of nature" underpin allegiance to different pathways of action for sustainability. It analyzes four selected pathways: (1) Green Economy, (2) Nature Protection, (3) Earth Stewardship and Biocultural Diversity, and (4) Degrowth and Post-Growth. We identify how these four pathways diverge in the values they prioritize and how these values are inseparable from the kind of knowledge and solutions they advocate to resolve environmental crises. The review reveals the underlying values that differentiate (and connect) competing pathways and argues that transparency and reflection on these differences is a step toward more constructive use of diversity. Looking forward, we identify promising directions involving deliberative governance, institutional reforms, and disruption of dominance.

Identifiers

OPENALEX

W4397002700

DOI

10.1016/j.oneear.2024.04.003

Documentary context

Documentary family

Scholarship

Source-reported types

article

Entity mentions are not evidence of legal recognition. Jurisdiction studied is separate from author affiliation country.

Sources

OpenAlex · Record 1 · Record 2

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2024.04.003
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W4397002700

Documented bibliographic relations

Source-declared references and links; they do not establish legal support or UGLC qualification. Up to 20 outgoing references are displayed.

• openalex:w11678268 · CITES
• openalex:w1263192620 · CITES
• openalex:w1510491280 · CITES
• openalex:w1513862577 · CITES
• openalex:w1516710914 · CITES
• openalex:w1521232912 · CITES
• openalex:w1550857732 · CITES
• openalex:w1560794455 · CITES
• openalex:w1678509351 · CITES
• openalex:w1758976756 · CITES
• openalex:w1925896662 · CITES
• openalex:w1974564128 · CITES
• openalex:w1976595013 · CITES
• openalex:w1983301590 · CITES
• openalex:w1984190418 · CITES
• Community stewardship: the foundation of biocultural rights · CITES
• openalex:w1997501954 · CITES
• openalex:w1998819003 · CITES
• openalex:w2001442493 · CITES
• openalex:w2006531474 · CITES

5 incoming references within the detected corpus

Documentary status

Relevance pending

Library

This identity is not yet included in the Legal Library.