Paul Knights

The missing pillar: Eudemonic values in the justification of nature conservation

The public justification for nature conservation currently rests on two pillars: hedonic (instrumental) values, and moral values. Yet, these representations appear to do little motivational work in practice; biodiversity continues to decline, and biodiversity policies face a wide implementation gap. In seven EU countries, we studied why people act for nature beyond professional obligations. We explore the motivations of 105 committed actors for nature in detail using life-history interviews, and trace these back to their childhood. Results show that the key concept for understanding committed action for nature is meaningfulness. People act for nature because nature is meaningful to them, connected to a life that makes sense and a difference in the world. These eudemonic values (expressing the meaningful life) constitute a crucial third pillar in the justification of nature conservation. Important policy implications are explored, e.g. with respect to public discourse and the encounter with nature in childhood.

Native Species, Human Communities and Cultural Relationships

Species are ordinarily conceived of as being native or non-native to either a geographical location or an ecological community. I submit that species may also be native or non-native to human communities. I argue, by way of an analogy with varieties of domesticated and cultivated species, that this sense of nativity is grounded by the cultural relationships human communities have with species. A further analogy is drawn with the motivations of varietal nativists - who seek to protect native varieties of domesticated and cultivated species for the sake of their cultural value - to argue for the consideration of the cultural value of native species in environmental policy decisions regarding invasive non-native species.

Motivations for committed nature conservation action in Europe

Despite ongoing efforts to motivate politicians and publics in Europe regarding nature conservation, biodiversity continues to decline. Monetary valuation of ecosystem services appears to be insufficient to motivate people, suggesting that non-monetary values have a crucial role to play. There is insufficient information about the motivations of actors who have been instrumental in successful conservation projects. We investigated the motivations underlying these biodiversity actors using the ranking of cards and compared the results with the rankings of motivations of a second group of actors with more socially related interests. For both groups of actors, their action relating to biodiversity was supported in general by two groups of motivations related to living a meaningful life and moral values. The non-biodiversity actors also noted that their action relating to biodiversity rested more on beauty, place attachment and intrinsic values in comparison with their main non-biodiversity interests. Our results have implications for environmental policy and biodiversity conservation in that the current tendency of focusing on the economic valuation of biodiversity fails to address the motivations of successful actors, thereby failing to motivate nature conservation on an individual level.

What makes you a 'hero' for nature? Socio-psychological profiling of leaders committed to nature and biodiversity protection across seven EU countries

Biodiversity loss is a widely debated world problem, with huge economic, social, and environmentally negative consequences. Despite the relevance of this issue, the psychological determinants of committed action towards nature and biodiversity have rarely been investigated. This study aims at identifying a comprehensive social-psychological profile of activists committed to biodiversity protection and at understanding what determinants best predict their activism. A questionnaire investigating relevant social-psychological constructs identified in the literature on environmental activism was administered to 183 outstanding leaders (vs. non-leaders) in biodiversity protection across seven EU countries. Leaders (vs. non-leaders) in biodiversity protection showed, among other constructs, higher scores on environmental values, attitudes, identity, perceived control, a feeling of union and spirituality with nature, and willingness to sacrifice for their cause. Results are discussed within the theoretical framework of a motivation model of committed action for nature and biodiversity protection. Applications of the results are also proposed.

Cultural Landscapes, Ecological Restoration and the Intergenerational Narrative

In this chapter, Paul Knights argues that there are reasons for a critical reassessment of two current movements in UK conservation – ‘creative conservation’ and ‘rewilding’ – that emerge from an examination of the ontological, axiological and ethical status of restored cultural ecosystems. He first argues that the famous criticism advanced by Robert Elliot against the ontological status of restored natural ecosystems results in unreasonable demands regarding the properties that must be restored to cultural ecosystems, and argues that where they do meet the more demanding conception of authenticity, they seem to have greater value as items of cultural heritage. Lastly, he bases a novel ethical justification upon an often overlooked type of value for the restoration of cultural ecosystems, which is grounded in the obligations we bear to our predecessors to understand and appreciate their values.