The Trouble with Relational Values
Abstract
This paper questions the conceptual and pragmatic worth of the category of relational values. Combining philosophical reasoning with ethnographic field-work in Wallmapu/Chile, I analyse a variety of ways in which people think about, value and behave toward the land. I thereby demonstrate that relational-ity is inherent to held, instrumental and intrinsic values. This means that there is no meaningful way in which to distinguish relational values from more familiar types of values. Yet, to be able to argue that a distinct class of relational values exists, those who have proposed the term have been compelled to silence or downplay the relational natures of those other values. This has the perverse effect of confining, rather than promoting, relational thinking.
Get full access to this article
View all access and purchase options for this article.
References
Anderson B., Kearnes M., McFarlane C. and Swanton D. 2012. ‘On assemblages and geography’. Dialogues in Human Geography 2 (2): 171–189. Crossref
Baard P. 2019. ‘The Goodness of means: Instrumental and relational values, causation, and environmental policies’. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 32 (1): 183–199. Crossref
Bengoa J. 2008. Historia del Puelbo Mapuche: Siglos XIX y XX. 7 ed. Santiago: LOM Ediciones.
Brown T.C. 1984. ‘The concept of value in resource allocation’. Land Economics 60 (3): 231–246. Crossref
Chan K.M.A., Gould R.K. and Pascual U. 2018. ‘Editorial overview: Relational values: What are they, and what's the fuss about?’ Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 35: A1–A7. Crossref
Chan K.M.A., Balvanera P., Benessaiah K., Chapman M. et al. 2016. ‘Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment’. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113 (6): 1462–1465. Crossref
Cronon W. 1995 ‘The trouble with wilderness; or, getting back to the wrong nature’. In Cronon W. (ed.), Uncommon Ground: Rethinking the Human Place in Nature, pp. 69–90. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.
De Vos A., Joana C.B. and Dirk R. 2018. ‘Relational values about nature in protected area research’. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 35: 89–99. Crossref
Deplazes-Zemp A., and Chapman M. 2020. ‘The ABCs of relational values: Environmental values that include aspects of both intrinsic and instrumental valuing’. Environmental Values 30 (6): 669–693. Crossref
Descola P. 2013. Beyond Nature and Culture. Trans. J. Lloyd. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Crossref
Di Giminiani P. 2015. ‘The becoming of ancestral land: Place and property in Mapuche land claims’. American Ethnologist 42 (3): 490–503. Crossref
Di Giminiani P. 2018. Sentient Lands: Indigeneity, Property, and Political Imagination in Neoliberal Chile. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press. Crossref
Díaz S., Demissew S., Carabias J., Joly C. et al. 2015. ‘The IPBES Conceptual Framework – connecting nature and people’. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 14: 1–16. Crossref
Díaz S., Demissew S., Joly C., Lonsdale W.M. and Larigauderie A. 2015. ‘A Rosetta Stone for Nature's benefits to people’. PLOS Biology 13 (1): e1002040. Crossref
Ducarme F., and Couvet D. 2020. ‘What does “nature” mean?’ Palgrave Communications 6 (1): 14. Crossref
de Ercilla y Zúñiga A. 1597 [2018]. La Araucana. Santiago de Chile: Penguin Random House. Crossref
Gilliand C. 2021. ‘Experiencing values in the flow of events: A phenomenological approach to relational values’. Environmental Values 30 (6): 715–736. Crossref
Harvey P. 1990. An Introduction to Buddhism: Teachings, History and Practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Himes A., and Muraca B. 2018. ‘Relational values: The key to pluralistic valuation of ecosystem services’. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 35: 1–7. Crossref
Hitlin S., and Piliavin J.A. 2004. ‘Values: Reviving a dormant concept’. Annual Review of Sociology 30 (1): 359–393. Crossref
Huber M.T. 2017. ‘Value, nature, and labor: A defense of Marx’. Capitalism Nature Socialism 28 (1): 39–52 Crossref
IPBES Secretariat. 2022. ‘Media Release: IPBES Values Assessment – Decisions Based on Narrow Set of Market Values of Nature Underpin the Global Biodiversity Crisis’. Online at https://ipbes.net/media_release/Values_Assessment_Published (accessed 14 July 2022).
James S.P. 2016b. ‘Protecting Nature for the sake of human beings’. Ratio 29 (2): 213–227. Crossref
James S.P. 2016a. ‘The trouble with environmental values’. Environmental Values 25 (2): 131–144. Crossref
James S.P. 2022a. ‘Against relational value’. The Harvard Review of Philosophy [online first]. Crossref
James S.P. 2022b. How Nature Matters. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jones K., and Tobin D. 2018. ‘Reciprocity, redistribution and relational values: Organizing and motivating sustainable agriculture’. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 35: 69–74. Crossref
Klain S.C., Olmsted P., Chan K.M.A. and Satterfield T. 2017. ‘Relational values resonate broadly and differently than intrinsic or instrumental values, or the New Ecological Paradigm’. PLOS ONE 12 (8): e0183962. Crossref
Knippenberg L., de Groot W.T., van den Born R.J., Knights P. and Muraca B. 2018. ‘Relational value, partnership, eudaimonia: A review’. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 35: 39–45. Crossref
Maier D.S. and Feest A. 2016. ‘The IPBES Conceptual Framework: An unhelpful start’. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 29 (2): 327–347. Crossref
Marimán Quemenado P., Caniuqueo Huircapán S., Millalén Paillal J. and Levil Chilcahual R. 2006. ¡…Escucha, winka…! cuatro ensayos de Historia Nacional Mapuche y un epílogo sobre el futuro. First edition. Santiago: LOM Ediciones.
Marx K. 1867. ‘The Commodity’. In Capital Vol. I., pp. 125–177. London: Penguin.
Muraca B. 2011. ‘The map of moral significance: A new axiological matrix for environmental ethics’. Environmental Values 20 (3): 375–396. Crossref
Muraca B. 2016. ‘Relational values: A Whiteheadian alternative for environmental philosophy and global environmental justice’. Balkan Journal of Philosophy 8 (1): 19–38. Crossref
Muradian R., and Pascual U. 2018. ‘A typology of elementary forms of human–nature relations: A contribution to the valuation debate’. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 35: 8–14. Crossref
Neuteleers S. 2020. ‘A fresh look at “relational” values in nature: Distinctions derived from the debate on meaningfulness in life’. Environmental Values 29 (4): 461–479. Crossref
Norton B., and Sanbeg D. 2020. ‘Relational values: A unifying idea in environmental ethics and evaluation?’ Environmental Values 30 (6): 695–714. Crossref
Nozick R. 1974. Anarchy, State, and Utopia. Oxford: Blackwell.
O'Neill J. 1992. ‘The varieties of intrinsic value’. The Monist 75 (2): 119–137. Crossref
Rabinowicz W., and Österberg J. 1996. ‘Value based on preferences: On two interpretations of preference utilitarianism’. Economics and Philosophy 12 (1): 1–27. Crossref
Rokeach M. (ed.) 1979. Understanding Human Values: Individual and Societal. New York: The Free Press.
Sheremata M. 2018. ‘Listening to relational values in the era of rapid environmental change in the Inuit Nunangat’. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 35: 75–81. Crossref
Soulé M.E 1985. ‘What is conservation biology? A new synthetic discipline addresses the dynamics and problems of perturbed species, communities, and ecosystems’. BioScience 35 (11): 727–734. Crossref
Webb A. 2014. ‘Articulating the Mapu: Land as a form of everyday ethnicity among Mapuche youth of Chile’. Latin American and Caribbean Ethnic Studies 9 (3): 222–246. Crossref
Cite
Cite
Cite
OR
Download to reference manager
If you have citation software installed, you can download citation data to the citation manager of your choice
Information, rights and permissions
Information
Published In
Article first published online: August 1, 2023
Issue published: August 2023
Keywords
Authors
Metrics and citations
Metrics
Publication usage*
Total views and downloads: 553
*Publication usage tracking started in December 2016
Publications citing this one
Receive email alerts when this publication is cited
Web of Science: 16 view articles Opens in new tab
Crossref: 15
- Beyond anthropocentrism: ethical pluralism and animal perspectives in Finnish primary school textbooks
- Naturalistic Virtue Ethics and the Relational Turn in Environmental and Animal Ethics: Recognizing an Independent Paradigm
- Loss and damage in tropical fisheries: a systematic review of people, climate, and fisheries
- The “Plural Values of Nature” scale: An integrated psychometric scale to measure instrumental, intrinsic and relational values
- Combining the four Life Framework of Values with Q-methodology to assess non-monetary values of ecosystem services in a Colombian Natural Park
- What is a unit of nature? Measurement challenges in the emerging biodiversity credit market
- The ‘Butterfly Effect’: Identifying pathways for sustainability transformation through social processes of disaster resilience
- Managing Trees Species of High Social and Cultural Value: Forest Manager Attitudes towards Pest and Disease Risks to Oak in Britain
- IPBES: Three ways forward with frameworks of values
- Conceptualising the role of values in environmental governance and management: an analytical framework
- View More
Figures and tables
Figures & Media
Tables
View Options
Access options
If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:
I am signed in as:
View my profileSign out
I can access personal subscriptions, purchases, paired institutional access and free tools such as favourite journals, email alerts and saved searches.
loading institutional access options
Alternatively, view purchase options below:
Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.
Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.
