Loading...
Looking into the dragons of cultural ecosystem services
Gould, Rachelle K. Adams, Alison Vivanco, Luis
Gould, Rachelle K.
Adams, Alison
Vivanco, Luis
Citations
Altmetric:
License
© 2020 The Author(s).
DOI
10.1080/26395916.2020.1815841
Abstract
Cultural ecosystem services research is in a somewhat tumultuous state. The cultural ecosystem services (CES) idea is seen simultaneously as a welcoming, expansive addition to conservation policy-making and as a strange, square-peg-in-a-round-hole concept that should be replaced by a more appropriate metaphor or conceptual structure. This confluence of interest and skepticism suggests an opportune moment to take stock of CES, both as a concept and growing scholarly field. Here, we focus on dilemmas that characterize and constitute CES as a field of empirical inquiry and practice. We describe five tensions that characterize the field (and mirror tensions in interdisciplinary work more broadly): universalism and anti-universalism; reductionism and non-reductionism; historical and ahistorical approaches; politicized and depoliticized approaches; and objectivity and situated knowledges. We then suggest five non-mutually-exclusive roles that CES research can (and does) play: The Convener/Illuminator; the Process Police Officer; the Translator; the Revolutionary; and the Policy In-fighter. We provide examples of each tension and role, and posit that clarity and reflexivity may help to make sense of a fertile, if sometimes confusing, interdisciplinary field. Making more sense of, and being more explicit about, the contradictions and contributions of the CES field, can, we suggest, aid decision-makers, CES researchers, and others to better include these values in environmental management.
Description
Date
2020-01-01
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Files
Loading...
Gould2020a.pdf
Adobe PDF, 1.55 MB
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Citation
Gould RK, Adams A, Vivanco L. Looking into the dragons of cultural ecosystem services. Ecosystems and People. 2020 Jan 1;16(1):257-72.