环境评估中的价值表达:哪些价值,谁的价值,如何价值?

IF 6.6 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Sharachchandra Lele
{"title":"环境评估中的价值表达:哪些价值,谁的价值,如何价值?","authors":"Sharachchandra Lele","doi":"10.1016/j.cosust.2023.101294","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Large infrastructure projects, such as ports, dams, highways, and mines, cause major negative environmental impacts, most felt by local communities but affecting other stakeholders as well. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and associated Social Impact Assessment (SIA) are tools that together constitute the core of the concept of environmental appraisal (EA). This concept has been accepted worldwide as the value-articulating institution that both recognizes values and evaluates impacts on them. The values, as in ethical principles, at stake here include values toward nature (instrumental, relational, or intrinsic) and toward people (recognition </span>justice, distributive justice or equity, and procedural or democratic functioning). Drawing upon the literature on the design, practice, and conceptualization of EA, I ask whether there is a lopsided treatment of different values for nature, and in particular an inattention to relational values. I find, however, that, while the EA process may indeed be particularly neglectful of relational values toward nature, there are broader substantive and procedural failures in recognizing and discussing adverse impacts that are largely felt by local, often marginalized, communities. These failures indicate that at the heart of the problem is a deeper neglect of values for people, that is, for equity and democratic decision-making.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":294,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability","volume":"63 ","pages":"Article 101294"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Value articulation in environmental appraisal: which values, whose values, and how valued?\",\"authors\":\"Sharachchandra Lele\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cosust.2023.101294\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><span>Large infrastructure projects, such as ports, dams, highways, and mines, cause major negative environmental impacts, most felt by local communities but affecting other stakeholders as well. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and associated Social Impact Assessment (SIA) are tools that together constitute the core of the concept of environmental appraisal (EA). This concept has been accepted worldwide as the value-articulating institution that both recognizes values and evaluates impacts on them. The values, as in ethical principles, at stake here include values toward nature (instrumental, relational, or intrinsic) and toward people (recognition </span>justice, distributive justice or equity, and procedural or democratic functioning). Drawing upon the literature on the design, practice, and conceptualization of EA, I ask whether there is a lopsided treatment of different values for nature, and in particular an inattention to relational values. I find, however, that, while the EA process may indeed be particularly neglectful of relational values toward nature, there are broader substantive and procedural failures in recognizing and discussing adverse impacts that are largely felt by local, often marginalized, communities. These failures indicate that at the heart of the problem is a deeper neglect of values for people, that is, for equity and democratic decision-making.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":294,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability\",\"volume\":\"63 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101294\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877343523000416\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877343523000416","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

大型基础设施项目,如港口、水坝、高速公路和矿山,会造成重大的负面环境影响,这些影响主要由当地社区感受到,但也会影响到其他利益相关者。环境影响评估(EIA)和相关的社会影响评估(SIA)是共同构成环境评价(EA)概念核心的工具。这一概念已被全世界所接受,作为一种既承认价值又评估对价值的影响的价值表达机构。与伦理原则一样,这里涉及的价值观包括对自然(工具性、关系性或内在性)和对人(承认正义、分配正义或公平、程序或民主功能)的价值观。参考有关EA的设计、实践和概念化的文献,我想知道是否存在对不同自然价值的不平衡处理,特别是对关系价值的忽视。然而,我发现,虽然EA过程可能确实特别忽视了对自然的关系价值,但在认识和讨论主要由当地(通常是边缘化的)社区感受到的不利影响方面,存在更广泛的实质性和程序性失败。这些失败表明,问题的核心是更深层次地忽视了人民的价值观,即对公平和民主决策的价值观。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Value articulation in environmental appraisal: which values, whose values, and how valued?

Large infrastructure projects, such as ports, dams, highways, and mines, cause major negative environmental impacts, most felt by local communities but affecting other stakeholders as well. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and associated Social Impact Assessment (SIA) are tools that together constitute the core of the concept of environmental appraisal (EA). This concept has been accepted worldwide as the value-articulating institution that both recognizes values and evaluates impacts on them. The values, as in ethical principles, at stake here include values toward nature (instrumental, relational, or intrinsic) and toward people (recognition justice, distributive justice or equity, and procedural or democratic functioning). Drawing upon the literature on the design, practice, and conceptualization of EA, I ask whether there is a lopsided treatment of different values for nature, and in particular an inattention to relational values. I find, however, that, while the EA process may indeed be particularly neglectful of relational values toward nature, there are broader substantive and procedural failures in recognizing and discussing adverse impacts that are largely felt by local, often marginalized, communities. These failures indicate that at the heart of the problem is a deeper neglect of values for people, that is, for equity and democratic decision-making.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES-ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
CiteScore
13.80
自引率
2.80%
发文量
52
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: "Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability (COSUST)" is a distinguished journal within Elsevier's esteemed scientific publishing portfolio, known for its dedication to high-quality, reproducible research. Launched in 2010, COSUST is a part of the Current Opinion and Research (CO+RE) suite, which is recognized for its editorial excellence and global impact. The journal specializes in peer-reviewed, concise, and timely short reviews that provide a synthesis of recent literature, emerging topics, innovations, and perspectives in the field of environmental sustainability.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信