Values in contrast with the IPBES framework

This category refers to the value that nature or natural entities have for themselves. It can include their functional value within a broader ecological state. It can also involve attributing them a moral value, e.g. that species should not be driven to extinction regardless of human interests. The target of value may be: individual organisms such as a particular gorilla or an oak tree; bio-physical assemblages such as a population of polar bears or a river basin; biophysical processes such as evolution or ecological resilience; or biodiversity on a genetic, organismal, species or holistic bases. The orientation of values in this category is non-anthropocentric.

This category refers to the benefits (in the broadest sense) that people draw from nature or ecosystem functions. These benefits can be realized as physical outputs, such as water or food. They can also include cultural, recreational and/or spiritual interactions that are directly or indirectly influential for human endeavour. One of the conceptualizations of nature’s benefits is ‘ecosystems services’. The orientation of values in this category is anthropocentric, and includes both instrumental and relational values with a normative goal of human well-being.

This category concerns the contribution of nature and ecosystem processes to a good quality of life, or a fulfilled human life. This refers to the way in which different elements of nature and biodiversity & ecosystem services support human well-being. It also includes the principles of living in harmony with nature, and living in balance with Mother Earth. This can involve the development of desirable communities and societies, for example the way landscape conservation can contribute to a sense of place and community. The orientation of values in this category is anthropocentric and relational.