Advertisement

Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics

, Volume 31, Issue 5, pp 605–623 | Cite as

Environmental Stewardship and Ecological Solidarity: Rethinking Social-Ecological Interdependency and Responsibility

  • Raphaël MathevetEmail author
  • François Bousquet
  • Catherine Larrère
  • Raphaël Larrère
Articles
  • 212 Downloads

Abstract

This paper explores and discusses the various meanings of the stewardship concept in the field of sustainability science. We highlight the increasing differences between alternative approaches to stewardship and propose a typology to enable scientists and practitioners to more precisely identify the basis and objectives of the concept of stewardship. We first present the two dimensions we used to map the diversity of stances concerning stewardship. Second, we analyse these positions in relation to the limits of the systemic approach, ideological manipulation, responsibility, and solidarity. In the final section we explain how the concept of ecological solidarity, a core principal in recent French law on biodiversity conservation and national park governance can contribute to the underpinning of a specific form of social-ecological stewardship.

Keywords

Environmental ethics Solidarity Biodiversity conservation Socio-ecosytem Sustainability 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research presented in this paper contributes to the research project “Multi-scale adaptations to global change and their impacts on vulnerability in coastal areas” (MAGIC), funded by the French National Research Agency and the Belmont Forum and G8 International Opportunities Fund (IOF 2013).

References

  1. Armitage, D., Charles, A., & Berkes, F. (2017). Governing the coastal commons: Communities, resilience and transformation. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Armitage, D. R., Plummer, R., Berkes, F., et al. (2009). Adaptive co-management for social-ecological complexity. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7(2), 95–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 35(4), 216–224.Google Scholar
  4. Attfield, R. (2001). Christianity. In D. Jamieson (Ed.), A companion to environmental philosophy. Blackwell companions to philosophy (pp. 96–110). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barrett, C. B., & Grizzle, R. E. (1999). A holistic approach to sustainability based on pluralistic stewardship. Environmental Ethics, 21(1), 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barrière, O., & Bes, C. (2017). Droit foncier et pastoralisme, entre propriété et territoire. VertigOla revue électronique en sciences de l’environnement, 17(1). https://journals.openedition.org/vertigo/18362.
  7. Beavis, M. A. (1994). Environmental stewardship: History, theory and practice workshop proceedings. Occasional paper 32, Institute Of Urban Studies, University of Winnipeg.Google Scholar
  8. Berkes, F., & Folke, C. (2000). Linking social and ecological systems: Management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Berry, R. J. (2006). Environmental stewardship: Critical perspectives, past and present. London: T&T Clark.Google Scholar
  10. Bieling, C., & Plieninger, T. (2017). The science and practice of landscape stewardship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brandon, K., Redford, K., & Sanderson, S. (1998). Parks in Peril: People, politics and protected areas. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  12. Brandon, K., & Wells, M. (1992). Planning for people and parks: Design delemmas. World Development, 20(4), 557–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brockington, D., & Duffy, R. (2011). Capitalism and conservation. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cairns, R., & Stirling, A. (2014). Maintaining ‘planetary systems’ or ‘concentrating global power?’ High stakes in contending framings of climate geoengineering’. Global Environmental Change, 28, 25–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Callicott, J. B. (2013). Thinking like a planet, the land ethic and the earth ethic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Callicott, J. B., Crowder, L. B., & Mumford, K. (1999). Current normative concepts in conservation. Conservation Biology, 13(1), 22–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Castree, N. (2000). Marxism and the production of nature. Capital and Class, 24(3), 5–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. CENLR. (2014). L’intendance écologique des territoires. Montpellier, FR: Conservatoire des Espaces Naturels.Google Scholar
  19. Chapin, F. S., III, Kofinas, G. P., & Folke, C. (2009). Principles of ecosystem stewardship. Resilience-based natural resource management in a changing world. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  20. Chapin, F. S., III, Power, M. E., Pickett, S. T. A., et al. (2011). Earth Stewardship: Science for action to sustain the human-earth system. Ecosphere, 2, art89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Christian, C., Ainley, D., Bailey, M., et al. (2013). A review of formal objections to Marine Stewardship Council fisheries certifications. Biological Conservation, 161, 10–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Clayton, S. (Ed.). (2012). Handbook of environmental and conservation psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. ComMod. (2003). Our companion modelling approach. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 6(2). http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/6/2/1.html.
  24. Corlett, R. T. (2015). The Anthropocene concept in ecology and conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 30(1), 36–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Cote, M., & Nightingale, A. J. (2012). Resilience thinking meets social theory: Situating social change in socio-ecological systems research. Progress in Human Geography, 36(4), 475–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. DeFries, R., Hansen, A., Turner, B. L., Reid, R., & Liu, J. (2007). Land use change around protected areas: Management to balance human needs and ecological function. Ecological Applications, 17, 1031–1038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Descartes, R. (1962). Discours de la méthode, texte et commentaire, E. Gilson, Paris: J. Vrin.Google Scholar
  28. DeWitt, C. B. (2006). Stewardship: Responding dynamically to the consequence of human action in the world. In R. J. Berry (Ed.), Environmental stewardship: Critical perspectives, past and present (pp. 145–158). London: T&T Clark.Google Scholar
  29. Di Paola, M. (2015). Virtues for the Anthropocene: Taking action in the garden. Environmental Values, 24, 183–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Etienne, M. (Ed.). (2011). Companion modelling. A participatory approach to support sustainable development. Versailles: Quae & Springer.Google Scholar
  31. Fisher, D. R., Svendsen, E. S., & Connolly, J. J. T. (2015). Urban environmental stewardship and civic engagement: How planting trees strengthens the roots of democracy. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Folke, C., Jansson, Å., Rockström, J., et al. (2011). Reconnecting to the Biosphere. Ambio, 40, 719–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Forrester, J. W. (1991). System dynamics and the lessons of 35 years. In K. B. De Greene (Ed.), The systemic basis of policy making in the 1990s. Sloan School of Management Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  34. Foster, J. B., & Clark, B. (2008). The sociology of ecology: Ecological organicism versus ecosystem ecology in the social construction of ecological science, 1926–1935. Organization & Environment, 21(3), 311–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Gardiner, S. M. (2011). Is no one responsible for global environmental tragedy? Climate change as a challenge to our ethical concepts. In D. G. Arnold (Ed.), The ethics of global climate change (pp. 38–59). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Gutiérrez, N. L., Hilborn, R., & Defeo, O. (2011). Leadership, social capital and incentives promote successful fisheries. Nature, 470(7334), 386–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Hansen, A., & DeFries, R. (2007). Ecological mechanisms linking protected areas to surrounding lands. Ecological Applications, 17, 974–988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hejnowicz, A. P., Rudd, M. A., & White, P. C. L. (2016). A survey exploring private farm advisor perspectives of agri-environment schemes: The case of England’s environmental stewardship programme. Land Use Policy, 55, 240–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Hornborg, A. (2009). Zero-sum world: Challenges in conceptualizing environmental local displacement and ecologically unequal exchange in the world system. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 50(3–4), 237–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ison, R. (2010). Systems practice: How to act in a climate-change world. London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Jamieson, D. (2014). Reason in a dark time, why the struggle against climate change failed—and what it means for our future. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Janzen, D. H. (1983). No park is an island. Oikos, 41, 402–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Jepson, P. R., Caldecott, B., Schmitt, S. F., et al. (2017). Protected area asset stewardship. Biological Conservation, 212, 183–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Jonas, H. (1979). The imperative of responsibility. In search for an ethics for the technological age. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  45. Kareiva, P., & Marvier, M. (2012). What is conservation science? BioScience, 62(11), 962–969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Langton, C. G. (1992). Life at the edge of chaos. In C. G. Langton, C. Taylor, J. D. Farmer, & S. Rasmussen (Eds.), Artificial life II (pp. 42–91). Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
  47. Larrère, C., & Larrère, R. (2009). Du bon usage de la nature. Pour une philosophie de l’environnement. Paris, FR: Flammarion.Google Scholar
  48. Larrère, C., & Larrère, R. (2015). Penser et agir avec la nature: Une enquête philosophique. Paris, FR: La Découverte.Google Scholar
  49. Leopold, A. (1949). A Sand County Almanac and sketches here and there. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Macnaghten, P., & Szerzynski, B. (2013). Living the global social experiment: An analysis of public discourse on solar radiation management and its implications for governance. Global Environmental Change, 23, 465–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Mathevet, R. (2012). La solidarité écologique, Ce lien qui nous oblige. Arles, FR: Actes Sud.Google Scholar
  52. Mathevet, R., & Bousquet, F. (2014). Résilience & environnement, penser les changements socio-écologiques. Paris, FR: Buchet-Chastel.Google Scholar
  53. Mathevet, R., Bousquet, F., & Raymond, C. M. (2018). The stewardship concept in sustainability science and conservation biology. Biological Conservation, 217, 363–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Mathevet, R., Thompson, J., Delanoë, O., Cheylan, M., & Bonnin, M. (2010). La solidarité écologique: Un nouveau concept pour la gestion intégrée des parcs nationaux et des territoires. Natures Sciences Sociétés, 18(4), 424–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Mathevet, R., Thompson, J., Folke, C., & Chapin, F. S., III. (2016). Protected areas and their surrounding territory: Social-ecological systems in the context of ecological solidarity. Ecological Applications, 26(1), 5–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. McCulloch, W. (1988). Embodiments of the mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  57. McGinnis, V. (2005). Bioregionalism. New York: Taylor and Francis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. McShane, K. (2007). Why environmental ethics shouldn’t give up on intrinsic value. Environmental Ethics, 29, 43–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Merchant, C. (1996). Earthcare, women and the environment. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  60. Merchant, C. (2004). Reinventing Eden. The fate of nature in western culture. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Merwin, S. (1977). The “Country Life Movement” and the American Churches. Church History, 46, 358–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Morton, O. (2016). The planet remade. How geoengineering could change the world. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Norton, B. (2005). Sustainability: A philosophy of adaptive ecosystem management. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Noss, R., Nash, R., Paquet, P., & Soulé, M. (2013). Humanity’s domination of nature is part of the problem: A response to Kareiva and Marvier. BioScience, 63(4), 241–242.Google Scholar
  65. Nussbaum, M. C. (2006). Frontiers of justice: Disability, nationality, species membership. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Ode Sang, Å., & Tveit, M. S. (2013). Perceptions of stewardship in Norwegian agricultural landscapes. Land Use Policy, 31, 557–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Ostrom, E. (2009). A general framework for analysing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science, 325, 419–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Palmer, C. (2006). Stewardship: A case study in environmental ethics. In R. J. Berry (Ed.), Environmental stewardship: Critical perspectives, past and present (pp. 63–75). London: T&T Clark.Google Scholar
  69. Passmore, J. (1974). Man’s responsability for nature: Ecological problems and western tradition. New York: Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
  70. Plieninger, T., Kizos, T., Bieling, C., et al. (2015). Exploring ecosystem-change and society through a landscape lens: Recent progress in European landscape research. Ecology and Society, 20, 5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Plumwood, V. (1999). Paths beyond human-centeredness: lessons from liberation struggles. In A. Weston (Ed.), An invitation to environmental philosophy (pp. 69–106). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  72. Plumwood, V. (2002). Environmental culture: The ecological crisis of reason. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  73. Preston, C. J. (2016). Climate justice and geoengineering: Ethics and policy in the atmospheric anthropocene. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield International.Google Scholar
  74. Pretty, J. (1995). Participatory learning for sustainable agriculture. World Development, 23(8), 1247–1263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Raymond, C. M., Bieling, C., Fagerholm, N., et al. (2015). The farmer as a landscape steward: Comparing local understandings of landscape stewardship, landscape values, and land management actions. Ambio, 45, 173–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Raymond, C. M., Reed, M. S., Bieling, C., et al. (2016). Integrating different understandings of landscape stewardship into the design of agri-environmental schemes. Environmental Conservation, 43(4), 350–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., et al. (2009). A safe operating space for humanity. Nature, 461, 472–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Rozzi, R., Pickett, S. T. A., Palmer, C., et al. (2015). Linking ecology and ethics for a changing world. Values, philosophy, and action. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  79. Sandler, R. (2010). Ethical theory and the problem of inconsequentialism: Why environmental ethicists should be virtue-oriented ethicists. Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Ethics, 23(1–2), 167–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Sartre, J. P. (1960). Critique de la raison dialectique. Paris, FR: Galllimard.Google Scholar
  81. Serre, M. (1995). The natural contract. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Shannon, C. E. (1949). Communication theory of secrecy systems. Bell System Technical Journal, 28, 656–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Spash, C. L. (2015). Bulldozing biodiversity: The economics of offsets and trading-in Nature. Biological Conservation, 192, 541–551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Theobald, D. M., Hobbs, N. T., Bearly, T., Zack, J. A., Shenk, T., & Riebsame, W. E. (2000). Incorporating biological information in local land use decision making for conservation planning. Landscape Ecology, 15, 35–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Thompson, J., Mathevet, R., Delanoë, O., Cheylan, M., & Bonnin, M. (2011). Ecological solidarity as a conceptual tool for rethinking ecological and social interdependence in conservation policy for protected areas and their surrounding landscape. Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences, 334, 412–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Turner, M. G. (1989). Landscape ecology: The effect of pattern on process. Annual Reviews of Ecology and Systematics, 20, 171–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Welchman, J. (2012). A defence of environmental stewardship. Environmental Values, 21, 297–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. White, L. (1967). The historical roots of our ecologic crisis. Science, 155, 1203–1207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Wiener, N. (1948). Cybernetics or control and communication in the animal and the machine. Cambridge: The Technology Press.Google Scholar
  90. Wolfram, S. (1984). Cellular automata as models of complexity. Nature, 311, 419–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Worrell, R., & Appleby, M. C. (2000). Stewardship of natural resources: Definition, ethical and practical aspects. Journal of Agriculture and Environmental Ethics, 12, 263–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Wunderlich, G. (2004). Evolution of the stewardship idea in American country life. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 17(1), 77–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Young, I. M. (2006). Responsibility for justice. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  94. Young, H. S., McCauley, D. J., Galetti, M., & Dirzo, R. (2016). Patterns, causes, and consequences of Anthropocene defaunation. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics, 47, 333–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raphaël Mathevet
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • François Bousquet
    • 3
  • Catherine Larrère
    • 4
  • Raphaël Larrère
    • 5
  1. 1.Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive, UMR 5175, CNRS, Université de Montpellier-Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier-EPHEMontpellier Cedex 5France
  2. 2.Institut Français de Pondichéry, UMIFRE 21, CNRS/MAEEPondicherryIndia
  3. 3.GREEN, Univ MontpellierMontpellier Cedex 5France
  4. 4.Université Pari l Panthéon-Sorbonne, Institut des sciences juridique et philosophique de la Sorbonne (UMR8103), Centre de philosophie contemporaine de la Sorbonne (PhiCo)Paris Cedex O5France
  5. 5.Département SAE2 (Sciences Sociales Agriculture et Alimentation, Espace et Environnement)Institut National de la Recherche AgronomiqueParisFrance

Personalised recommendations