Digital co-construction of relational values: understanding the role of social media for sustainability
There is a deeply relational aspect to the systems people employ for sorting through and prioritizing plural values assigned to social–ecological interactions. Spurred by interpersonal relationships and adhesion to societal core values, such as justice and reciprocity, relational values go beyond instrumental and intrinsic approaches to understanding human behaviour vis-à-vis the environment. Currently, this relational dimension of values is entering the spotlight of the cultural ecosystem services (CES) literature focusing on non-material benefits and values people derive from ecosystems, such as aesthetics and sense of place. Relational values foster reflections on appropriateness and morality of preferences and respective behaviours in contributing to collective flourishment across space and time, holding implications for social–ecological justice and sustainability. Recently, several studies explored the potential of using social media data for assessing values ascribed to CES, but did not look at how this emerging approach could contribute to an enhanced understanding of relational values. In order to take up this goal, we conducted a systematic review, screening 140 publications and selecting 29 as relevant for exploring the extent to which relational CES values are inferable through social media. Our results show that social media data can reveal CES values’ plural and relational dimension. Social media platforms, thus, can be understood as new arenas for the co-construction of values, where relational values stemming from social–ecological interactions are negotiated and defined. Yet, work on their implications for social–ecological justice and sustainability needs to be extended.
KeywordsCultural ecosystem services Social media analysis Relational values Sustainability
We acknowledge financial support from the 2015–2016 BiodivERsA COFUND call for research proposals through the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities (PCIN-2016-002) and from the European Research Council (Greenlulus 678034). F.C. thanks the AGAUR Catalan governmental agency (Grant number 2018FI_B00635) and the Institute for the right to university studies in Lazio, Laziodisu (Grant “Torno Subito 2017” number 7425-18092017) for the funding received to support this study. A.T.A.M. acknowledges support by the European Commission through an Erasmus Mundus scholarship (JEMES CiSu UAB2016/No. 1). J.J.T.C. thanks the Spanish Ministry of Sciences, Innovation, and University’s Subprogram of Juan de la Cierva Incoporacion (IJCI-2016-31100). We also thank the reviewers for their valuable remarks.
- Catana AV (2016) Using social media to assess cultural ecosystem services generated in protected areas in PatagoniaGoogle Scholar
- De Nadai M, Staiano J, Larcher R, et al (2016) The Death and life of great italian cities: a mobile phone data perspective. In: 26th International ACM Conference on World Wide Web (WWW)Google Scholar
- Goldberg L (2015) Utilizing Crowdsourced georeferenced photography for identification and prioritization of areas for scenic conservation. In: Buhmann E, Ervin SM, Pietsch M (eds) Digital landscape architecture. pp 268–275Google Scholar
- Guerrero P, Møller MS, Olafsson AS, Snizek B (2016) Revealing cultural ecosystem services through instagram images: the potential of social media volunteered geographic information for urban green infrastructure planning and governance. Urban Plan. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v1i2.609 Google Scholar
- Haines-Young R, Potschin M (2018) Common international classification of ecosystem services (CICES) V5.1 guidance on the application of the revised structureGoogle Scholar
- Hamstead ZA, Fisher D, Ilieva RT et al (2018) Geolocated social media as a rapid indicator of park visitation and equitable park access. Comput Environ Urban Syst 72:38–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2018.01.007 Google Scholar
- International Telecommunication Union (2016) Measuring the Information Society Report 2016Google Scholar
- Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) Ecosystems and Human Well Being: Synthesis. Island Press, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
- Schlosberg D (2007) Defining environmental justice. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Stern PC, Dietz T, Abel T et al (1999) A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: the case of environmentalism. Hum Ecol Rev 6:81–97.Google Scholar
- Syahid A, Tareq MA (2015) A penny for your thoughts : a preference modelling case study in R. In: 12th International Conference on Innovation and ManagementGoogle Scholar
- TEEB (2010) The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: mainstreaming the economics of nature: a synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB.Google Scholar