This article reflects on implications of presenting nature as a social construction, and of commodification of nature. The social construction of nature tends to limit significance of nature to human perception of it. Commodification presents nature in strict instrumental terms as ‘natural resources’, ‘natural capital’ or ‘ecosystem services’. Both construction and commodification exhibit anthropocentric bias in denying intrinsic value of non-human species. This article will highlight the importance of a deep ecology perspective, by elaborating upon the ethical context in which construction and commodification of nature occur. Finally, this article will discuss the implications of this ethical context in relation to environmental education (EE) and education for sustainable development (ESD). https://doi.org/10.3384/cu.2000.1525.146931 https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
MULTIFILE
Biodiversity preservation is often viewed in utilitarian terms that render non-human species as ecosystem services or natural resources. The economic capture approach may be inadequate in addressing biodiversity loss because extinction of some species could conceivably come to pass without jeopardizing the survival of the humans. People might be materially sustained by a technological biora made to yield services and products required for human life. The failure to address biodiversity loss calls for an exploration of alternative paradigms. It is proposed that the failure to address biodiversity loss stems from the fact that ecocentric value holders are politically marginalized and underrepresented in the most powerful strata of society. While anthropocentric concerns with environment and private expressions of biophilia are acceptable in the wider society, the more pronounced publicly expressed deep ecology position is discouraged. “Radical environmentalists” are among the least understood of all contemporary opposition movements, not only in tactical terms, but also ethically. The article argues in favor of the inclusion of deep ecology perspective as an alternative to the current anthropocentric paradigm. https://doi.org/10.1080/1943815X.2012.742914 https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
Through the commodification of nature, the framing of the environment as a ‘natural resource’ or ‘ecosystem service’ has become increasingly prominent in international environmental governance. The economic capture approach is promoted by international organizations such as the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) through Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD), Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES) and The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB). This paper will inquire as to how forest protection is related to issues of social and ecological justice, exploring whether forest exploitation based on the top-down managerial model fosters an unequitable distribution of resources. Both top-down and community-based approaches to forest protection will be critically examined and a more inclusive ethical framework to forest protection will be offered. The findings of this examination indicate the need for a renewed focus on existing examples of good practice in addressing both social and ecological need, as well as the necessity to address the less comfortable problem of where compromise appears less possible. The conclusion argues for the need to consider ecological justice as an important aspect of more socially orientated environmental justice for forest protection. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892916000436 https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
MULTIFILE
To what extent does receiving information about either popular attractions or less-visited at-tractions, presented as “highlights” of the city, influence the movement of tourists to popular or less-visited attractions, and how does this differ by information channel through which the information is presented? To what extent does receiving information about either popular attractions or less-visited at-tractions, presented as “highlights” of the city, influence tourists’ experience, including their evaluations of the destination, their visit as a whole, and the specific information channel they received, and how does this differ by information channel through which the information is presented? What implementation models and financing mechanisms are available for DMO’s to spread tourists using the information channels tested, contingent on their effectiveness as measured by the previous experiment?Societal issueDestination Management Organisations (DMOs) are looking for interventions that effectively discourage tourists from visiting crowded hotspots and entice them to visit less crowded locations. Interventions like changing infrastructure, charging entrance fees and re-serving site access are either too expensive, too invasive or politically controversial. It is much easier to intervene on tourists' behaviour by informing them about alternatives.Collaborative partnersNHL Stenden, Travel with Zoey, Amsterdam and Partners, Wonderful Copenhagen, Mobidot.
