Environmental restoration is emerging as a major driver in the repair and reversal of some of the world’s most severely degraded landscape systems, with growing interest in the status and composition of restoration efforts. Although much has already been written about the theory and practice of environmental restoration, both positive and negative, hitherto the literature has tended to overlook the complexity bound up in defining restoration discourses, and perhaps more importantly, the physical, material consequences instilled through such human choice. The mutability of discourses of environmental restoration means that it can be moulded and (re-)shaped by different actors and contexts, with different values and meanings attached to ‘nature’. There exist multiple and contested natures of environmental restoration - nature(s) both in the sense o f the properties of restoration, and also that which is restored to a site. In this doctoral thesis, I demonstrate how discourses of environmental restoration are defined and interpreted, which discourses (if any) appear to dominate, and how these are mobilised to produce ‘restored nature’. Attention is also awarded to the environmental implications incurred when such discourses are played out on the ground. The research is grounded empirically through reference to the case studies o f the Eden Project (Cornwall, UK), the National Forest Company (Derbyshire, UK), and the Walden Woods Project (Lincoln, MA) and their adoption of restoration practices. Analysing the processes and practices of environmental restoration within a framework of social nature and cultural landscapes serves to destabilise the dualism distancing nature from society - a preserve of environmental ethics and philosophy - for such synergy not only highlights how ideas of (restored) nature are socially constructed, but also addresses the material production of nature, reinforcing the interactions between natural and societal actors.

No description available.

The purposes of this research were 1) to understand what stakeholders in one nature center are "thinking"about the focus of their center and the niche it occupies; 2) to characterize the role of one nature center in its local community; 3) to examine the nature center in terms of established characteristics of a "best" nature center; 4) to compare stakeholder perceptions with perceptions of directors of exemplar nature centers and environmental education organizations; and 5) to characterize visitor and member stakeholder perceptions and motivations in terms of the extrinsic value of ecosystem services, bioeconomics, versus the intrinsic value of nature, biophilia. This research was conducted utilizing case study methodology with mixed method data collection. Ijams Nature Center visitors and members were surveyed concerning the value of nature; structured interviews were administered to Ijams Nature Center employees, nationally recognized nature center and environmental organization directors. Visitors‘ perceptions of nature focused on the natural surroundings of the nature center, providing opportunities to watch wild animals, appreciate nature, and feel at peace. Nature center member perceptions of nature reflected the concepts of stewardship and advocacy fostered by the Center‘s conservation mission, education programs, and preservation activities. Participants shared common thematic concepts for the role of nature centers and the characteristics of a best nature center. A best nature center was characterized as a composite of factors, practices, and perspectives that merge to form a business plan reflective of best practice guidelines. Participants highlighted the unique quality of centers and the passion and vision that guides development and the roles played by nature centers in their local communities, as identified in this study, i.e., education, advocacy, and immediacy. Ijams Nature Center visitors and members valued nature differently in terms of bioeconomics and biophilia, but both groups rated the biophilic value of nature of greater importance, with differing constructs reflective of that value.

No description available.

En cette époque de profonds bouleversements environnementaux, les motifs invoqués par la communauté internationale en vue de protéger la nature sont multiples. Si la préservation de la biodiversité est souvent mise à l’avant-plan, les préoccupations témoignent également d’une sensibilité omniprésente à la beauté des paysages. Cette thèse étudie donc le rôle de l’appréciation esthétique de la nature dans la désignation internationale d’aires protégées. Elle emploie pour cela l’exemple de la Convention concernant la protection du patrimoine mondial, culturel et naturel, adoptée en 1972 par l’UNESCO. Les préceptes de cet instrument de conservation de portée globale admettent l’importance de sauvegarder la beauté du monde naturel, sans toutefois prescrire de moyens clairs pour identifier et sélectionner les sites méritant protection à ce titre. Face à ce flou méthodologique, la thèse examine les facteurs historiques, structurels et techniques qui façonnent, de façon relativement implicite et spontanée, l’inscription d’aires naturelles d’une beauté exceptionnelle sur la Liste du patrimoine mondial. La thèse est constituée de six chapitres. Le premier chapitre introduit le problème et la question de recherche. La revue de la littérature pose ensuite les bases contextuelles et théoriques de la recherche en explorant différents facteurs historiques et philosophiques d’appréciation de la nature. Le troisième chapitre expose la méthodologie qualitative et historique employée dans la thèse. Il est suivi d’un chapitre qui retrace l’origine des préoccupations esthétiques qui ont été intégrées à la Convention du patrimoine mondial lors de sa création, avant de détailler le développement et l’application de ces idées durant les cinq décennies de sa mise en œuvre. Le cinquième chapitre est quant à lui dédié à l’étude spécifique de l’application du critère de sélection (vii), qui prévoit la reconnaissance « […] d’aires d'une beauté naturelle et d'une importance esthétique exceptionnelles ». Finalement, la conclusion renferme une synthèse et une discussion des résultats, appelant à une reconsidération de la valeur esthétique de la nature à travers une meilleure prise en compte de ses dimensions humaine et sociale. Elle aborde également la contribution et les limites de la thèse et suggère des pistes de recherches ultérieures. Les résultats de la recherche brossent un portrait précis des enjeux théoriques et pratiques qui caractérisent l’interprétation de la valeur esthétique des espaces naturels dans le cadre du patrimoine mondial. Celle-ci s’avère largement influencée par la séparation conceptuelle et disciplinaire entre culture et nature ainsi que par le paradigme scientifique, objectiviste et universaliste qui prédominent au sein de la Convention de 1972. Réalisée sans assise théorique claire, l’évaluation de la beauté naturelle est vulnérable aux jugements subjectifs et aux incohérences. Pour y conférer plus de structure et de rigueur, la thèse appelle à une meilleure prise en compte du rôle de la perspective humaine et des facteurs socioculturels dans la construction de la valeur esthétique de la nature. / In this era of substantial environmental disruption, incentives given by the international community to protect nature are many. While the preservation of biodiversity is often at the forefront, preoccupations also show an enduring sensitivity to scenic beauty. This thesis therefore examines the role of the aesthetic appreciation of nature in the international designation of protected areas, through the example of the 1972 UNESCO Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. The principles of this global conservation instrument recognize the importance of safeguarding the beauty of the natural world, but do not prescribe clear means for identifying and selecting sites deserving protection as such. In the face of this methodological uncertainty, this thesis examines the historical, structural, and technical factors that shape, in a relatively implicit and spontaneous way, the inscription of natural areas of outstanding beauty on the World Heritage List. The thesis consists of six chapters. The first chapter introduces the problem and research question. The literature review then sets the contextual and theoretical basis for the research by exploring various historical and philosophical factors of nature appreciation. The third chapter outlines the qualitative and historical methodology used in the thesis. This is followed by a chapter tracing the origin of the aesthetic concerns that were incorporated into the World Heritage Convention at its inception, before detailing the development and application of these ideas over the five decades of its implementation. The fifth chapter is dedicated to the specific study of the application of selection criterion (vii), which provides for the designation of "...areas of outstanding natural beauty and aesthetic importance". Finally, the conclusion contains a synthesis and discussion of the results, calling for a rethinking of the aesthetic value of nature through a better consideration of its human and social dimensions. It also addresses the contribution and limitations of the thesis, and suggests avenues for further research. The results of the research provide a clear picture of the theoretical and practical issues that characterize the interpretation of the aesthetic value of natural areas in the context of World Heritage. This interpretation is largely influenced by the conceptual and disciplinary separation between culture and nature, as well as by the scientific, objectivist and universalist paradigm that prevail in the 1972 Convention. Carried out without a clear theoretical foundation, the assessment of natural beauty is vulnerable to subjective judgments and inconsistencies. To provide more structure and rigor, this thesis calls for a better consideration of the role of the human perspective in constructing the aesthetic value of nature.

The argument advanced is this thesis is that the entities that make up the environment are those that do not owe their origin to any willful creative activity but have evolved through accidental natural processes. This fact of not being willfully created makes the environment ontologically independent and confers on it intrinsic value as opposed to instrumental value. This intrinsic value is one that all the entities that make up the environment share. It is further argued that this intrinsic value is aesthetic rather than moral. Only beings that are specially endowed with certain capacities, like reflection and understanding, could be said, in the context of this work, to have intrinsic moral value in the sense of being moral agents. But as moral agents, we need to give moral considerability to all the natural entities in the environment since they share the same natural right with us, based on our common origin. So, even though the nonhuman, natural entities in the environment do not have moral rights, they have natural rights. It is further argued that this natural right could be best safeguarded in a legal framework.

The argument advanced is this thesis is that the entities that make up the environment are those that do not owe their origin to any willful creative activity but have evolved through accidental natural processes. This fact of not being willfully created makes the environment ontologically independent and confers on it intrinsic value as opposed to instrumental value. This intrinsic value is one that all the entities that make up the environment share. It is further argued that this intrinsic value is aesthetic rather than moral. Only beings that are specially endowed with certain capacities, like reflection and understanding, could be said, in the context of this work, to have intrinsic moral value in the sense of being moral agents. But as moral agents, we need to give moral considerability to all the natural entities in the environment since they share the same natural right with us, based on our common origin. So, even though the nonhuman, natural entities in the environment do not have moral rights, they have natural rights. It is further argued that this natural right could be best safeguarded in a legal framework.