Corinna Casi

Within the heritage of environmental aesthetics, the scenic appreciation of nature is influenced by the eighteenth-century notion of the “picturesque” and by “the landscape model”. These influences have consequences, such as the exclusive focus on the visual aspect of a landscape leaving out other elements such as the sounds, smells and other sensations one can experience in a natural environment. In the chapter “Ecological Significance in Nature Appreciation”, I present a critique of the aesthetic appreciation of nature, mentioning some international environmental case as well as examples of the everyday life. (Neglected for many years because understood as a mere context where events take place, the “everyday” is mentioned in this article as a revitalized concept that in the last years has witnessed a growing interest within philosophy and the aesthetics of everyday life which include the aesthetics qualities of living personal spaces such as yards and gardens.) Based on the criticism of the solely aesthetic evaluation of natural environments, I propose alternatives appreciation of nature based on the pre-knowledge of the natural history sciences, which can help to understand the features and the functions of natural elements, environments and ecosystems beyond their appearance. The scientific knowledge is a good point of departure to broaden people’s horizon on the richness and biodiversity of the natural world but it should be deepened by a personal engagement with nature, as the American philosopher Holmes Rolston III proposed (Rolston III 1998, 162), which includes other senses such as the one of sound, smell and touch. Among the natural history sciences, ecology can particularly help to display features and benefits of unattractive landscapes such as wetlands and prairies, and species that are not aesthetically appealing to the great public such as bats and Venus flytraps. Ecological knowledge can support the battle against the tyranny of the scenic landscape approach in the everyday experiences, prevalently visual, thus opening the way for supporting environmental protecting policies which do not prioritize beauty but health and well-being, not only for humans but for the whole earth ecosystem.

The chapter "The Value of the Barents Region: More than a Resource Provider" focuses on the ecological value of the Barents Region (such as old-growth forests, minerals, peatlands, mires, etc.) beyond its economic aspects not only for the Arctic itself but for the climate mitigation of the whole planet earth. This work offers an account of the environmental non-economic value of the Barents region from an ecological perspective. The text provides a critique of the interpretation of environmental issues as if they would be economic ones (Sagoff, O’Neill). Generally conceived as a territory reach in natural resources therefore source of economic profits, the Barents Region is instead a unique natural environment worth of protection and respect. Many of its aspects, such as peatlands, mires, minerals and old-grow forests contribute to the sustainability of the whole planet. Moreover, the Indigenous inhabitants of the Barents Regions, who often are not considered in the decision-making of their native land, provide an incalculable help to its well-being which should be acknowledged.

This paper focuses on Sami Indigenous Peoples’ food system as an example to consider for alternative solutions, which do not put stress on the planet ecosystems. Their food system is linked with Sami traditional ecological knowledge and livelihood practices, and all together they inform the Sami’s worldview. Furthermore, I suggest that Sami traditional food system represents a model of ‘sustainable food production and consumption’ to look at in order to foster a higher respect for the food we eat and diminish the current food waste. I call the Sami food system ‘sustainable’ due to their bond to the food production, harvesting and processing and to the high respect of the natural environment and the natural cycle of animals and plants. The Aristotelian philosophical tradition and its virtue ethics help to identify a 'Sami sustainability virtue'. This is understood as a practical wisdom of Sami Indigenous People based on their worldview and traditional ecological knowledge.

This chapter investigates the relationship between traditional food systems, livelihood practice and the identity of Sami Indigenous communities living in Northern Europe. The theoretical framework of this chapter draws from three non-Indigenous fields of study: food ethics, food security, and food sovereignty. Firstly, food ethics discourses are used to outline the significance of traditional food in Sami culture. Secondly, food security, as a global discourse on food policy, is employed to shed light to the accessibility and availability of nutritious and sufficient food for a healthy and active life. Lastly, food sovereignty is used to highlight the relationship between food and issues of inequality and injustice, and the importance of strengthening local food production. These analytical frameworks help point out the strong relationship of the Sami’s traditional livelihood activities of reindeer herding and salmon fishing with their dignity, self-determination, and identity as the Sami Indigenous community, even though the discourses about these topics remain in the settler’s realm and language. To empower Sami Indigenous People, it is essential to decolonise food security and indigenise food sovereignty discourses. In Sami communities, this means letting the Sami people develop their own definitions for food security and food sovereignty and set their own food policies.

Reversing the ecological degradation that is rapidly spreading globally requires radical action at various levels of society. In this transition, the legal framework could create pathways for ethically sound, yet effective, techno-socio-economic developments. Most legal systems are failing, as they are built on ‘strong’ anthropocentrism, where humans’ interests are prioritized over those of nature. This approach is particularly prominent in some fields of private law, such as intellectual property regimes. This article focuses on the alternative, namely to create a ‘rights of nature’ (RoN) framework in order to curb and, ideally, reverse the continuing environmental decline. In this regard, we argue that to better respect nature, law should follow ‘weak’ anthropocentrism, identified in this paper as an approach that assigns higher intrinsic value to humans but also recognizes intrinsic value in non-human nature. To this end, an inclusive concept of ‘nature’ that encompasses both humans and non-human elements of nature, and where non-human elements of nature also become legal subjects with a degree of legal capacity, could provide a viable alternative. We concretize this vision via elaborating on how such an approach could divert, in particular, traditionally ‘strong’ anthropocentric regimes such as (intellectual) private property law towards achieving more eco-friendly outcomes.

Traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) refers to a body of knowledge, practices, and ideas transmitted and (re)generated orally and non-verbally in diverse forms from generation to generation. It is constantly changing and being updated. TEK is rich among several communities, but we will situate our cases in the Amazonian and Arctic Indigenous contexts. We will also discuss the limits of TEK in sustainability science, which include its truth-value and legitimacy. As it originates from different traditions, experiences, and language structures, it is challenging to systematize. Recently, however, TEK has been recognized in a more inclusive way, and traditional knowledge holders have been taken as collaborators to scientific projects. Therefore, various local communities have been able to contribute to science with their views and knowledge of the social history and presence of specific places, which are rapidly changing due to climate change and global warming. This has also offered better-situated and multidimensional understandings of complex and dynamic ecosystems. The inclusion of TEK can thus bring better-informed results, improve our understanding of environmental situations, and eventually contribute to greater sustainability.

The concept of ‘extractivism’ refers to the mindset and processes that facilitate for-profit large-scale exploitation of natural resources. Extractivism has a strong connection with how the markets work in this era of factory mass-production. This article seeks to understand if and how 3D printing (3DP), guided by effective legislation and policy, could help reduce overproduction practices and minimize resource extraction, thereby limiting the consumeristic attitude on which the concept of extractivism is based. The research utilized scenario building, following a multiphased-qualitative approach involving literature review, an expert workshop, and two focus group interviews. The primary outcome includes four scenarios for the year 2032, which are from most-likely, normative, optimistic, and pessimistic perspectives. Since the normative scenario calls for action to reach a preferable future, further analysis involved mapping out the strategies for utilizing 3DP to reduce extractivism. The findings support positioning 3DP as a low-volume production tool for prolonging product lifecycle and material value, highlighting the strategic areas of ‘material circulation’ and ‘product upgrade and repair-reuse systems’. Key legal and policy actions that could support these approaches are also identified, which primarily pertain to the fields of IPR and environmental legislation.

This doctoral thesis is a study of environmental values, also addressed as values of nature, or natural values. The point of departure of my research is situated within the philosophical field of environmental ethics, which is a branch of applied ethics that emerged in the 1970s. Nonetheless, it also includes other disciplines, such as environmental aesthetics, Indigenous studies, and decolonial theory, as well as various interdisciplinary collaborations, which broadly revolve around the theme of environmental values. One of the premises of this doctoral dissertation is that some Western cultures are understood as ‘colonial’ since they reproduce colonial discourses and practices. This means that they endorse binary power structures—subject (active)/object (passive), superior/inferior, dominant/subjugated divisions, etc.—and that they focus strongly on economic profit in the name of increasing power and wealth. They also refer persistently to the validity of Western sciences as the only truth upon which they validate Western criteria for academic performances, and they perpetrate the arrogance of interpreting non-Western cultures, traditions, and knowledges through Western metrics and lenses. In this context, the process of decolonization concerns environmental academic debates and theoretical environmental discourses, and it develops in various steps. The first of the two arguments upon which this doctoral dissertation is based is the pluralistic argument, in which I criticize the value monism in nature valuation, exemplified by the mainstream neoclassical economic valuation of nature. I offer a critical analysis of the privileged position of economic environmental valuation based on the logic of ‘betterness’—meaning more convincing theories as well as better results, which are easier to consider in the environmental decision-making structure, which revolves around Western standards. This chain of reasoning reproduces ‘colonial discourses and practices’ that identify the ‘colonizers’, meaning those who promote the prevalent economic assessment of nature as better and superior. In specific, I address and criticize the privileged position held by the economic value of nature in the current capitalist society, vis-à-vis other non-economic values, as an example of value discrimination that privileges the dominant wealthy and capitalist class. I instead propose supporting a value pluralism framework, as a more balanced theoretical structure, where I display other types of values, which I call ‘non-economic’ values (NEV) of nature. Those are a set of values, different than the economic one, through which it is possible to value nature from several angles, instead of only one perspective. Many environmental NEV exist, but in this thesis I address the moral, the aesthetic as well as the ecological value of nature. The discussion on NEV, even though of utmost importance, remains in the Western realm. Only the introduction of Indigenous traditional ecological knowledge (TEK)—and especially Sami Indigenous people TEK—allows a decolonial step to properly decolonize environmental ethics. This is the foundation of the second argument of this study, which I call the ‘decolonial argument’. It advances the introduction of Indigenous TEK and their environmental views, next to NEV, to offer alternative angles to the Western dominant economic environmental assessment, as well as to the Western non-economic valuation of nature. Indigenous TEK is a type of situated knowledge system, broadly concerning the interrelation with nature. Indigenous TEK is ontologically and epistemologically different from the dominant Western knowledge system. Precisely these diversities make it an optimal point of departure for initiating the decolonization process of Western environmental discourses, through which we can deconstruct Western colonial structures of powers. In conclusion, decolonizing theoretical environmental discourses within environmental ethics means analyzing the hegemonic and long-lasting attention of Western standards and points of refences, as well as to deconstruct and de-centre Western power structures. This process will help to uncover and tackle the social injustices that colonial patterns perpetrate. My decolonial critique of environmental discourses aims, on the one hand, at revealing and dismantling colonial power structures such as the Western philosophical and epistemological supremacy within academia. On the other hand, it seeks to create alternative conversations and ‘counter-discourses’ that are more inclusive of what has been left out, such as non-economic values of nature, and Indigenous knowledge systems that focus on the relationship both with the land and with all the entities that exist in nature.

This article situates within the gender inequality debate associated with the relation between nature and women, which started to be conceptualized academically in 1970s’ in the philosophical field of ecofeminism. After presenting some ecofeminist perspectives highlighting the reasons of the women/nature link some criticism will be advances showing the limitation of such approach. The argument will then move to the younger field of Indigenous feminism keeping the focus of the relation between nature and women and observing how this has influenced the condition of women within Indigenous communities such as the Igbo people in Nigeria, the Kahnawa:kev people in Canada and the Sami people living in Sapmi.