Sociologický časopis / Czech Sociological Review | DOI: 10.13060/csr.2024.031

‘Being a Good Neighbour and Good Steward of the Land’: Anthropocentric and Biocentric Attitudes among Representatives of Environmental Organisations and Their Significance for the Success of Landscape Governance Strategies

Jana Stachová ORCID...
Sociologický ústav AV ČR, v. v. i., Praha

The shape of the landscape depends not only on natural and climatic conditions, but also on the social demand as to what the landscape should look like and what functions it should fulfil. Approaches to landscape governance thus reflect the interests and attitudes of the public and social groups. One segment of society that is involved in landscape governance is the branch of civil society devoted to the environment. This article presents the results of a sociological study aimed at identifying and analysing attitudes towards landscape and strategies of landscape governance among Czech environmental organisations whose activities directly or indirectly impact the landscape. An analysis of data from interviews and focus group with representatives of environmental organisations revealed differences in landscape governance strategies and attitudes towards the landscape depending on the type of organisation the representatives belonged to. Representatives of national organisations primarily focused on advocacy were more commonly observed to have biocentric attitudes and to approach landscape governance within the framework of addressing wider environmental issues and efforts to reform the system. Representatives of service organisations, especially local ones, held exclusively anthropocentric views and to some extent also exhibited epistemic and responsive climate scepticism. Their approach to the landscape, based on the principle of care, does not seek to change the system, and it is rated as more successful.

Keywords: landscape, landscape governance, environmental organisations, anthropocentrism

Received: May 25, 2023; Revised: July 26, 2024; Accepted: July 31, 2024; Prepublished online: July 31, 2024 

Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Axelsson, R. (2010). Integrative research and transdisciplinary knowledge production: a review of barriers and bridges. Journal of Landscape Ecology, 3(2), 14-40. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10285-012-0025-0 Go to original source...
    2. Binka, B. (2008). Environmentální etika. Masarykova univerzita.
    3. Binka, B. (2009). Zelený extremismus - Ideje a mentalita českých environmentálních hnutí. Masarykova univerzita.
    4. Buck, H. J. (2015). On the Possibilities of a Charming Anthropocene. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 105, 369-377. https://doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2014.973005 Go to original source...
    5. Buizer, M., Arts, B. a Westerink, J. (2016). Landscape governance as policy integration 'from below': A case of displaced and contained political conflict in the Netherlands. Environment and Planning. C, Government & Policy, 34(3), 448-462. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263774X15614725 Go to original source...
    6. Carmin, J. a Jehlička, P. (2005). By the Masses or for the Masses? The Transformation of Voluntary Action in the Czech Union for Nature Protection. Voluntas, 16, 397-416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-005-9149-8 Go to original source...
    7. Cihar, M. a Stankova, J. (2006). Attitudes of stakeholders towards the Podyji/Thaya River Basin National Park in the Czech Republic. Journal of Environmental Management, 81(3), 273-285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.11.002 Go to original source...
    8. Císař, O. (2008). Politický aktivismus v České republice. Centrum pro studium demokracie a kultury.
    9. Císař, O., Navrátil, J. a Vráblíková, K. (2011). Staří, noví, radikální: politický aktivismus v České republice očima teorie sociálních hnutí, Sociologický časopis / Czech Sociological Review, 47(1), 137-168. https://doi.org/10.13060/00380288.2011.47.1.07 Go to original source...
    10. Delín, M. a Pospěch P. (2016). Komodifikace venkova a utváření identity regionu. Sociologický časopis / Czech Sociological Review, 52(2), 209-235. https://doi.org/10.13060/00380288.2016.52.2.247 Go to original source...
    11. Dick, B. (2005). Grounded theory: a thumbnailsketch. Action Research & Action Learning for Community & Organisational Change. http://www.aral.com.au/resources/grounded.html
    12. Fagan A. a Carmin J. (2011). Environmental mobilization and organizations in post-socialist Europe and former Soviet Unuion. In A. Fagan a J. A. Carmin (eds.), Green Activism in Post-Socialist Europe and the Former Soviet Union. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2010.508300 Go to original source...
    13. Farkač, B., Sochová, E. a Kobyláková, M. (2021). Osvědčené komunikační postupy v ochraně přírody: metodika komunikace s vlastníky a uživateli pozemků v chráněných územích. Agentura ochrany přírody a krajiny.
    14. Fien, J. (2000). Education for the Environment: A critique'-an analysis. Environmental Education Research, 6(2), 179-192. https://doi.org/10.1080/713664671 Go to original source...
    15. Frantál, B. a Kunc, J. (2011). Wind turbines in tourism landscapes: Czech Experience. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(2), 499-519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2010.10.007 Go to original source...
    16. Frič, P. a Goulli. R. (2001). Neziskový sektor v České republice. Eurolex Bohemia.
    17. Fry, G. (2001). Multifunctional landscapes- towards transdisciplinary research. Landscape and urban Planning, 57(3-4), 159-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00201-8 Go to original source...
    18. Gibas, P. a Pauknerová, K. (2015). Archeologie krajiny. In P. Krištuf et al. (eds.), Výzkum krajiny: Vybrané antropologické a archeologické metody. Katedra antropologie, Fakulta filozofická Západočeská univerzita.
    19. Görg, Ch. (2007). Landscape governance: The 'politics of scale' and the 'natural' conditions of places. Geoforum, 38(5), 954-966. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.01.004 Go to original source...
    20. Greider, T. a Garkovich, L. (1994). Landscapes: The Social Construction of Nature and the Enviroment. Rural Sociology, 59(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1549-0831.1994.tb00519.x Go to original source...
    21. Hála, V. (2013). Obrana "antropocentrismu". Sociální studia / Social Studies, 10(1), 63-83. https://doi.org/10.5817/SOC2013-1-63 Go to original source...
    22. Hargrove, E. C. (1992). Weak anthropocentric intrinsic value. Monist, 75(2), 183-207. https://doi.org/10.5840/monist19927529 Go to original source...
    23. Hirsh, E. (1995). Between Place and Space. In E. Hirsch a M. O'Hanlon (eds.), The Anthropology of Landscape: The Perspectives on Place and Space. Clarendon Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198278801.001.0001 Go to original source...
    24. Chvátalová, V., Malá, S. a Meierová, T. (2022). Jak na spolupráci pro udržitelný rozvoj krajiny. Certifikovaná metodika MZE-40559/2022-14131.
    25. Ingold, T. (2000). The Perception of the Environment: Essays on Livelihood, Dwelling and Sklil. Routledge.
    26. Jebari, K. a Sandberg, A. (2022). Ecocentrism and Biosphere Life Extension. Science and Engineering Ethics, 28(2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-022-00404-2 Go to original source...
    27. Jehlička, P., Sarre, P. a Podoba, J. (2005). The Czech Environmental Movement's Knowledge Interest in the 1990s: Compatability of Western Influences with pre-1989 Perspectives. Environmental Politics, 14(1), 64‒82. https://doi.org/10.1080/0964401042000310187 Go to original source...
    28. Kolen, J. a Renes, J. (2015). Landscape Biographies: Key Issues. In J. Kolen, J. Renes, R. Hermans (eds.), Landscape Biographies. Amsterdam University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9789048517800-003 Go to original source...
    29. Kopnina, H., Washington, H. a Taylor, B. (2018). Anthropocentrism: More than Just a Misunderstood Problem. J Agric Environ Ethics, 31, 109-127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-018-9711-1 Go to original source...
    30. Köpsel, V., Walsh, C. a Leyshon C. (2017). Landscape narratives in practice: implications for climate change adaptation. The Geographical Journal, 183(2), 175-186. https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12203 Go to original source...
    31. Kortenkamp, K. V. a Moore, C. F. (2001). Ecocentrism and anthropocentrism: Moral reasoning about ecological commons dilemmas. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21(3), 261-272. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.2001.0205 Go to original source...
    32. Kusters, K., De Graaf, M., Buck, L., Galido, K., Maindo, A., Mendoza, H., Nghi, T. H., Purwanto, E. a Zagt, R. (2020). Inclusive Landscape Governance for Sustainable Development: Assessment Methodology and Lessons for Civil Society Organizations. Land, 9(4), 128. https://doi.org/10.3390/land9040128 Go to original source...
    33. Kučera, Z. a Kašková, M. (2016). Utváření domova ve změněné krajině pohraničí Česka. In K. Ledererová Kolajová (ed.), Domov a krajina (s. 28-42). OSSCU.
    34. Kühne, O. (2019). Landscape Theories. A Brief Introduction, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-25491-9 Go to original source...
    35. Lapka, M. a Cudlínová, E. (1999). Private farmer's attitudes to land, work and landscape: interpretation of case study in landscape ecological framework. Ekológia, 18(4), 401- 412.
    36. Lapka, M. a Cudlínová, E. (2004). Vnímání a hodnocení evropské rurální krajiny. Životné Prostriede, 38(3), 156-159.
    37. Lokoč, R. a Ulčák, Z. (2009). Percepce krajinných prvků zemědělci - důležitý předpoklad péče o krajinný ráz. In P. Klvač (ed.), Člověk, krajina, krajinný ráz (s. 61-72). Masarykova univerzita.
    38. Mácha, P. (2010). Krajina antropologie a antropologie krajiny. Český lid, 97(3), 225-246.
    39. Mácha, P. (2013). Krajiny: příspěvek k diskusi o konceptualizaci krajiny v (české) geografii. Geografie, 118(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.37040/geografie2013118010001 Go to original source...
    40. McShane K. (2013). Ecocentrism. In C. Death (ed.), Critical Environmental Politics (s. 83-90). Routledge.
    41. Meierová, T. (2020). Conflicts Between Farmers and Conservationists: The Role of Communication in the Management of Natural Resources. Journal of Landscape Ecology, 13(2), 129-149. https://doi.org/10.2478/jlecol-2020-0013 Go to original source...
    42. Meierová, T. a Chvátalová, V. (2022). Frustrated or fulfilled? Motivation of Czech farmers to implement climate change adaptation measures on the landscape level. Journal of Rural Studies, 92, 354-370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2022.04.013 Go to original source...
    43. Miklós, L. a Špinerová, A. (2010). Approaches and compromises in the concept of landscape. Journal of Landscape Ecology, 3(2) 7-13.
    44. Naveh, Z. (2010). Ecosystem and landscapes - a critical comparative appraisal. Journal of Landscape Ecology, 3(1), 64-81. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10285-012-0024-1 Go to original source...
    45. Norton, B. G. (1984). Environmental Ethics and Weak Anthropocentrism. Environmental Ethics, 6, 131-148. https://doi.org/10.5840/enviroethics19846233 Go to original source...
    46. Novák, A. (2017). Tmavozelený svět. Radikálně ekologické aktivity České republice po roce 1989. Sociologické nakladatelství (SLON).
    47. Orcígr, V. (2018). Arnošt Novák: Tmavozelený svět. Radikálně ekologické aktivity v České republice po roce 1989. Sociologický časopis / Czech Sociological Review, 54(2), 298-300.
    48. Pauknerová K. (2010). Hladké a měkké: promýšlení chůze městem. Biograf, 51. http://www.biograf.org/clanek.php?clanek=5107
    49. Pavlis, E. a Terkenli, T. S. (2023). Towards landscape conscience: a geographical perspective. Landscape Research, 1004-1018. https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2023.2238639 Go to original source...
    50. Penker, M. (2009). Landscape governance for or by the local population? A property rights analysis in Austria. Land Use Policy, 26(49), 947-953. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2008.11.007 Go to original source...
    51. Petřík, P., Fanta, J. a Petrtýl, M. (2015). It is time to change land use and landscape management in the Czech republic. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability, 1(9), 1-6. https://doi.org/ 10.1890/15-0016.1 Go to original source...
    52. Pospěch P. (2013). Městský veřejný prostor: interpretativní přístup. Sociologický časopis / Czech Sociological Review, 49(1), 75-100. https://doi.org/10.13060/00380288.2013.49.1.04 Go to original source...
    53. Pospěch, P. (2021). Neznámá společnost. Host.
    54. Pospíšil, M., Neumayr, M., Škarabelová, S., Malý, I., Meyer, M. a Schneider, U. (2009). Neziskové organizace a jejich funkce v demokratické společnosti. Společnost pro studium neziskového sektoru.
    55. Quinn, F., Castéra, J. a Clément, P. (2016). Teachers' conceptions of the environment: anthropocentrism, non-anthropocentrism, anthropomorphism and the place of nature, Environmental Education Research, 22(6), 893-917. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2015.1076767 Go to original source...
    56. Raatikainen, K. J., Tupala, A. K., Niemelä, R. a Laulumaa, A. M. (2023). The intricate diversity of human-nature relations: Evidence from Finland. Ambio A Journal of Human Environment, 53(2), 181-200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-023-01933-1 Go to original source...
    57. Salamon, L. a Anheier H. K. (1997). Defining the Nonprofit Sector. A Cross-national Analysis. Manchester University Press.
    58. Sauer, C. O. (1925). The morphology of landscape. In J. Leighly (ed.), Land and Life: A Selection from the Writings of Carl Ortwin Sauer (s. 315-350). University of California Press.
    59. Sekulova F., Anguelovski, I. a Argüelles, L. (2023). Redefining success in organizing towards degrowth. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 48, 100764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2023.100764 Go to original source...
    60. Schama, S. 2007. Krajina a paměť. Argo.
    61. Smith, J. A. a Osborn, M. (2003). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In J. A. Smith (ed.). Qualitative Psychology: A Practical Guide to Research Methods. Sage Publications Ltd.
    62. Sklenička, P. (2007). Krajinná ekologie v systému krajinného plánování České republiky. Životní prostředí, 41(3), 126-130.
    63. Sockhill, N. J., Dean, A. J., Oh, R. R. Y. a Fuller, R. A. (2022). Beyond the ecocentric: Diverse values and attitudes influence engagement in pro-environmental behaviours. People and Nature, 4, 1500-1512. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10400 Go to original source...
    64. Sovová L., Jehlička P. a Daněk P. (2021) Growing the Beautiful Anthropocene: Ethics of Care in East European Food Gardens. Sustainability, 13(9), 5193. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13095193 Go to original source...
    65. Stachová, J. (2002). Sociální hnutí na hraně mezi organizací a neformální iniciativou. In Česká společnost (s. 271-289). Sociologický ústav AV ČR.
    66. Stachová, J. (2008). Občanská společnost v regionech České republiky. Sociologický ústav AV ČR.
    67. Stachová J. a Čermák D. (2023). Social Perception of Trees in the Landscape: The Connection Between Attitudes and Visual Preferences. Journal of Landscape Ecology, 16(1), 66-87. https://doi.org/10.2478/jlecol-2023-0004 Go to original source...
    68. Šedivý, M. a Medlíková, O. (2011). Úspěšná nezisková organizace. Grada.
    69. Šimandl, V. a Dobiáš, V. (2021). Analýza dat při tvorbě zakotvené teorie pomocí software atlas.ti. Paidagogos 1. http://www.paidagogos.net/issues/2021/1/article.php?id=8
    70. Špička, J., Boukal, P. a Vávrová, H. (2016). Diskuse k hodnocení úspěšnosti nestátních neziskových organizací. Ekonomika a management, 2, 1-14.
    71. Taylor, B., Chapron, G., Kopnina, H., Orlikowska, E., Gray, J. a Piccolo, J. J. (2020). The need for ecocentrism in biodiversity conservation. Conservation Biology, 34(5), 1089-1096. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13541 Go to original source...
    72. Thompson, S. C. G. a Barton, M. A. (1994). Ecocentric and anthropocentric attitudes toward the environment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 14(2), 149-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80168-9 Go to original source...
    73. Trávníček, J. (2011). Vývoj kulturní krajiny v zázemí Brna: případová studie formování managementu VKP Poustka [rigorózní práce]. Masarykova univerzita.
    74. Tress, B. a Tress, G. (2001). Capitalising on multiplicity: a transdisciplinary systems approach Go to original source...
    75. to landscape research. Landscape and Urban Planning 57 (3-4): 143-157.
    76. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-2046(01)00200-6 Go to original source...
    77. Vidomus, P. (2018). Oteplí se a bude líp: Česká klimaskepse v čase globálních rizik. Sociologické nakladatelství (SLON).
    78. Vitousek, P., Mooney M., Lubchenco, H. A. a Melillo, J. (1997). Human Domination of Earth's Ecosystems. Science, 277(5325), 494-499. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.277.5325.494 Go to original source...
    79. Vojtíšková K., Patočková V. a Mikešová R. (2017). Vztah obyvatel k přírodě a její ochraně. Sociologická perspektiva. Academia. Edice Strategie AV21.
    80. Vondra, Z., Gburíková, A., Schmelzová, R., Ent, Z., Žižka, T., Willoughby, T., Zichová, T., Jílková, P., Sigmund, T. a Borecký. P. (2023). Metodika: Interpretace aspektů krajiny prostřednictvím umění. Institut pro plánování a rozvoj hlavního města Prahy.
    81. Walker, A. J. a Ryan, R. L. (2008). Place attachment and landscape preservation in rural New England: A Maine case study. Landscape and Urban Planning, 86(2), 141-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2008.02.001 Go to original source...
    82. Washington, H., Taylor, B., Kopnina, H., Cryer, P. a Piccolo, J. J. (2017). Why ecocentrism is the key pathway to sustainability. The Ecological Citizen, 1, 35-41.

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return