This paper focuses on a Swedish case where a biological insecticide has been used to fight mosquitoes in order to reduce the nuisance to humans. The case concerns conflicting values regarding environmental protection. People's quality of life in the summers is placed in opposition to long-term risks to biodiversity. On the surface, the affected lay-population is one-sidedly positive about the intervention. However, interviews with citizens revealed a more complex picture, where the majority also touched upon value conflicts. At the same (...) time, different psychological mechanisms for handling these dilemmas hindered more critical and doubtful views from being included in societal deliberations concerning the intervention. By way of conclusion, we argue that it is important to create deliberative arrangements that acknowledge the emotional and contradictory side of human nature and that encourage people to dare to voice standpoints that may be seen as uncomfortable or inconsistent. (shrink)

This paper examines the definition and implementation of community -based alternative food systems,drawing on examples from British Columbia, Canada. We seek to reframe the goals of AFS by focusing on the values associated with food production, distribution and consumption strategies. We argue that current AFS thinking suffers from an over reliance on policies reflecting single rather than multiple objectives and arguments over specific alternatives rather than a values -focused debate.A decision-focused approach, using a consequence matrix, is proposed to link people's (...) expressed values to food policy responses and clarify trade-offs across options. This reframing should encourage new dialogue, new policy alternatives, and increased acceptance of actions supporting AFS. (shrink)

This paper argues for a broader understanding of complexity; an understanding that speaks to the multidimensionality of environmental problems. As argued, environmental problems rest upon ontological, epistemological, and moral claims; they rest, in other words, upon statements about what is, knowledge, and what ought to be, respectively. To develop and illustrate this argument, the GMO (genetically modified organism) controversy is broken down according to these three dimensions. Dissecting environmental problems in this manner reveals why we cannot look solely toward the (...) natural sciences for resolution: because these problems beg questions that cannot be answered with references to materiality alone. (shrink)