Received: 18 January 2023 | Accepted: 14 May 2023 DOI: 10.1002/pan3.10506 RESEARCH ARTICLE Pluralizing environmental values for urban planning: How to uncover the diversity of imaginaries about socio-­natures from Vitoria-­Gasteiz (Basque Country, Spain) Julia Neidig1,2 | Isabelle Anguelovski1,3 | Bosco Lliso2,4 | Unai Pascual2,5,6 1 Institute for Environmental Science and Technology, Universitat Autònoma de Abstract Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; 1. Cities have pushed forward re-­naturing initiatives in local planning agendas. 2 Basque Centre for Climate Change (BC3), Leioa, Spain; Discourses and rationales for such interventions tend to follow instrumental 3 Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis framings often narrowed down to the economic, health and ecological ben- Avançats, Barcelona, Spain; efits of nature's contributions to people (NCP). Yet, diverse urban residents 4 World Benchmarking Alliance (WBA), often connect to other socio-­nature framings that are associated with a plu- Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 5 Ikerbasque, Basque Foundation for rality of values held for nature, including relational, intrinsic, and instrumental Science, Bilbao, Spain and values. 6 Centre for Environment and 2. Focusing mostly on urban NCP, we used Q-­methodology to explore the perspec- Development (CDE), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland tives and expressions of urban residents' diversity of values for urban greenery and broader human-­nature relationships. We explore the role of both instrumen- Correspondence Julia Neidig tal and relational values, as well as certain potential disvalues of urban NCP. In Email: julia.neidig@bc3research.org light of the recent IPBES values assessment (IPBES, 2022) we follow a call for Funding information empirical studies and methodologies to explore, elicit and visibilize plural values City of Vitoria-­Gasteiz—­Convene about nature. "REVALUE"; Department of Education of the Basque Government, Grant/ 3. We base our study in the Basque city of Vitoria-­Gasteiz, Spain (2012 European Award Number: PIBA19-­0 096; María Green Capital) where we identify four distinct perspectives, all of which re- de Maeztu Excellence Accreditation 2018-­2022, Grant/Award Number: MCIN/ late to a diversity of values about urban nature. Urban residents mostly per- AEI/10.13039/501100011033/ ceive positive values for NCP as directly connected to their wellbeing. Yet, NCP Handling Editor: Priscilla Wehi that impact social bonds within their social community, expressed for instance through community-­related values, are perceived differently across the four perspectives. 4. We conclude that planners and decision-­makers should pay scrutiny to include the four, partly differing, perspectives about the plural values of (urban) NCP in policymaking processes to assure just and inclusive outcomes. Here, intersec- tional and participatory approaches are needed beyond dominating framings of NCPs and related values, especially those that can take into account the needs and preferences of marginalized social groups. Special emphasis should be put This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © 2023 The Authors. People and Nature published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society. People and Nature. 2023;00:1–22.  wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/pan3 | 1 | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 2 People and Nature NEIDIG et al. on integrating relational values as nourishing such values through planning can play an important role in creating place-­rooted connections with local urban land- scapes and the community. KEYWORDS inclusive greening, plural values about nature, Q-­method, relational values, socio-­natures, urban environmental planning, Vitoria-­Gasteiz 1 | I NTRO D U C TI O N nature's benefits may hence accelerate an increasing rift between the often antagonistically portrayed concepts of society and nature As cities are facing a socio-­environmental crisis, urban greening (Gandy, 2018) and more concretely to an amplification of the city-­ interventions (UGI) are increasingly presented in urban planning nature binary (Angelo, 2017). theory and practice as win-­win solutions to multiple challenges af- To overcome this conceptional antagonism of society and nature, fecting human well-­being (Melanidis & Hagerman, 2022). With main- in his seminal essay “The city as a hybrid”, Swyngedouw (1996) pro- streaming of UGI in day-­to-­day planning practice, nature has turned posed the concept of “socio-­natures” to shift urban theory towards into a core element of a contemporary green planning orthodoxy acknowledging cities as socio-­ecological systems. He described the (Connolly, 2019). Thereby, UGI are dominantly presented through chaotic entanglements of society and nature, wherein (humans' re- their multifunctionality and the multiple social, economic and en- lationships with and valuations of) nature is the outcome of social vironmental benefits they add to urban habitats (Angelo, 2019a; practices and processes. He writes: Pineda-­Pinto et al., 2022). Despite the diverse benefits of UGI, their framings and jus- Social relations operate in and through metabolizing tifications in policy-­making processes often follow a universally the "natural" environment through which both soci- applied yet simplified definition of nature's contributions that in ety and nature are transformed, changed, or altered reality support a process of commodification of urban greening and new socio-­natural forms are produced. While na- (Anguelovski & Corbera, 2022; García-­L amarca, Anguelovski, & ture provides the foundation, the dynamics of social Venner, 2022; Neidig et al., 2022). UGI are increasingly presented relations produce nature's and society's history. as part of a universal social imaginary portraying urban nature (ibid, p. 68) as a hegemonic “one-­size-­f its-­all” approach with purely posi- tive impacts across diverse geographical, cultural and economic Since then, there are increasingly calls for including more-­than-­ urban contexts (Angelo, 2019b; Tozer et al., 2020; Wachsmuth & human thinking in urban planning theory and practice to move beyond Angelo, 2018). The potential benefits of UGI thereby tend to be the intellectual divide of society and nature (Armstrong et al., 2022; narrowed down to their (often market related) instrumental contri- Maller, 2021; Pineda-­Pinto et al., 2022). For instance, Hinchliffe and butions to people, including the increased competitiveness of cit- Whatmore (2006) argued for shifting conceptualizations of the city ies by improving their air, water and soil quality (Baró et al., 2019; that depict (human-­)built environments as opposite to the “wild”, Haase et al., 2014); fostering a growing tourism and real estate “country”, “non-­human” (ibid, p. 124) towards visions of living cities. sector (García-­L amarca, Anguelovski, Cole, et al., 2022); or their Human and non-­human elements are thus convivial, co-­existing, and impact on mental and physical health while reducing healthcare co-­dependent in diverse kinds of socio-­natures. Houston et al. (2018) expenditures (Berdejo-­E spinola et al., 2021; Capaldi et al., 2015; and Wiesel et al. (2020) go even further in advocating for a post-­human Labib et al., 2022). planning theory and practice. Here, more-­than-­human thinking should Yet, focusing on nature's utility to humans expressed through be a core component of designing and building cities prioritizing inti- only instrumental framings reduces the more complex society-­ mate society-­nature relationships and practices of responsibility and nature relationships, including those in cities, to unidirectional and care for nature. uniform relations (Muradian & Pascual, 2018). Recent discourses Using these calls for alternative imaginaries about urban socio-­ and imaginaries around nature's integration into urban environ- natures as our starting point, our objective here is to explore dif- ments show a tendency to become co-­opted by a neoliberal ra- ferent imaginaries and perspectives surrounding nature hold by tionale (Anguelovski & Corbera, 2022; Kotsila et al., 2021; Tozer urban residents. We show different forms of socio-­natures in the et al., 2020; Tzoulas et al., 2021). For instance, critical research on case study of the city of Vitoria-­Gasteiz, the 2012 European Green the concepts of ecosystem services and nature-­based solutions, Capital located in the Basque Country, Spain. We hereby draw on a both widely permeated urban planning theory and practice, exhib- framework of plural values about nature that integrates the concept its the often market-­driven logic for implementing UGI (see e.g. Babí of relational values and hence supports conceptualizing nature's Almenar et al., 2021; Chan et al., 2012; Kiss et al., 2021; Langemeyer added value to urban areas beyond instrumental and positive fram- & Connolly, 2020). These narrow instrumental framings of urban ings of nature's benefits (IPBES, 2022). | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License NEIDIG et al. People and Nature 3 1.1 | The notion of relational values for 1.2 | Just positive (urban) socio-­natures? urban planning The consideration of value plurality, specifically through integrating As a core component of the Values Assessment Report of the relational values, bears a lot of potential for achieving more Intergovernmental Science-­Policy Platform on Biodiversity equitable urban planning processes. Yet, current dominant framings and Ecosystem Services (IPBES, 2022), the notion of relational of nature's values as universally positive held by urban planners may values has gained prominence recently. It helps expand the risk undermining the possible negative impacts of UGI, specifically understanding of nature's benefits by means of the more encom- on marginalized and vulnerable communities (Birch et al., 2020; passing concept of nature's contributions to people (NCP; Díaz Rishbeth & Birch, 2020) or the conflicting perceptions residents et al., 2018; Pascual et al., 2017); that is, a more nuanced descrip- might express about nature. A growing body of literature in critical tion of society-­n ature-­r elationships, including multiple positive urban planning research shows how certain UGI contribute to and negative values of nature affecting humans' quality of life increasing social inequality and socio-­cultural exclusion, exemplified (Díaz et al., 2018; Kadykalo et al., 2019; Lliso et al., 2022; Pascual for instance through green gentrification and displacement of et al., 2017). vulnerable groups (Anguelovski et al., 2022; Gould & Lewis, 2017; So far, in western cultures values of nature have traditionally Rigolon & Németh, 2019). That is, despite the tendency to depict been conceptualized dichotomously: as being either instrumental nature's contributions as merely beneficial to humans (Hoelle or intrinsic. Instrumental values typically emphasize nature's social et al., 2022), urban re-­naturing programs may not always be and economic value through an anthropocentric lens, prioritizing welcomed positively. ideas such as natural capital and ecosystem services with specific A more holistic view on urban nature must also consider its “dis- NCP being largely or partially substitutable (Deplazes-­Zemp & values” (Lliso et al., 2022) or “trade-­offs” (Haase et al., 2017). For Chapman, 2021; Himes & Muraca, 2018; Tadaki et al., 2017). By example, UGI may translate into displacement because of rising contrast, intrinsic values derive from bio-­centric worldviews and property prices, real estate speculation and tourism-­centred devel- generally refer to the inherent worth of nature for its own sake opments (García-­L amarca, Anguelovski, Cole, et al., 2022; García-­ (Deplazes-­Zemp & Chapman, 2021; O'Connor & Kenter, 2019; Lamarca, Anguelovski, & Venner, 2022). This in turn typically results Piccolo, 2017). They thus express the notion that nature has rights in both an economic loss, that is, instrumental disvalue, for those to exist and thrive irrespective of whether it is (instrumentally) use- being priced-­out of their neighbourhoods and a diminishing sense ful to humans; its protection is associated with moral obligations. of community and loss of place-­specific culture and local traditions, These values can be found in early nature conservation think- that is, relational disvalues (Lliso et al., 2022). It is therefore essential ing, such as Arne Naess' deep ecology (Naess, 2008). However, to not only consider positive but also potential negative values in intrinsic values are receiving relatively little attention in today's planning processes for new nature-­centred programs to better cap- environmental (human-­centred) policies given their as abstract and ture the complex scope of urban society-­nature relationships. philosophical perceived conceptualization of nature (O'Connor & Plural values approaches can serve as a “technology of partic- Kenter, 2019). ipation” (Tadaki et al., 2017) when planning UGI. If correctly im- Relational values count as a pragmatic approach to overcome plemented, they may leverage urban planning processes towards the instrumental-­relational values dichotomy and its critique of achieving equity and inclusivity by acknowledging, eliciting, and being an oversimplification of complex symbiotic multidirectional including throughout the different planning phases a diversity relationships between society and nature (Britto dos Santos & of, sometimes diverging, values about nature held by multiple Gould, 2018; Kleespies & Dierkes, 2020; Pineda-­Pinto et al., 2022). stakeholders (Mansur et al., 2022). Carefully implemented plural They concern notions of a good life, that is eudemonia, and more valuation approaches can also shed light on power dynamics that concretely refer to “preferences, principles, and virtues associated underpin socio-­e nvironmental conflicts as they allow for deco- with relationships, both interpersonal and as articulated by policies lonialized interpretations of NCP based on different worldviews and social norms.” (Chan et al., 2016, p. 1462). Relational values and knowledge systems (Díaz et al., 2018; IPBES, 2022; Jacobs offer different ontological and counter-­hegemonic ways to de- et al., 2020; Tozer et al., 2020). For example, UGI have been shown scribe meaningful society-­nature relationships (IPBES, 2022; Jacobs to accelerate or produce environmental injustices in material prac- et al., 2020) articulated both collectively and individually through tices and immaterial discourses around greening through the ex- for example, notions of care, justice, kinship, sense of place, reci- clusion of marginalized voices (with their own associated values procity or individual and collective identity (Calcagni et al., 2019; and needs; Anguelovski et al., 2020; Kabisch & Haase, 2014; Pérez Chan et al., 2018; Himes & Muraca, 2018). Firmly linked to local del Pulgar et al., 2020; Triguero-­Mas et al., 2021). In contrast, a landscapes (Stenseke, 2018) and local knowledge systems (Díaz decolonized reading of NCP opens space for a careful consider- et al., 2018), they help strengthening a sense of place and belong- ation of those often-­overlooked values that may be affected by ing to the local community and natural environments, thus creating UGI (Anguelovski et al., 2020; Langemeyer & Connolly, 2020; multiple forms of socio-­natures. Tozer et al., 2020). | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 4 People and Nature NEIDIG et al. 1.3 | The aim of the study greening and sustainability and has, inter alia, been awarded as the 2012 European Green Capital and the 2019 UNESCO Global Since the call to shift towards pluralizing valuations of nature is still Green City for its urban greening efforts. The city's green trans- recent (IPBES, 2022), empirical studies offering methodological formation started in the early 1990s with an ecological and social tools to explore plural values, specifically in urban areas, are rationale to redevelop contaminated brownfields to recreational relatively few (Termansen et al., 2022). We draw on empirical green amenities. As global narratives of green policies changed data from our case study of Vitoria-­G asteiz, a former European over time, environmental projects became the embodiment of de- Green Capital, which has been praised for the ambition of its politicized discourses dominated by ecomodernist and economist greening mission and projects (Neidig et al., 2022), with a twofold framings (Neidig et al., 2022). objective: first, to elicit plural and context-­specific values about In terms of its natural environment, the city counts on diverse nature held by urban residents in the case study context using a types of urban and peri-­urban landscapes ranging from green Q-­m ethodology approach. Second, to inform decision-­making and corridors, parks, gardens, wetlands, riversides, to forests. These implementation of UGI, drawing on a place-­specific understanding spaces are connected through a holistic green infrastructure net- of nature's values and recognizing the diversity of urban dwellers' work mostly known for its emblematic peri-­urban 35 km Green Belt perspectives about UGI. We therefore ask: (a) What are the plural (Aznarez et al., 2022). This belt sets a spatial limit to prevent further values (instrumental, intrinsic or relational) urban residents hold urban and industrial expansion and separates the city from its sur- in regard to urban greenery and the broader idea of nature? (b) rounding agricultural land (40% of the municipality's surface). In ad- Do urban NCP tend to be perceived as a positive impact on well-­ dition, two mountain ranges in the west and south of the city, zones being or may aspects of nature also be negatively valued by urban of special environmental protections, make up another 40% of the residents? and (c) How do plural, partly diverging, values about city-­owned land (Orive & Dios Lema, 2012; Figure 1). nature impact urban policymaking processes? In sum, the city's urban development history, including the long-­ In the following, we introduce the context of our case city term green and sustainability trajectory with shifting rationales for Vitoria-­Gasteiz. We then turn to a detailed description of the Q-­ greening, and the access to diverse types of urban and peri-­urban methodological approach used to identify collective patterns of how natural landscapes make Vitoria-­Gasteiz an emblematic case to urban residents respond to, rank and/or compare a mixture of rela- study diverse types of plural values about nature and its different tional, instrumental, and intrinsic values about urban greening. This embodiments in the city. will be followed by the description of the results, focusing on four elicited, distinct, perspectives on the values of nature we found in the urban context of Vitoria-­Gasteiz, and on additional qualitative 3 | M E TH O D O LO G Y: Q - ­M E TH O D findings. Lastly, we discuss the implications of the findings for plan- ning UGI more generally. We used Q-­method, a semi-­quantitative methodological approach to investigate a diversity of perspectives on specific, often con- flicted, topics (Sneegas et al., 2021). Originating from psychology, 2 | CO NTE X T UA LIZ I N G Q-­method has been used to shed light on opinions and perspec- V ITO R I A- ­G A S TE IZ ’ U R BA N TR A J EC TO RY tives by experts and policymakers or lay people around a specific A N D G R E E N I N G A M B ITI O N S environmental topic that then can be integrated in the policy design and implementation (Barry & Proops, 1999; Watts & Stenner, 2012; We base our study in Vitoria-­Gasteiz, Basque Country, Spain, a Zabala et al., 2018). The strength of this approach lies in cluster- 250.000 resident mid-­sized city that grew rapidly during the indus- ing individual responses and opinions into social discourses, that is, trialization period from the 1950s to 1970s with a fivefold increase understand time-­ and context-­specific patterns in the way people of the population (from 40.000 to 190.000 residents), attracting relate to the discussed research question by examining nuanced people from rural and deprived areas of Spain. In Vitoria-­Gasteiz, differences and communalities between perspectives on the con- this shifted the urban identity and workforce from the agricultural flicted discourse (Maniatakou et al., 2020). Unlike other quantitative sector with strong connections to local landscapes to an industrial (positivist) methodologies, Q-­method follows an explicit normative production centred around the automotive sector (Gonzaléz de approach (Nielsen et al., 2019), as the researcher is urged to take Langarica Mendizábal, 2007; Pérez-­Álvarez, 2020). As of 2021, only an interpretative and reflective role at every step of the iterative around half of the city's residents were born in Vitoria-­Gasteiz with phases of research design, data collection and data analysis (Zabala an additional 11% born in the Basque Country, while 23% came from et al., 2018).1 the rest of Spain and 14% immigrated from other countries (most Until now, only few studies used Q-­method to elicit local plural of whom from Colombia, Morocco, and Algeria; Ayuntamiento de values about nature through statement-­ or image-­based valuations Vitoria-­Gasteiz, 2021). building upon the categorization of NCP through instrumental, rela- Through the 2010s, Vitoria-­G asteiz has received broad in- tional and intrinsic values (IPBES, 2022). For example, Maniatakou ternational recognition for its long-­term political commitment to et al. (2020) studied the perceived importance of wetland-­based | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License NEIDIG et al. People and Nature 5 F I G U R E 1 Map of urban, peri-­urban and rural green infrastructure network of the municipality of Vitoria-­Gasteiz. Source: Centro de Estudios Ambientales de Vitoria-­Gasteiz, 2023. ecosystem services through these three different value dimensions; For this end, we consulted diverse types of statement sources, Inglis and Pascual (2021) focused on the role of languages in the that is, eight structured interviews with residents, posts on so- valuation of forest benefits, including a series of relational values cial media, local media articles and previous scientific studies. linked to Euskara (Basque language) and relationships to forests in This was further complemented by statements purposively cre- the Basque Country; and Holmes et al. (2022) used image-­based Q ated by the authors referring to themes not covered by any of methodology to better grasp contested relational discourses around the above statement sources (for a detailed description of each rural landscape changes. of these statement sources, consult Table 1). From these sources, In the following, we describe in greater detail the research design we retrieved the Q-­concourse used in this study, a total of 284 based on the Q-­method, particularly the creation of the Q-­concourse statements that described the different perspectives and values and the Q-­set and the selection of participants. We then turn to a associated with NCP, referring to both urban greenery, either description of the data collection and analysis (for a summary for the with links to specific places in Vitoria-­G asteiz or with emphasis research process, see Figure 2). on urban-­s pecific NCP, and to nature as a broader socially con- structed concept. 3.1 | Research design 3.1.2 | The Q-­set 3.1.1 | The Q-­concourse From the Q-­concourse we selected a representative sample of state- The Q-­concourse describes the set of statements that convey the ments, the so-­called Q-­set, that was then used during the ranking full scope of perspectives about the research topic in the study of statements, that is the Q-­sort (see Section 3.2). The selection context (Robbins & Krueger, 2000). In this paper, it describes process of those representative statements consisted of an iterative the diversity of perceptions and values about (urban) NCP in the coding process where each statement of the Q-­concourse was la- cultural, linguistic and place-­s pecific context of Vitoria-­G asteiz. belled as either associated with relational, instrumental, and intrinsic | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 6 People and Nature NEIDIG et al. F I G U R E 2 Synthesis of the research process, including research design, data collection and data analysis using Q-­methodology. values, or broader human-­nature relational models (as in Muradian & After a pilot study with 10 experts and lay residents from Vitoria-­ Pascual, 2018). Next, each statement received a tag that expressed Gasteiz to test the statements for clarity and comprehensibility, we an associated notion of nature's value, related to for example health, reduced the final Q-­set to 39 statements that expressed a diverse sense of community, care, fear of nature, economic benefits, bore- and nuanced notion of the plural values of urban nature applicable dom or detachment. Throughout six iteratives rounds of coding, we in the context of Vitoria-­Gasteiz (for the full list of statements, see reduced the Q-­concourse to a Q-­set of 40 statements represent- Table 2). ing the heterogeneity of perspectives about values of nature in the Of this final Q-­set, a relatively large number of statements (#1–­ study context (Sneegas, 2020). #13) express positive notions of nature's relational values. These | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License NEIDIG et al. People and Nature 7 TA B L E 1 Types of statement sources consulted for creating the Q-­concourse of 284 statements. Types of statement sources for the Q-­concourse Rationale (objectives) of using different sources of the statements Interviews with residents To include statements that express individual values about nature prevalent in the case-­study context: We conducted eight structured interviews in November 2020 of 45–­60 min in Spanish around individuals' understandings of the term ‘nature’ and related associations. These included questions about uses of urban greenery, the perceived impacts on physical and mental well-­being, and practices of care with nature. Interviewees were purposively selected through snowball sampling and resided in Vitoria-­Gasteiz for at least 1 year with different socio-­demographic backgrounds (i.e. age, gender and place of origin) Social media posts To include statements that express individual values about nature prevalent in the case-­study context: We searched for posts on the social media platforms Twitter and Instagram that were posted under the hashtags “Green Belt”, “Nature”, “Vitoria-­Gasteiz” and “Green Capital” combined with geotags of specific urban parks in Vitoria-­Gasteiz (e.g. “Olarizu”, “Armentia”, or “Salburua”) Local media articles To include statements that expressed the local public discourses about nature: We reviewed articles from local newspapers and local online media outlets. These were, for example, articles referring to specific parks or urban green initiatives, to the importance of public green spaces especially during the COVID-­19 pandemic, or articles that dealt with broader environmental topics Previous scientific literature To include statements expressing notions of society-­nature relationships building on the state of art of the scientific literature: We reviewed previous empirical statement-­based studies, focusing on, for example (cultural) ecosystem services, humans' connection to nature, the new environmental paradigm, and relational and plural values Statements purposively created To include statements expressing notions of disvalues about nature, detachment from nature, or urban-­specific understandings of nature: We created and added statements that we could not find in any of the above sources yet considered relevant for the guiding research questions statements refer to NCP expressing a positive relational bond be- urban greenery and its related NCPs for, for example, going to the tween individuals and nature necessary for a good life, for example, cinema (#34). This may also lead to a preference of fewer public through eudaimonia (#1), care (#4), reciprocity (#5), or harmony (#7) funds for UGI (#31) and instead dedicated to other urban planning or between humans within their social communities through nature, priorities, such as housing (#33). The instrumental disvalue may also expressed for instance by their sense of community (#8), collective be reflected in framings that describe a unidirectional negative im- identity (#9), or care for present (#12) or future (#13) generations. pact on people's wellbeing, such as negative impacts on recreation Statements #14–­#20 are associated with relational disvalues (i.e. of a park perceived dirty and full of mosquitos (#30). negative relational values). They refer to a negative relational, often The original Q-­concourse showed a dominantly anthropocentric emotional, bond between individuals and nature hindering achieving framing of society-­nature relationships with only few statements a “good life”, for example, through the dislike of specific features of expressing an eco-­centric perspective on the values of nature. We (urban) nature such as insects, rats or pigeons (#15) or the emotion therefore included mainly statements referring to relational and in- of fear of nature (#16). They can also describe negative relational strumental aspects of NCP into the final Q-­set; only statement #35 bonds between humans within their social communities through na- (“I do not think that the main function of nature is to serve for hu- ture, such as perceptions of insecurity in parks (#19) or the dislike mans.”) and #36 (“Animals deserve to have rights of their own.”) ex- of having to share urban greenery with people different to oneself press some form of intrinsic value of nature held by people. (#20). Lastly, based on the “extinction of experience” hypothesis re- Other statements (#21–­#29) express positive framings of the in- ferring to a lack of direct and meaningful experiences with nature, strumental value of NCP. Nature is perceived as a means to achieve especially in urban environments, that may lead to an emotional, a higher quality of life. It is not the relationship with nature per se physical, spiritual or intellectual alienation from nature (Miller, 2005; that is valued but nature as the means to deliver tangible benefits for Soga & Gaston, 2016), the final Q-­set also contains statements well-­being, that is, revenues through green tourism (#21), local food expressing ideas of human separation from nature. Here, we used production (#22), a place for recreation (#25 and #29), or access to Muradian and Pascual's (2018) typology of human-­nature relational better air quality (#27). models, specifically those models relevant in an urban environment Statements that reflect instrumental disvalues (#30–­#34) de- furthering anti-­environmental behaviour: utilization of nature (#37), scribe individuals' preferences or prioritization of other (non-­green-­ domination of nature (#38) and detachment from nature (#39). based) experiences over experiences in nature or associated with Throughout the full set of 39 statements, we paid attention specific NCP. Urban residents may therefore prefer substituting to include both place-­based statements, that is, with reference to 8 TA B L E 2 Q-­set and statement descriptions. | Statement Statement no. Statement (English translation) Statement tag Place-­specific?a sourceb Positive relationship between individuals and nature (relational value) #1 When I connect with the nature of VG I have a sense of tranquillity, I am happier. It helps me to live a fulfilled and Eudaimonia Yes Interview People and Nature good life #2 The green spaces of Vitoria-­Gasteiz (VG), such as the Green Belt, are important for my mental health Mental health Yes Interview #3 I feel that the nature and landscapes of VG are an important part of my identity, of who I am as a person Personal identity Yes Interview #4 Caring for nature helps me lead a more fulfilled life Care No Literature #5 Nature gives me so much more than I can give her. If I treat her well, she returns it to me Reciprocity No Interview #6 I think that nature is the origin of humankind, where we came from. Nature is like our big house Kinship No Interview #7 There are places in nature that give me a sensation of harmony Harmony No Interview Positive relationship between humans within their social communities through nature (relational value) #8 The green spaces of VG are contributing to a stronger sense of community Sense of community Yes Local media #9 Nature is part of our collective identity as the city of VG Collective identity Yes Interview #10 The parks of VG are places where I can share experiences with people who are very different from me Community diversity Yes Purposively created #11 If nature is well, we are well too. The health of our community depends on the state of nature Health of community No Interview #12 We are responsible for the impacts we have on the environment because they can harm other people Care for present No Interview generations #13 We have an obligation to take care of nature for future generations Care for future No Literature generations Negative relationship between individuals and nature (relational disvalue) #14 Many of us humans are losing our connection with nature Disconnection No Interview #15 Natural spaces in cities are attracting dirt, insects, rats and pigeons. I do not like that Dislike of non-­human No Purposively Others created #16 There are aspects of nature that scare me Fear of nature No Purposively created #17 I do not need to spend time in nature to feel good Anti-­eudaimonia No Purposively created Negative relational bond between humans within their social communities through nature (relational disvalue) #18 Now that the green spaces in VG are more crowded because of the pandemic, you have to go further away to be Lack of solitude Yes Interview alone. This is not good #19 At night I do not usually walk in the parks of VG. I try to avoid them because I do not feel very safe Perceived insecurity Yes Interview #20 I do not go to some parks in VG because they are usually full of people I do not like Dislike of human Yes Interview Others NEIDIG et al. 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License TA B L E 2 (Continued) Statement Statement no. Statement (English translation) Statement tag Place-­specific?a sourceb NEIDIG et al. Positive framing of the instrumental value of NCP (instrumental value) #21 The Green Belt contributes to generating tourism and economic benefits for the city Economic benefit Yes Local media (tourism) #22 The neighbourhood gardens and urban agriculture of VG are important places to produce healthy and local food Natural resources Yes Purposively (food) created #23 The protection of nature in VG is symbolic of the quality of life for the citizens of this city Quality of life Yes Social media #24 The urban and peri-­urban parks of VG are contributing to a healthy environment. They have a positive impact on Physical health Yes Interview our physical health #25 The parks of VG are spaces where I can go for a run, take the bike, or skate. They make me feel very active Recreation (physical) Yes Literature #26 Protecting nature will help us prevent future economic crises caused by species loss and climate change Economic benefit No Local media (health) #27 Nature makes a significant contribution to improving air quality Natural resources (air) No Local media #28 Protecting nature will help us reduce the risk of new pandemics and other public health emergencies Public health No Local media #29 I like natural spaces to relax. They are spaces where I can spend many hours Recreation (mental) No Purposively created Negative framing of instrumental values of NCP (instrumental disvalue) #30 I do not like the Green Belt because I think its parks are dirty and full of mosquitos Unpleasant nature Yes Interview #31 I think VG spends too much public money on nature conservation programs Wasted expenses Yes Literature #32 I think the parks in the city and its surroundings are very boring. They do not have much value for me Boredom Yes Interview #33 I think that parts of the Green Belt should be used to build new cheap housing for the residents of VG Trade-­offs Yes Purposively created #34 I usually prefer to watch a movie with a good friend than take a walk in nature with that same friend Disinterest No Purposively created Intrinsic value of nature #35 I do not think that the main function of nature is to „serve for humans”. Nature has value in itself Intrinsic worth No Interview #36 Animals deserve to have rights of their own Intrinsic rights No Literature Human-­nature relational models #37 It's okay if we lose forests and wetlands, as long as we keep enough for humans Utilization No Literature #38 We human beings have the right to use nature the way we want Domination No Literature #39 I prefer living in an urban environment to a rural environment Detachment No Purposively created Note: The original statements in Spanish can be found in the Appendix (Table A1). a Place-­specific? Yes: statements refer to aspects of urban nature specific to Vitoria-­Gasteiz. No: statements express notions of nature as a social or biophysical entity beyond urban boundaries. b People and Nature Statement source: indicates the source the statements were retrieved from, that is, interviews, social media, local media, (previous scientific) literature, (statements) purposively created (for description of | each statement source, see Table 1). 9 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 10 People and Nature NEIDIG et al. city-­wide or specific UGI of Vitoria-­Gasteiz and statements referring Vitoria-­Gasteiz, 13 came from other parts of Spain, three respon- to nature beyond urban boundaries. For example, while statement dents were from Colombia, and one from Argentina, Senegal, China #4 links to the value of collective urban identity through the city's and Morocco. We selected participants who had been residing in urban parks, statement #12 refers to nature beyond the specific Vitoria-­Gasteiz for at least 1 year in order to secure they could have urban context as a broader socially constructed concept. developed some sense of place for different (peri-­) urban green spaces and some level of belonging based on city identity. Four of the 29 participants had been interviewed previously during the cre- 3.1.3 | Participants ation of the Q-­concourse (see Table 1 “Interviews with residents”). The Q-­method is designed to capture the broadest range of perspec- tives on the studied topic, unlike quantitative (survey) designs that 3.2 | Data collection aim to be representative of the study population. Hence, securing het- erogeneity of respondents is key and allows for using relatively small The data collection was completed face-­to-­face between November sample sizes by carefully selecting respondents with the rule of thumb 2021 and June 2022 and has been approved by the Basque Centre of having a lower number of participants than statements (Watts & for Climate Change Advisory Board and Ethics Committee. Each re- Stenner, 2012). We aimed to explore urban residents' patterns of valu- spondent was interviewed individually in a green space, in a neigh- ing nature and strategically selected the study participants with diverse bourhood centre or public space of their choice. Each interview socio-­demographic and cultural backgrounds and without a-­priory ex- lasted between 30 and 60 min. pectation that participants would have any specific knowledge on en- Data collection started with an introduction of the study and the vironmental issues or urban challenges connected to Vitoria-­Gasteiz. signing of the Informed Consent. Then, study participants responded A snowball sampling technique was used to recruit participants, we to a survey about socio-­demographic characteristics and their pref- further approached people in public parks and neighbourhood centres. erences and uses of green spaces in the city. This was followed by This helped control for gender representation, diverse age groups and the Q-­sort—­the process in which respondents were asked to rank to assure a fair representation of residents' diverse places of origin. the 39 statements into a forced distribution from most disagree to In total 29 urban residents, 16 women and 13 men, were inter- most agree according to their own perspectives (Figure 3). Place-­ viewed, ranging from 18 to 71 years old. Nine persons were born in specific statements were printed on yellow cards, place-­detached F I G U R E 3 Q-­sort and sorting scheme (example photo from fieldwork, March 2022). | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License NEIDIG et al. People and Nature 11 statements on purple cards (see Table 2, “Place-­specific?”). We asked data collected during the 29 interviews, that is, survey results and the participants to sort the statements into three piles: statements qualitative information, namely participants' comments throughout the they agreed with, statements they disagreed with and statements Q-­sorting process and information derived from the closing conversa- they felt neutral about. tion, to build rich descriptions of the four identified perspectives. This was followed by each participant ranking the statements ac- cording to the given Q-­sorting scheme (Figure 3). Starting with the “agree” pile, participants were asked to place the two statements 4 | R E S U LT S : FO U R D I S TI N C T they most strongly agreed with on the “+4”-­labelled column on the PE R S PEC TI V E S O N TH E VA LU E S O F right. They continued filling up the right-­hand side of the Q-­sorting (U R BA N ) N AT U R E scheme with all the “agree” statements moving towards the more neutral centre of the scheme, according to their level of agree- We identified four different perspectives of valuations of (urban) NCP ment. The same procedure was repeated with the “disagree”-­piled by urban residents, which we labelled as the Relationalist (representing statements on the left-­hand side of the scheme. Then, the remain- Factor A), the Green Citizen (Factor B), the Green Individualist (Factor ing empty fields at the centre were filled with statements initially C), and the Precarious and Community-­Driven Newcomer (Factor D; see sorted as “neutral”, until all 39 statement cards had been placed on Figure 4). Across the four perspectives, there is agreement with posi- the Q-­sorting scheme. Lastly, participants were invited to take a tive expressions of nature's values that refer to direct links between final look and change location of statements if needed. The sorting NCP and individual well-­being, yet the four perspectives can be distin- process was completed with a closing conversation, so participants guished by a unique combination of different values that range from could explain their choices or raise any doubts on statements they more utilitarian and community-­detached understandings of nature's found interesting. Participants' comments on specific statements benefits to deeper relational bonds with nature and the social commu- throughout the sorting process together with remarks from closing nity through nature. Before turning to a broader discussion of implica- conversations were noted down in the researcher's field diary. This tions of such a diversity of perspectives for urban planning, we briefly process helped to capture qualitative insights on how participants describe each perspective. made sense of their Q-­sorts in order to complement and enrich the quantitative Q-­sort-­data. 4.1 | (A) The Relationalist perspective 3.3 | Data analysis For the Relationalist, nature significantly impacts what constitutes their sense of a “good life”. They feel deeply connected to a broader, place-­ Data was analysed with the Q-­method-­package in the R software detached, notion of nature; thus, values connecting to place-­specific (Zabala, 2014), using Pearson coefficient for the initial correlation, NCP or the local community in Vitoria-­Gasteiz play a secondary role. Of principal components analysis and varimax rotation. To decide how significance to the Relationalist are those statements expressing posi- many factors to extract, we applied the Kaiser-­Guttmann Criterion tive relational values, such as kinship (#6, +4),4 reciprocity (#5, +4), care (factor's Eigenvalue >1), the Humphrey Rule (the cross product of for present (#12, +3) and for future generations (#13, +3), and nature's the two highest factor loadings exceeds the standard error) and with intrinsic worth (#35, +2) and intrinsic rights (#36, +2). As nature is con- at least two significantly loading sorts on each factor (Brown, 1980; sidered an enriching and necessary contribution to people's well-­being, Watts & Stenner, 2012). Based on these criteria, two to four fac- the Relationalist typically rejects any framing of nature's disvalue that tors could have been extracted. After considering the qualitative may describe nature as something to be afraid of (#16, −2) or some- information obtained during data collection, we opted for the four-­ thing boring (32, −2). Especially ideas expressing a human domination factor solution. 2 The four factors explained 73.63% of the total over nature (#38, −4) and nature's main role to be utilized by humans variance. Thirteen Q-­sorts loaded significantly on Factor A, 10 (#37, −4) face strong disagreement. The Relationalist's deep connection Q-­sorts on Factor B, and two Q-­sorts on each Factor C and D. Two with nature also became apparent in the accompanying conversations Q-­sorts loaded significantly on more than one factor. These so-­ with respondents loading on this perspective who stressed the impor- called confounded Q-­sorts were excluded from the subsequent tance of engaging in stewardship activities in a community or private analysis (Sneegas et al., 2021).3 garden or going for long walks in nature. Each of the four factors represents a distinct perspective on pat- terns of how residents of Vitoria-­Gasteiz relate to and value urban nature. These perspectives also show various commonalities as some 4.2 | (B) The Green Citizen perspective statements are considered consensus statements, that is, they have been ranked similarly across all four factors. In interpreting each factor The Green Citizen values a mixture of instrumental and relational or perspective about the values of urban nature we focused on the dis- aspects of urban NCP. Of importance in this perspective are espe- tinguishing statements that differentiate one or several perspectives cially those relational values that express a relationship within their from the other perspectives (Table 3). We further used the additional social communities through nature. Respondents loading onto this | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 12 People and Nature NEIDIG et al. TA B L E 3 Statistical results of the Q-­sorts. Exact factor scores in Z-­score units Statement no. Statement tag Factor A Factor B Factor C Factor D a #1 Eudaimonia 0.55 0.53 −0.26 1.2 #2 Mental health −0.05 0.65 −0.53 1.08 #3 Personal identity −0.03 0.99 0.82 0.1 #4 Care 0.69a 0.07 −0.54 1.49a a #5 Reciprocity 1.56 −0.01 −0.28 0 #6 Kinship 1.68a 0.19 0.01 −0.1 #7 Harmony 1.09 0.46 1.12 −0.79a #8 Sense of community −0.29a 0.87 −1.39a 0.6 #9 Collective identity 0.01 1.4 0 1 #10 Community diversity −0.44 0.68a −0.56 −0.31 #11 Health of community 1.36 0.3 0.29 1.89 #12 Care for present generations 1.26a 0.8a −0.3 −0.39 #13 Care for future generations 1.34 1.4 1.97 0.5a #14 Disconnection −0.28 −0.61 1.13a −0.5 b #15 Dislike of non-­human Others −1.29 −1.45 −1.41 −1 #16 Fear of nature −1.08 0 −0.57 −1.39 #17 Anti-­eudaimonia −1.22 −1.05 −1.12 0.89a #18 Lack of solitude −0.93 −1.21 0.55a −1.49 #19 Perceived insecurity −0.66 −0.77 0.86a −1.89a #20 Dislike of human Others −1.1 −0.96 −0.01a −1.6 a a #21 Economic benefit (tourism) 0.19 0.70 −0.83 −0.68 #22 Natural resources (food)b −0.1 0.22 0.29 0.5 #23 Quality of life 0.45 1.23a 0.28 −0.19 #24 Physical health 0.41 0.64 0.26 −0.48 #25 Recreation (physical) 0.38 1.25a −1.11a 0.31 #26 Economic benefit (health) 1.16 0.54 0.83 0.39 #27 Natural resources (air) 1.27 1.81 1.68 1.68 a a #28 Public health 0.66 0.16 1.97 1.6 #29 Recreation (mental)b 0.52 0.93 1.12 0.6 #30 Unpleasant natureb −1.12 −1.24 −1.13 −1.6 #31 Wasted expenses −0.92 −1.13 −1.41 −1.68 a #32 Boredom −1.01 −1.45 −1.97 −0.21a #33 Trade-­offs −1.17 −1.47 −0.87 −0.6 a a #34 Disinterest −0.93 −1.39 0.28 0.48 #35 Intrinsic worth 0.98 0.24 1.39 −0.1 #36 Intrinsic rights 1.14 0.52 0.86 −0.39a #37 Utilization −1.77 −1.54 −1.13 1.18a #38 Domination −1.78 −1.80 0.3 0.29 #39 Detachmentb −0.52 −0.51 0.57 −0.39 a Distinguishing statements for each factor. b Consensus statements across all four factors. perspective expressed a strong sense of place and reflected a dis- of a perceived high quality of life offered by Vitoria-­Gasteiz (#23, course of pride attached to the green achievements of “their city” +3). For the Green Citizen, both enjoying the shared experiences as several respondents explicitly mentioned “the luxury of living in with other people different to them (#10, +1) and the core role that a European Green Capital”, which is considered a core component the local landscapes play in developing a personal identity (#1, +3) | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License NEIDIG et al. People and Nature 13 F I G U R E 4 Factor arrays for each factor A, B, C, and D. The factor array exemplifies for each perspective the “archetypical” Q-­sort, that is the sort that would load 100% on the specific factor/ perspective, i.e. (a) shows the archetypical Q-­sort for the perspective of the Relationalist, (b) the Green Citizen, (c) the Green Individualist, and (d) the Precarious and Community-­driven Newcomer Blue letters indicate intrinsic values, red instrumental values, green relational values, and black broader human-­nature relational models. Cards in purple contain place-­specific notions, and cards in yellow refer to nature as a broader concept. Statements underlined show the distinguishing statements for each factor. | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 14 People and Nature NEIDIG et al. and collective identity (#9, +4) are key values of urban nature. The community, such as perceived insecurity through community mem- Green Citizen highly values instrumental NCP such as access to clean bers (#19, −4), the rejection of (over-­)crowded parks (#18, −3), or air (#27, +4), options for recreation (#25, +3) and various economic feeling negatively towards other park users different to them (#20, benefits due to UGI (#21, +2). They also show a relational sentiment −3). Contrary to the other three main perspectives, this perspective of care for the present (#12, +2) and future generations beyond local understands human's connection with nature as less relational, and urban boundaries (#13, +3); sentiments that become even stronger instead more instrumental and unidirectional. This becomes exem- through rejecting statements describing relational models that em- plified through agreement with the statement expressing a utiliza- phasize human domination (#38, −4) and utilization (#37, −4) of na- tion of nature mostly for humans' benefit (#37, +3). That is, nature is ture, a commonality they share with the Relationalist perspective. valued for its instrumental contributions, such as delivering natural resources (#27, +4) and mainly through its positive impacts on public health (#28, +3); less importance is given to the intrinsic value of 4.3 | (C) The Green Individualist perspective nature (#36, −1). The Green Individualist expresses a general positive sentiment to- wards urban greening but shares a distinct response regarding 4.5 | Commonalities and patterns across the four statements expressing negative relational bonds between humans perspectives within their social communities through nature. For example, the perspective is associated with statements referring to negative We identified patterns across the four perspectives based on the perceptions of the local community, such as a perceived insecurity consensus statements and the additional qualitative data gathered during night time (#19, +2), or the dislike of having to share urban during the Q-­sort process. These patterns pinpoint to notions of nature with other people (#18, +1) and especially with people of urban nature having been perceived differently given diverse socio-­ diverse socio-­demographic backgrounds (#20, 0). Hence, people demographic background, such as differences between gender and within this perspective strongly disagree with urban nature contrib- places of origin but also show commonalities across all four perspec- uting to a sense of community (#8, −3). Despite this distinguished tives, for instance, regarding a general positive reception of NCP response towards understandings of nature as a connector for the concerning direct links between individuals and nature. local community, the Green Individualist values nature as an impor- First, we noted a clear gendered dimension in how partici- tant contribution to their individual well-­being. This is expressed pants responded verbally to statement #19, expressing a per- through a mixture of relational and instrumental values, both inside ceived insecurity in urban parks during night. Although most male and beyond urban boundaries. The Green Individualist for instance respondents sorted statement #19 at the centre or disagreement appreciates urban greenery (#32, −4) and hence considers it impor- side, several of these respondents explicitly mentioned during tant to allocate public funds for urban nature conservation (#31, the sorting of statements that they would feel differently about −4). That is because nature is perceived as a contribution to hu- this statement if they were female. For instance, one male re- man's quality of life through delivering natural resources (#27, +3) spondent expressed that “while I am not afraid of passing through or a sense of harmony (#7, +3). Although lacking strong ties to the a park during night, I tell my teenage daughter not to. I tell her local community, the Green Individualist still cares deeply for nature always go on the street with lights.” Another female respondent for the sake of future generations (#13, +4), which also connects to noted that “my parents always told me to not spend time in the their strong concern about an increasing disconnection of humanity urban parks when it is dark. This sentence still sticks with me, I from nature (#14, +3). avoid them at night.” Second, respondents who immigrated from other countries em- phasized the role of urban parks for creating a sense of place and of 4.4 | (D) The Precarious and Community-­Driven belonging, and for maintaining relationships with their countries of Newcomer perspective origin. For example, three male respondents that more recently ar- rived in the city from Senegal, Morocco and Argentina, shared how Respondents loading onto the fourth perspective, namely the the social component of urban parks as meeting places helped them Precarious and Community-­driven Newcomer's perspective, tended to navigate their financial and bureaucratic insecurities, to exchange find themselves in a socially and economically precarious situation, with peers, and to have a space for recreation accessible to them as they recently immigrated to the city as members of vulnerable as members of vulnerable communities in Vitoria-­Gasteiz. Similarly, communities, waiting for their residence permit being approved. two female respondents from Colombia exemplified how nature can For respondents within this perspective, green parks are helping serve as a vehicle to emotionally re-­connect with their community in them to create a sense of belonging, as a space that allows them to their home country. Here, practices of care for nature through par- forge a collective identity (#9, +2) and develop a sense of commu- ticipating in a community garden project helped bringing childhood nity (#8, +2). That is, the Precarious and Community-­Driven Newcomer memories and cultural practices from their country of origin to their highly rejects framings of negative relational bonds within the local new home. Further, the habit of daily visiting a neighbourhood park | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License NEIDIG et al. People and Nature 15 turned into a routine of video-­calling friends and family at home and Despite this overall positive reception of NCP, each perspective maintaining bonds across far-­away places. exhibits certain traits that distinguish them from the other perspec- Third, a closer look at the consensus statements across the four tives and hence requires distinct responses from planners and deci- perspectives further shows that respondents dominantly reject sionmakers. The Relationalist perspective is associated with a deep negative framings of (urban) NCP emphasizing direct links between relational bond with nature that is mostly understood as a social or individuals and the natural environment. Both statement #15, ex- biophysical entity beyond urban boundaries necessary for living a pressing a general aversion to specific elements of urban nature, “good life”. Humans and Nature are two deeply interconnected ele- such as perceived dirt, insects, rats, and pigeons, and #30 pointing ments; relational practices, such as spending time in and caring for na- to a dislike of green areas in Vitoria-­Gasteiz because of seemingly ture, thus play a core role in the Relationalists' identity, well-­being and unpleasant elements of nature are consensus statements across all practices in and with nature. This perspective shows similarities with four perspectives, being scored either −2 or −3. Statement #16, fear a universal social imaginary depicting nature as an inherently benefi- of nature, was consistently mentioned throughout the sorting pro- cial and providing positive contributions to people in diverse urban cess and the closing conversations with a sentiment of surprise and contexts (Angelo, 2019a; Hoelle et al., 2022). But this dominantly in- laughter. One respondent for instance asked: “Why would I be afraid strumental framing of nature's benefits of current urban policies does of nature? Especially here in Vitoria-­Gasteiz, where there are neither not account for the strong connection the Relationalists holds towards dangerous animals nor earthquakes?” nature given their expressions of nature's intrinsic worth and the mul- tiple relational values. Here, municipal discourses and planning sur- rounding UGI need to more deliberately account for the depth of the 5 | TOWA R DS PL AC E-­ A N D Relationalist's connection with nature by including values emphasizing CO M M U N IT Y- ­B A S E D FR A M I N G S O F U R BA N the co-­ and interdependency of humans and nature and supporting N AT U R E I N PL A N N I N G civic and stewardship practices that enable this connection. People within the Green Citizen perspective show similarities The findings of this study show that society-­nature relationships of with the Relationalist as they respond to merely positive framings of urban residents in Vitoria-­Gasteiz can range from a deep relational NCPs. What differentiates them, is their emphasis on place-­based bond with all living-­beings towards more instrumental perceptions connotations of urban nature that becomes explicit through the of the value of NCPs. The four different perspectives thus illus- strong ties to the local community but also through expressing a cer- trate that NCPs are rarely perceived as either purely instrumental tain pride of the institutional achievements of their local decision-­ or relational, or purely positive or negative contributions, but rather makers. Respondents loading on this perspective for instance through multidirectional and nuanced tapestry of socio-­natural repeatedly referred to the municipal slogan of “We are the Green relationships. This complexity of socio-­natures hence demands an Capital” which we identified in a previous study as crucial in institu- assessment of values about nature through a cultural lens, that is, tionally nurturing place-­making that then turned into an urban brand what constitutes a positively or negatively perceived NCP is cultur- (Neidig et al., 2022). We argue that this perspective is mirroring the ally driven, contrary to many perspectives on cultural ecosystem local prevalent political discourse drawing on dominantly instrumen- services typically used in the literature (Díaz et al., 2018). We now tal and a few community-­related relational framings of UGI by rep- turn to a discussion of the implications of this plurality of value per- licating the official green branding of the city and highlighting their spectives for urban planning. We focus here on the, partly conflict- strong connection to local institutional UGI, such as the European ing, values and perceptions present in the different forms of urban Green Capital award. Here, green planners have strong supporters socio-­natures and their need for being explicitly acknowledged in of their green legacy and should continue building on it for funding planning responses. and deploying future green projects. Overall, there is a general rejection of framings that describe Contrary to the Green Citizen, the Green Individualist perspective direct negative impacts of nature on humans as those NCPs refer- indicates a lack of sense of belonging towards the local community ring to a direct link between humans and nature are received pos- through nature. Respondents loading on this perspective expressed itively across the four perspectives. This may be explained by the a certain mistrust towards other residents and community members, study context of the mid-­sized city Vitoria-­Gasteiz and its green city especially strangers and foreigners, which in return may hinder their branding campaigns that regularly remind its residents on the mul- engagement in local UGI. Urban planners may thus need to further tiple, mostly instrumental, benefits of nature (Neidig et al., 2022). examine the reasons why people within this perspective disconnect Further, the close proximity to natural landscapes and a holistic net- from the local community and how different forms of engagement work of (peri-­) urban green infrastructure enables a relatively easy or participation in UGI may help creating new bonds with local peo- access across neighbourhoods to different forms of (urban) NCP. ple, both long-­term residents and newcomers. Here, participatory In general, Vitoria-­Gasteiz exhibits little green gentrification and processes surrounding renaturing-­t ype UGI may be needed to as- inequalities, unlike other cities in Spain and beyond (Anguelovski sure a process of trust building between diverse community mem- et al., 2022), thus inviting less controversy around the speculative bers. Appealing to those relational values prevalent in the Green nature of urban greening policies. Individualist's perspective, such as a feeling of sense of harmony in | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 16 People and Nature NEIDIG et al. nature, may be a starting point to create place-­specific connections more nuanced and localized understanding of (urban) NCP consisting to urban landscapes and the local community. of plural positive values about nature as it could have been found in Out of the four perspectives, only the Precarious and Community-­ Vitoria-­Gasteiz’ early local environmental political discourses in the driven Newcomer shows a more utilitarian approach to urban greenery 1980s/1990s that drew upon an intrinsic ecological conservation ratio- that is especially valued for the opportunity of its use as a social meet- nale. Over time, nature became presented as a win-­win strategy for both ing and community-­building asset. This perspective gives insights into the environment and the local economy (Temenos & McCann, 2012; how historically marginalized residents in the city, such as recent im- While et al., 2004), a framing that mirrors recent international urban dis- migrants, appreciate urban nature, in particular accessible urban pub- courses around the Green(est) City (Rosol et al., 2017). With that, the lic parks, as a substitute for the lack of other meeting spaces. Urban social imaginary replicated in Vitoria-­Gasteiz’ environmental political greenery may hence turn into a vehicle to create a localized sense of discourse shifted towards ecomodernist understandings that envision place and of belonging to the new community. This perspective mir- a smart carbon-­neutral city and that depicts nature's benefit through a rors findings from previous studies (see e.g. Birch et al., 2020; Ono dominantly utilitarian, instrumental framing (Neidig et al., 2022). et al., 2021; Rishbeth & Birch, 2020) that describe urban nature as Especially since the recent IPBES Values Assessment Report important socializing places that can help newcomers and migrants to (IPBES, 2022), the conceptualization of plural valuation approaches is build a connection and adapt to the new cultural and social context, gaining visibility in high-­level policymaking. Yet so far, only few policy-­ they find themselves in. Further, as highlighted in prior studies on gar- making processes actually use valuation approaches to consider di- dening and collective efficacy (Teig et al., 2009) and gardening and verse perceptions of nature in environmental planning (IPBES, 2022). place building (Anguelovski, 2014; Hartwig & Mason, 2016; Truong To implement and apply them in local decision-­making, an operation- et al., 2022), urban green spaces offer newcomers and immigrants alizing of relational values is needed which could serve as a tool to spaces for practices of care and stewardship, that, while re-­connecting “integrate issues of justice into assessments of multifunctionality” to memories to their home country, also help develop and strengthen (Pineda-­Pinto et al., 2022). This could further steer urban environmen- place-­based relational values. In this regard, green planners should tal planning towards understanding socio-­ecological systems through keep funding and building greenspaces that can support such social multiple forms of socio-­natures (Swyngedouw, 1996). Our study has activities in nature and sustain the positive links different groups form drawn on Q-­methodology to elicit, formulate, and visibilize the mul- with each other and with greenspaces. tiplicity of values about nature held by diverse residents which has We argue that especially the Green Individualist and the Precarious allowed us to identify diverse socio-­nature in the urban context. Q-­ and Community-­driven Newcomers' perspectives about (urban) NCP methodology shows promise as an exploratory approach within a may require special attention in planning re-­naturing initiatives and multi-­method approach to meaningfully integrate plural values of na- UGI. The diverse perspectives about community-­related values in ture throughout the policy-­making process, especially of those urban connection to urban nature suggest that the contribution of UGI to residents who remain most invisible or excluded in policy and plan- human-­human relationships within the local community may be per- ning. The research design phase, and more specifically conveying the ceived as disvalues (Lliso et al., 2022) by some residents—­contrary to full range of the local discourses, is a rather time-­intensive process the inherently beneficial assumptions that permeate dominating po- since the Q-­concourse should mirror comprehensive place-­specific litical green(ing) discourses (Angelo, 2019a). Urban residents' needs notions about nature. However, the methodology's main advantages and perceptions thus differ in relation to both the material green lie, first, in the relatively small sample size needed as it can already space and the intangible relational bonds between culturally diverse allow deriving key insights into the full depths of purposively sampled residents that may affect members of the community negatively. perspectives present in any given local context, including those often Formulating a social imaginary of urban nature that can be more in- overlooked and marginalized. Second, the Q-­sorting process contains clusive of the multiple (place-­specific) forms of urban socio-­natures a playfulness in its set-­up that respondents expressly enjoyed. We requires urban planners to pay closer attention to why and how those consider it a useful first step to define the starting base of a longer disvalues arise and manifest. We here call for an intersectional plan- iterative and participatory plural valuation approach. ning approach, for example, in the form of carefully implemented participatory processes, that emphasizes these differences based on the multiples identities and bodies that perceive (urban) NCP and 6 | CO N C LU S I O N their integration through nature within different social communities (Anguelovski et al., 2020). Understanding and embracing residents' Our research on eliciting and identifying plural values about nature plurality in regard to design, maintenance, and use of urban green that urban residents hold towards (urban) NCP in the case context of spaces is therefore key to support residents in safely negotiating and the mid-­sized city Vitoria-­Gasteiz showed that people hold diverse, contesting dominant prevalent values associated with UGI. partly contradicting, forms of socio-­natures that can be neither re- The Relationalists' and Green Citizens' perspectives on the value duced to instrumental nor relational framings of NCP. The integra- of urban NCPs are more in tune with dominating urban greening dis- tion of a plurality of values throughout decision-­making processes courses as they regard NCP as a purely positive contribution to human hence requires a careful examination of prevalent values and spe- well-­being. Especially the Relationalist's perspective shows a much cifically those undermined by dominating institutional discourses. | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License NEIDIG et al. People and Nature 17 3 Factors loadings of each Q-­sort can be found in Table A2. Those load- Attention should be paid to understanding whose values are being ings express the association of each Q-­sort with each of the four ex- put forward, what is the underlying rationale for emphasizing spe- tracted factors. cific values over others, and how can those valuation approaches 4 The numbers in the brackets indicate the statement number and the target specifically socially vulnerable groups whose needs and score it would receive in an archetypical Q-­sort that would load 100% perceptions regarding urban nature may differ from mainstream on the respective perspective. For example, for perspective A, state- ment #6 received a score of +4. The archetypical types of Q-­sorts for political framings. Future research will have to dissect how people each perspective can be found in Figure 4. with differing values contest and negotiate their needs and neces- sities in a day-­to-­day basis to be able to better adapt urban plan- ning processes towards their existing and often conflicting identities REFERENCES (Oscilowicz et al., 2023). This will require an intersectional approach Angelo, H. (2017). From the city lens toward urbanisation as a way of see- to put emphasis on the plurality of needs that differ across intersect- ing: Country/city binaries on an urbanising planet. Urban Studies, 54(1), 158–­178. https://doi.org/10.1177/00420​98016​629312 ing groups, such as women, immigrants, children or elderly residents. Angelo, H. (2019a). Added value? Denaturalizing the “good” of urban greening. Geography Compass, 13(8), 1–­14. https://doi.org/10.1111/ AU T H O R C O N T R I B U T I O N S gec3.12459 Julia Neidig, Bosco Lliso and Unai Pascual conceived the ideas and Angelo, H. (2019b). The greening imaginary: Urbanized nature in Germany's Ruhr region. Theory and Society, 48(5), 645–­669. https:// designed methodology; Julia Neidig collected the data; Julia Neidig doi.org/10.1007/s1118​6-­019-­09361​-­5 analysed the data; Julia Neidig wrote the original draft, Julia Neidig, Anguelovski, I. (2014). Neighborhood as refuge: Community reconstruction, Isabelle Anguelovski, Bosco Lliso and Unai Pascual reviewed and ed- place remaking, and environmental justice in the City. MIT Press. ited the manuscript substantially. All authors contributed critically to Anguelovski, I., Brand, A. L., Connolly, J. J. T., Corbera, E., Kotsila, P., Steil, J., Garcia-­L amarca, M., Triguero-­Mas, M., Cole, H., Baró, the manuscript and gave final approval for publication. Unai Pascual F., Langemeyer, J., del Pulgar, C. P., Shokry, G., Sekulova, F., & obtained funding to carry out the research. Argüelles Ramos, L. (2020). Expanding the boundaries of jus- tice in urban greening scholarship: Toward an emancipatory, AC K N O​W L E D ​ G E ​M E N T S Antisubordination, intersectional, and relational approach. Annals We thank Aitor Albaina and Aiora Zabala for their feedback through- of the American Association of Geographers, 4452, 1–­27. https://doi. org/10.1080/24694​452.2020.1740579 out the design and data collection phase and the two anonymous re- Anguelovski, I., Connolly, J. J. T., Cole, H., Garcia-­L amarca, M., Triguero-­ viewers for their constructive comments. We also thank the Centro Mas, M., Baró, F., Martin, N., Conesa, D., Shokry, G., del Pulgar, C. P., de Estudios Ambientales Vitoria-­Gasteiz for the time and effort of Ramos, L. A., Matheney, A., Gallez, E., Oscilowicz, E., Máñez, J. L., sharing documents and their knowledge about the study context. Sarzo, B., Beltrán, M. A., & Minaya, J. M. (2022). Green gentrification in European and North American cities. Nature Communications, This work was supported by the Department of Education of the 13(1), 3816. https://doi.org/10.1038/s4146​7-­022-­31572​-­1 Basque Government (PIBA19-­0 096), the City of Vitoria-­Gasteiz (and Anguelovski, I., & Corbera, E. (2022). Integrating justice in nature-­based the Centro de Estudios Ambientales) and by the María de Maeztu solutions to avoid nature-­enabled dispossession. Ambio, 52, 45–­53. excellence accreditation 2018–­2022 (Ref. MDM-­2017-­0714), funded https://doi.org/10.1007/s1328​0 -­022-­01771​-­7 Armstrong, A., Bulkeley, H., Tozer, L., & Kotsila, P. (2022). Border trou- by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033/. bles: Urban nature and the remaking of public/private divides. Urban Geography, 1–­21, 1–­21. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723​ C O N FL I C T O F I N T E R E S T S TAT E M E N T 638.2022.2125669 The authors declare no conflict of interest. Ayuntamiento de Vitoria-­Gasteiz. (2021). Informe de poblacion de Vitoria-­ Gasteiz 2021. Fuente: Padrón Municipal de habitantes, Vitoria-­ Gasteiz Gabinete de Estudios. DATA AVA I L A B I L I T Y S TAT E M E N T Aznarez, C., Svenning, J.-­C ., Taveira, G., Baró, F., & Pascual, U. (2022). The data that support the findings of this study are openly available Wildness and habitat quality drive spatial patterns of urban biodi- in Dryad Digital Repository: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.qnk98​ versity. Landscape and Urban Planning, 228(April), 104570. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.landu​rbplan.2022.104570 sfnj (Neidig et al., 2023). Babí Almenar, J., Elliot, T., Rugani, B., Philippe, B., Navarrete Gutierrez, T., Sonnemann, G., & Geneletti, D. (2021). Nexus between nature-­ ORCID based solutions, ecosystem services and urban challenges. Julia Neidig https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6560-9664 Land Use Policy, 100, 104898. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landu​ Isabelle Anguelovski https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6409-5155 sepol.2020.104898 Baró, F., Calderón-­Argelich, A., Langemeyer, J., & Connolly, J. T. T. (2019). Bosco Lliso https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2460-4322 Under one canopy? Assessing the distributional environmental jus- Unai Pascual https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5696-236X tice implications of street tree benefits in Barcelona. Environmental Science & Policy, 102(1), 54–­6 4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. E N D N OT E S envsci.2019.08.016 1 Barry, J., & Proops, J. (1999). Seeking sustainability discourses with Q For a detailed description of the different methodological steps of Q-­ methodology. Ecological Economics, 28(3), 337–­3 45. https://doi. methodology, see for example Watts and Stenner (2012) or McKeown org/10.1016/S0921​-­8 009(98)00053​-­6 and Thomas (2013). Berdejo-­Espinola, V., Suárez-­C astro, A. F., Amano, T., Fielding, K. S., 2 This is also in line with Watts and Stenner's (2012) rule of thumb of Oh, R. R. Y., & Fuller, R. A. (2021). Urban green space use during extracting one factor for every six to eight Q-­sorts. a time of stress: A case study during the COVID-­19 pandemic in | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 18 People and Nature NEIDIG et al. Brisbane, Australia. People and Nature, 3(3), 597–­609. https://doi. Haase, D., Kabisch, S., Haase, A., Andersson, E., Banzhaf, E., Baró, F., org/10.1002/pan3.10218 Brenck, M., Fischer, L. K., Frantzeskaki, N., Kabisch, N., Krellenberg, Birch, J., Rishbeth, C., & Payne, S. R. (2020). Nature doesn't judge you—­ K., Kremer, P., Kronenberg, J., Larondelle, N., Mathey, J., Pauleit, How urban nature supports young people's mental health and well- S., Ring, I., Rink, D., Schwarz, N., & Wolff, M. (2017). Greening cit- being in a diverse UK city. Health and Place, 62(February), 102296. ies—­To be socially inclusive? About the alleged paradox of society https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healt​hplace.2020.102296 and ecology in cities? Habitat International, 64, 41–­48. https://doi. Britto dos Santos, N., & Gould, R. K. (2018). Can relational values be devel- org/10.1016/j.habit​atint.2017.04.005 oped and changed? Investigating relational values in the environmen- Haase, D., Larondelle, N., Andersson, E., Artmann, M., Borgström, S., tal education literature. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, Breuste, J., Gomez-­Baggethun, E., Gren, Å., Hamstead, Z., Hansen, 35, 124–­131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2018.10.019 R., Kabisch, N., Kremer, P., Langemeyer, J., Rall, E. L., McPhearson, Brown, S. (1980). Political subjectivity: Applications of Q methodology in T., Pauleit, S., Qureshi, S., Schwarz, N., Voigt, A., … Elmqvist, T. political science. Yale University Press. (2014). A quantitative review of urban ecosystem service assess- Calcagni, F., Amorim Maia, A. T., Connolly, J. J. T., & Langemeyer, J. (2019). ments: Concepts, models, and implementation. Ambio, 43(4), 413–­ Digital co-­construction of relational values: Understanding the role 433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1328​0 -­014-­0504-­0 of social media for sustainability. Sustainability Science, 14(5), 1309–­ Hartwig, K. A., & Mason, M. (2016). (2016). Community gardens for 1321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1162​5-­019-­0 0672​-­1 refugee and immigrant communities as a means of health promo- Capaldi, C., Passmore, H.-­A., Nisbet, E., Zelenski, J., & Dopko, R. (2015). tion. Journal of Community Health, 41(6), 1153–­1159. https://doi. Flourishing in nature: A review of the benefits of connecting with org/10.1007/s1090​0 -­016-­0195-­5 nature and its application as a wellbeing intervention. International Himes, A., & Muraca, B. (2018). Relational values: The key to pluralistic Journal of Wellbeing, 5(4), 1–­16. https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v5i4.449 valuation of ecosystem services. Current Opinion in Environmental Chan, K. M., Gould, R. K., & Pascual, U. (2018). Editorial overview: Sustainability, 35, 1–­7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2018.09.005 Relational values: What are they, and what's the fuss about? Hinchliffe, S., & Whatmore, S. (2006). Living cities: Towards a politics Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 35, A1–­A7. https:// of conviviality. Science as Culture, 15(2), 123–­138. https://doi. doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2018.11.003 org/10.1080/09505​43060​0707988 Chan, K. M. A., Balvanera, P., Benessaiah, K., Chapman, M., Díaz, S., Hoelle, J., Gould, R. K., & Tauro, A. (2022). Beyond ‘desirable’ values: Gómez-­Baggethun, E., Gould, R., Hannahs, N., Jax, K., Klain, S., Luck, Expanding relational values research to reflect the diversity of G. W., Martín-­López, B., Muraca, B., Norton, B., Ott, K., Pascual, U., human–­nature relationships. People and Nature, 1–­12. https://doi. Satterfield, T., Tadaki, M., Taggart, J., & Turner, N. (2016). Why protect org/10.1002/pan3.10316 nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proceedings of the Holmes, G., Clemoes, J., Marriot, K., & Wynne-­Jones, S. (2022). The poli- National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113(6), tics of the rural and relational values: Contested discourses of rural 1462–­1465. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.15250​02113 change and landscape futures in west Wales. Geoforum, 133(May), Chan, K. M. A., Satterfield, T., & Goldstein, J. (2012). Rethinking eco- 153–­164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geofo​rum.2022.05.014 system services to better address and navigate cultural values. Houston, D., Hillier, J., MacCallum, D., Steele, W., & Byrne, J. (2018). Ecological Economics, 74, 8–­18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecole​ Make kin, not cities! Multispecies entanglements and ‘becoming-­ con.2011.11.011 world’ in planning theory. Planning Theory, 17(2), 190–­212. https:// Connolly, J. J. T. (2019). From Jacobs to the just City: A foundation doi.org/10.1177/14730​95216​688042 for challenging the green planning orthodoxy. Cities, 91, 64–­70. Inglis, D., & Pascual, U. (2021). On the links between nature's values and https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2018.05.011 language. People and Nature, 5, 326–­3 42. https://doi.org/10.1002/ Deplazes-­Zemp, A., & Chapman, M. (2021). The ABCs of relational val- pan3.10205 ues: Environmental values that include aspects of both intrinsic and IPBES. (2022). Summary for policymakers of the methodological assessment instrumental valuing. Environmental Values, 30(6), 669–­693. https:// report on the diverse values and valuation of nature of the intergovern- doi.org/10.3197/09632​7120X​15973​37980​3726 mental science-­policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services. (U. Díaz, S., Pascual, U., Stenseke, M., Martín-­López, B., Watson, R. T., Molnár, Z., Pascual, P. Balvanera, M. Christie, B. Baptiste, D. González-­Jiménez, Hill, R., Chan, K. M. A., Baste, I. A., Brauman, K. A., Polasky, S., Church, C. B. Anderson, S. Athayde, R. Chaplin-­Kramer, S. Jacobs, E. Kelemen, A., Lonsdale, M., Larigauderie, A., Leadley, P. W., van Oudenhoven, A. R. Kumar, E. Lazos, A. Martin, T. H. Mwampamba, B. Nakangu, P. P. E., van der Plaat, F., Schröter, M., Lavorel, S., … Shirayama, Y. (2018). O'Farrell, C. M. Raymond, S. M. Subramanian, M. Termansen, … A. Assessing nature's contributions to people. Science, 359(6373), 270–­ Vatn, Eds.). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6522392 272. https://doi.org/10.1126/scien​ce.aap8826 Jacobs, S., Zafra-­C alvo, N., Gonzalez-­Jimenez, D., Guibrunet, L., Gandy, M. (2018). Cities in deep time: Bio-­diversity, metabolic rift, and the Benessaiah, K., Berghöfer, A., Chaves-­C haparro, J., Díaz, S., urban question. City, 22(1), 96–­105. https://doi.org/10.1080/13604​ Gomez-­B aggethun, E., Lele, S., Martín-­L ópez, B., Masterson, 813.2018.1434289 V. A., Merçon, J., Moersberger, H., Muraca, B., Norström, A., García-­L amarca, M., Anguelovski, I., Cole, H. V. S., Connolly, J. J. T., O'Farrell, P., Ordonez, J. C., Prieur-­R ichard, A.-­H ., … Balvanera, P. Pérez-­del-­Pulgar, C., Shokry, G., & Triguero-­Mas, M. (2022). Urban (2020). Use your power for good: Plural valuation of nature—­T he green grabbing: Residential real estate developers discourse and Oaxaca statement. Global Sustainability, 3(2020), e8. https://doi. practice in gentrifying global north neighborhoods. Geoforum, 128, org/10.1017/sus.2020.2 1–­10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geofo​rum.2021.11.016 Kabisch, N., & Haase, D. (2014). Green justice or just green? Provision García-­L amarca, M., Anguelovski, I., & Venner, K. (2022). Challenging the of urban green spaces in Berlin. Germany. Landscape and Urban financial capture of urban greening. Nature Communications, 13, Planning, 122(2014), 129–­139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landu​ 7132. https://doi.org/10.1038/s4146​7-­022-­3 4942​-­x rbplan.2013.11.016 Gonzaléz de Langarica Mendizábal, A. (2007). La ciudad revolucionada: Kadykalo, A. N., López-­Rodriguez, M. D., Ainscough, J., Droste, N., Industrialización, inmigración, urbanización (Vitoria, 1946–­ 1965). Ryu, H., Ávila-­Flores, G., Le Clec'h, S., Muñoz, M. C., Nilsson, L., Ayuntamiento de Vitoria-­Gasteiz. Rana, S., Sarkar, P., Sevecke, K. J., & Harmáčková, Z. V. (2019). Gould, K., & Lewis, T. (2017). Green gentrification: Urban sustainability and Disentangling ‘ecosystem services’ and ‘nature's contributions the struggle for environmental justice (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi. to people’. Ecosystems and People, 15(1), 269–­287. https://doi. org/10.4324/97813​15687322 org/10.1080/26395​916.2019.1669713 | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License NEIDIG et al. People and Nature 19 Kiss, B., Sekulova, F., Hörschelmann, K., Salk, C. F., Takahashi, W., & O'Connor, S., & Kenter, J. O. (2019). Making intrinsic values work; inte- Wamsler, C. (2021). Citizen participation in the governance of grating intrinsic values of the more-­than-­human world through the nature-­based solutions. Environmental Policy and Governance, 2022, life framework of values. Sustainability Science, 14(5), 1247–­1265. 1–­28. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1987 https://doi.org/10.1007/s1162​5-­019-­0 0715​-­7 Kleespies, M. W., & Dierkes, P. W. (2020). Exploring the construct of Ono, A. J., Boyd, D. R., & Chan, K. M. A. (2021). Acculturation as an eco- relational values: An empirical approach. Frontiers in Psychology, system service? Urban natural space supports evolving relational 11(March), 1–­14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00209 values and identity in new female migrants. People and Nature, 5, Kotsila, P., Anguelovski, I., Baró, F., Langemeyer, J., Sekulova, F., & 313–­325. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10188 Connolly, J. T. (2021). Nature-­based solutions as discursive tools Orive, L. A., & Dios Lema, R. (2012). From urban greenbelt to regional and contested practices in urban nature's neoliberalisation pro- green infrastructure. In T. Beatly (Ed.), Green cities of Europe: Global cesses. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 4(2), 252–­274. lessons on green urbanism (pp. 1–­234). Island Press. https://doi. https://doi.org/10.1177/25148​48620​901437 org/10.5822/978-­1-­61091​-­175-­7 Labib, S. M., Browning, M. H. E. M., Rigolon, A., Helbich, M., & James, Oscilowicz, E., Anguelovski, I., Garcia Lamarca, M., Cole, H., Shokry, G., P. (2022). Nature's contributions in coping with a pandemic in the Perez de Pulgar, C., Arguelles Ramos, L., & Connolly, J. J. (2023). 21st century: A narrative review of evidence during COVID-­19. Grassroots mobilization for a just, green urban future: Building Science of the Total Environment, 833(January), 155095. https://doi. community infrastructure against green gentrification and dis- org/10.1016/j.scito​tenv.2022.155095 placement. Journal of Urban Affairs. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352​ Langemeyer, J., & Connolly, J. J. T. (2020). Weaving notions of justice into 166.2023.2180381 urban ecosystem services research and practice. Environmental Science Pascual, U., Balvanera, P., Díaz, S., Pataki, G., Roth, E., Stenseke, M., and Policy, 109, 1–­14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2020.03.021 Watson, R. T., Başak Dessane, E., Islar, M., Kelemen, E., Maris, V., Lliso, B., Lenzi, D., Muraca, B., Chan, K. M., & Pascual, U. (2022). Nature's Quaas, M., Subramanian, S. M., Wittmer, H., Adlan, A., Ahn, S. disvalues: What are they and why do they matter? Current Opinion in E., Al-­Hafedh, Y. S., Amankwah, E., Asah, S. T., … Yagi, N. (2017). Environmental Sustainability, 56, 101173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Valuing nature's contributions to people: The IPBES approach. cosust.2022.101173 Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 26–­27, 7–­16. https:// Maller, C. (2021). Re-­orienting nature-­based solutions with more-­ doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2016.12.006 than-­human thinking. Cities, 113(January), 103155. https://doi. Pérez del Pulgar, C., Anguelvoski, I., & Connolly, J. (2020). Toward a green org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103155 and playful city: Understanding the social and political production Maniatakou, S., Berg, H., Maneas, G., & Daw, T. M. (2020). Unravelling of children's relational wellbeing in Barcelona. Cities, 96(2020), diverse values of ecosystem services: A socio-­cultural valuation 102438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.102438 using Q methodology in Messenia. Greece. Sustainability, 12(24), 1–­ Pérez-­Álvarez, G. (2020). Historias de vidas obreras en el polo indus- 25. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122​410320 trial de Vitoria (País Vasco): del “milagro español” a la caída del Mansur, A. V., McDonald, R. I., Güneralp, B., Kim, H. J., de Oliveira, J. franquismo (1959–­1976). Izquierdas, 49, 892–­909. https://doi. A. P., Callaghan, C. T., Hamel, P., Kuiper, J. J., Wolff, M., Liebelt, V., org/10.4067/s0718​-­50492​02000​0100247 Martins, I. S., Elmqvist, T., & Pereira, H. M. (2022). Nature futures Piccolo, J. J. (2017). Intrinsic values in nature: Objective good or simply for the urban century: Integrating multiple values into urban man- half of an unhelpful dichotomy? Journal for Nature Conservation, 37, agement. Environmental Science and Policy, 131, 46–­56. https://doi. 8–­11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2017.02.007 org/10.1016/j.envsci.2022.01.013 Pineda-­Pinto, M., Frantzeskaki, N., & Nygaard, C. A. (2022). The potential McKeown, B., & Thomas, D. (2013). Q methodology (2nd ed.). Sage of nature-­based solutions to deliver ecologically just cities: Lessons Publications. for research and urban planning from a systematic literature re- Melanidis, M. S., & Hagerman, S. (2022). Competing narratives of nature-­ view. Ambio, 51(1), 167–­182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1328​0 -­021-­ based solutions : Leveraging the power of nature or dangerous dis- 01553​-­7 traction? Environmental Science and Policy, 132, 273–­281. https:// Rigolon, A., & Németh, J. (2019). Green gentrification or ‘just green doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2022.02.028 enough’: Do park location, size and function affect whether a Miller, J. R. (2005). Biodiversity conservation and the extinction of expe- place gentrifies or not? Urban Studies, 57(2), 402–­420. https://doi. rience. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 20(8), 430–­434. https://doi. org/10.1177/00420​98019​8 49380 org/10.1016/j.tree.2005.05.013 Rishbeth, C., & Birch, J. (2020). Urban nature and transnational lives. Muradian, R., & Pascual, U. (2018). A typology of elementary forms of Population, Space and Place, 27, e2416. https://doi.org/10.1002/ human-­nature relations: A contribution to the valuation debate. psp.2416 Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 35, 8–­14. https://doi. Robbins, P., & Krueger, R. (2000). Beyond bias? The promise and limits of org/10.1016/j.cosust.2018.10.014 Q method in human geography. The Professional Geographer, 52(4), Naess, A. (2008). Ecology of wisdom (A. Drengson & B. Devall, Eds.). 636–­6 48. https://doi.org/10.1111/0033-­0124.00252 Pinguin Random House UK. Rosol, M., Béal, V., & Mössner, S. (2017). Greenest cities? The (post-­)poli- Neidig, J., Anguelovski, I., Albaina, A., & Pascual, U. (2022). “We are tics of new urban environmental regimes. Environment and Planning the green capital”: Navigating the political and sustainability fix A, 49(8), 1710–­1718. https://doi.org/10.1177/03085​18X17​714843 narratives of urban greening. Cities, 131, 103999. https://doi. Sneegas, G. (2020). Making the case for critical Q methodology. The org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103999 Professional Geographer, 72(1), 78–­87. https://doi.org/10.1080/00330​ Neidig, J., Anguelovski, I., Lliso, B., & Pascual, U. (2023). Data from: 124.2019.1598271 Pluralizing environmental values for urban planning: How to un- Sneegas, G., Beckner, S., Brannstrom, C., Jepson, W., Lee, K., & cover the diversity of imaginaries about socio-­natures from Vitoria-­ Seghezzo, L. (2021). Using Q-­methodology in environmental sus- Gasteiz (Basque Country, Spain). Dryad Digital Repository. https:// tainability research: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review. doi.org/10.5061/dryad.qnk98​sfnj Ecological Economics, 180, 106864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecole​ Nielsen, J., de Bremond, A., Chowdury, R. R., Friss, C., Metternich, G., con.2020.106864 Meyfroidt, P., Murnoe, D., Pascual, U., & Thomson, A. (2019). Soga, M., & Gaston, K. J. (2016). Extinction of experience: The loss of Toward a normative land system science. Current Opinion in human-­nature interactions. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, Environmental Sustainability, 38, 1–­6. 14(2), 94–­101. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.1225 | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 20 People and Nature NEIDIG et al. Stenseke, M. (2018). Connecting ‘relational values’ and relational land- residents, Social Science & Medicine. Volume, 279(2021), 113964. scape approaches. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socsc​imed.2021.113964 35, 82–­88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2018.10.025 Tzoulas, K., Galan, J., Venn, S., Dennis, M., Pedroli, B., Mishra, H., Haase, Swyngedouw, E. (1996). The city as a hybrid: On nature, society and D., Pauleit, S., Niemelä, J., & James, P. (2021). A conceptual model cyborg urbanization. Capitalism, Nature, Socialism, 7(2), 65–­8 0. of the social–­ecological system of nature-­based solutions in urban https://doi.org/10.1080/10455​75960​9358679 environments. Ambio, 50(2), 335–­3 45. https://doi.org/10.1007/ Tadaki, M., Sinner, J., & Chan, K. M. A. (2017). Making sense of environ- s1328​0 -­020-­01380​-­2 mental values: A typology of concepts. Ecology and Society, 22(1):7. Wachsmuth, D., & Angelo, H. (2018). Green and gray: New ideologies https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-­0 8999​-­220107 of nature in urban sustainability policy. Annals of the American Teig, E., Amulya, J., Bardwell, L., Buchenau, M., Marshall, J. A., & Litt, J. S. Association of Geographers, 108(4), 1038–­1056. https://doi. (2009). Collective efficacy in Denver, Colorado: Strengthening neigh- org/10.1080/24694​452.2017.1417819 borhoods and health through community gardens. Health & Place, 15(4), Watts, S., & Stenner, P. (2012). Doing Q methodological research: Theory, 1115–­1122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healt​hplace.2009.06.003 method and interpretation. SAGE Publications Ltd. Temenos, C., & McCann, E. (2012). The local politics of policy mobility: While, A., Jonas, A. E. G., & Gibbs, D. (2004). The environment and the enter- Learning, persuasion, and the production of a municipal sustainabil- preneurial city: Searching for the urban “sustainability fix” in Manchester ity fix. Environment and Planning A, 44(6), 1389–­1406. https://doi. and Leeds. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28(3), org/10.1068/a44314 549–­569. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0309-­1317.​2004.​00535.x Termansen, M., Jacobs, S., Mwampamba, T. H., Ahn, S., Castro, A., Wiesel, I., Steele, W., & Houston, D. (2020). Cities of care: Introduction to Dendoncker, N., Ghazi, H., Gundimeda, H., Huambachano, M., Lee, a special issue. Cities, 105(June), 102844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. H., Mukherjee, N., Nemogá, G. R., Palomo, I., Pandit, R., Schaafsma, cities.2020.102844 M., Ngouhouo, J., Choi, A., Filyushkina, A., Hernández-­Blanco, M., Zabala, A. (2014). Qmethod: A package to explore human perspectives … González-­Jiménez, D. (2022). Chapter 3: The potential of val- using Q methodology. The R Journal, 6(2), 163–­173. https://journ​ uation. In P. Balvanera, U. Pascual, M. Christie, B. Baptiste, & D. al.r-­proje​c t.org/archi​ve/2014-­2/zabala.pdf González-­Jiménez (Eds.), Methodological assessment report on the di- Zabala, A., Sandbrook, C., & Mukherjee, N. (2018). When and how to verse values and valuation of nature of the intergovernmental science-­ use Q methodology to understand perspectives in conservation policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services (pp. 1–­170). research. Conservation Biology, 32(5), 1185–­1194. https://doi. IPBES secretariat. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6521298 org/10.1111/cobi.13123 Tozer, L., Hörschelmann, K., Anguelovski, I., Bulkeley, H., & Lazova, Y. (2020). Whose city? Whose nature? Towards inclusive nature-­based solution governance. Cities, 107, 102892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. cities.2020.102892 How to cite this article: Neidig, J., Anguelovski, I., Lliso, B., & Truong, S., Gray, T., & Ward, K. (2022). Enhancing urban nature and place-making in social housing through community gardening. Pascual, U. (2023). Pluralizing environmental values for urban Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 72(2022), 127586. https://doi. planning: How to uncover the diversity of imaginaries about org/10.1016/j.ufug.2022.127586 socio-­natures from Vitoria-­Gasteiz (Basque Country, Spain). Triguero-­Mas, M., Anguelovski, I., García-­Lamarca, M., Argüelles, L., Perez-­ People and Nature, 00, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/ del-­Pulgar, C., Shokry, G., Connolly, J. J. T., & Cole, H. V. S. (2021). Natural outdoor environments' health effects in gentrifying neighbor- pan3.10506 hoods: Disruptive green landscapes for underprivileged neighborhood | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License NEIDIG et al. People and Nature 21 APPENDIX TA B L E A 1 Original statements in Spanish. Item no. Original statement in Spanish Positive relationship between individuals and nature (relational value) #1 Cuando conecto con la naturaleza de Vitoria-­Gasteiz tengo una sensación de tranquilidad, soy más feliz. Me ayuda vivir una vida plena y buena #2 Los espacios verdes de Vitoria-­Gasteiz, como el Anillo Verde, son importantes para mi salud mental #3 Siento que la naturaleza y los paisajes de Vitoria-­Gasteiz constituyen una parte importante de mi identidad como persona #4 Cuidar de la naturaleza me ayuda a llevar una vida más plena #5 La naturaleza me da muchísimo más de lo que yo le puedo dar a ella. Si la trato bien, ella me lo devuelve #6 Pienso que la naturaleza es el origen del hombre, de donde vinimos. La naturaleza es como nuestra gran casa #7 Hay entornos naturales que me producen una sensación de armonía Positive relationship between humans within their social communities through nature (relational value) #8 Los espacios verdes de Vitoria-­Gasteiz ayudan a mejorar el sentido de comunidad #9 La naturaleza es parte de nuestra identidad como ciudad de Vitoria-­Gasteiz #10 Los parques de Vitoria-­Gasteiz son lugares donde puedo compartir experiencias con personas que son muy diferentes de mi #11 Si la naturaleza está bien, nosotros también estamos bien. La salud de nuestra comunidad depende del estado de la naturaleza #12 Somos responsables de los impactos que generamos en el medio ambiente porque pueden perjudicar a otras personas #13 Tenemos la obligación de cuidar de la naturaleza para las generaciones futuras Negative relationship between individuals and nature (relational disvalue) #14 La mayoría de las personas estamos perdiendo nuestra conexión con la naturaleza #15 Los espacios naturales dentro de las ciudades atraen suciedad, insectos, ratas y palomas. Esto no me gusta #16 Hay aspectos de la naturaleza que me dan miedo #17 No necesito pasar tiempo en espacios naturales para sentirme bien Negative relational bond between humans within their social communities through nature (relational disvalue) #18 Ahora que los espacios verdes de Vitoria-­Gasteiz están más llenos de gente debido a la pandemia, tienes que irte más lejos para estar solo. Esto no está bien #19 Por la noche normalmente no paseo por los parques de Vitoria-­Gasteiz. Intento evitarlos porque no me siento muy seguro/a #20 No voy a algunos parques de Vitoria-­Gasteiz por que suelen estar llenos de gente que no me gusta Positive framing of the instrumental value of NCP (instrumental value) #21 El Anillo Verde contribuye a generar turismo y beneficios económicos para la ciudad #22 Los huertos de los barrios y la agricultura urbana de Vitoria-­Gasteiz son importantes para una alimentación sana y de proximidad #23 La preservación de la naturaleza de Vitoria-­Gasteiz es sinónimo de calidad de vida para los ciudadanos de esta ciudad #24 Los parques urbanos de Vitoria-­Gasteiz ayudan a generar un entorno saludable. Tienen un impacto positivo en nuestra salud corporal #25 Los parques de Vitoria-­Gasteiz son espacios que me ofrecen la oportunidad de hacer ejercicio como correr, andar en bicicleta, o patinar. Me hacen sentir muy activo/a #26 Proteger la naturaleza nos ayudará a prevenir futuras crisis económicas causadas por la pérdida de especies y el cambio climático #27 La naturaleza contribuye de forma notable a mejorar la calidad del aire #28 Proteger la naturaleza nos ayudará a reducir el riesgo de nuevas pandemias y otras emergencias de salud pública #29 Los espacios naturales me gustan para relajarme. Son espacios donde puedo pasar muchas horas Negative framing of instrumental values of NCP (instrumental disvalue) #30 No me gusta el Anillo Verde porque siento que está sucio y llenos de mosquitos #31 Creo que Vitoria-­Gasteiz se gasta demasiado dinero publico en programas para conservar la naturaleza #32 Pienso que los parques en el centro y en las afueras de Vitoria-­Gasteiz son un aburrimiento. No tienen demasiado valour para mi #33 Creo que parte del Anillo Verde debería de usarse para construir viviendas más baratas para la gente de Vitoria-­Gasteiz #34 Por lo general prefiero ver una película con un buen amigo que dar un paseo por la naturaleza con ese mismo amigo Intrinsic value of nature #35 No creo que la función principal de la naturaleza sea servir a los humanos. La naturaleza tiene valour en si misma #36 Los animales se merecen tener derechos (Continues) | 25758314, 0, Downloaded from https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pan3.10506 by Readcube (Labtiva Inc.), Wiley Online Library on [27/07/2023]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License 22 People and Nature NEIDIG et al. TA B L E A 1 (Continued) Item no. Original statement in Spanish Human-­nature relational models #37 No pasa nada si perdemos bosques y humedales, si mantengamos lo suficiente para los humanos #38 Los seres humanos tenemos el derecho a usar la naturaleza de la manera que queramos #39 Prefiero vivir en un entorno urbano a un entorno rural TA B L E A 2 Factor loadings for each Q-­sort and factor. Q-­sort loadings on each factor Number Q-­sort Factor A Factor B Factor C Factor D Q1 0.8236a 0.4065 0.1799 0.1714 a Q2 0.5196 0.6880 0.1696 0.1180 Q3 0.7939a 0.4251 0.0146 0.2215 Q4 0.2791 0.6965a 0.1906 0.2882 Q5 0.1956 0.6064a 0.0115 0.5384 a Q6 0.6765 0.3432 0.3236 0.2864 Q7 0.6281a 0.4577 0.3747 0.0773 a Q8 0.2019 0.5723 0.3140 0.3919 a Q9 0.1540 0.0845 0.7229 −0.1978 Q10 0.7136a 0.3678 0.2203 0.1934 Q11 0.7466a 0.3894 0.2302 0.2760 Q12 0.5343 0.7080a 0.1920 0.0235 a Q13 0.7173 0.3769 0.2472 0.1183 Q14 0.1249 0.8964a −0.0191 0.0727 b Q15 0.5115 0.5913 0.4186 0.0956 Q16 0.7030a −0.0521 0.0016 −0.1436 Q17 0.3338 0.6893a 0.2048 0.2088 a Q18 0.6843 0.4219 0.0656 0.3069 Q19 0.2436 0.1863 0.7315a 0.3847 a Q20 0.3547 0.5606 0.2821 0.0880 Q21b 0.3322 0.6333 0.5405 −0.1005 Q22 0.2760 0.4866 −0.0888 0.6132a Q23 0.1096 0.0549 0.0276 0.8752a a Q24 0.3867 0.7020 0.1251 0.2027 a Q25 0.3956 0.6477 0.2690 0.1352 Q26 0.6607a 0.2567 0.5322 0.2078 Q27 0.7752a 0.4476 0.2623 0.1040 Q28 0.5556a 0.2825 0.2428 0.2186 a Q29 0.7283 0.3745 0.3587 0.2223 Number of loading Q-­sorts ∑ = 27 13 10 2 2 Percentage of explained variance ∑ = 73.63 28.95 25.73 10.10 8.85 Factor 8.40 7.46 2.93 2.57 EIgenvalue a The flagged Q-­sorts for each factor. b Cofounded Q-­sorts (they loaded significantly on more than one factor).