Discussion
Overall, our sample endorsed many elements of a non-dominant environmental worldview. Both forestry and non-forestry students generally affirmed the non-anthropocentric belief that some parts of nature have intrinsic value and direct moral standing, and endorsed the non-dualistic belief that humans are part of the natural world. However, whereas non-forestry students generally rejected the idea that humans dominate over nature, forestry students generally accepted this idea. In this regard, forestry students largely aligned with the dominant Eurocentric Western view that humans are at the top of a hierarchy over nature.
Among all students, virtue was the most highly rated mode of moral reasoning, suggesting students do not only see environmental decision-making as a calculation of benefits relative to costs. Nonetheless, forestry students did strongly endorse utilitarian reasoning, and more forestry than non-forestry students indicated utilitarianism as their preferred mode of moral reasoning.
On the whole, although forestry students are in some ways more strongly aligned with a dominant environmental worldview than non-forestry students, we suggest this is better understood as a difference of degree, rather than kind. Our findings corroborate with past research demonstrating generational shifts in forestry away from a strict resource-commodity orientation, and toward an ecosystem perspective emphasizing and valuing the holistic and aesthetic properties of forests (Xu and Bengston 1997, Brown and Harris 2000; Martin and Steelman 2004). The current study can be situated in this body of research, documenting the continuation and ongoing evolution of a trajectory of worldview diversification that initiated several decades ago. However, our study also builds on this work by articulating the characteristics of environmental worldview shift in more detailed philosophical terms.
Forestry students reported slightly less dualistic beliefs than non-forestry students, according to their rating for the BN worldview factor. This was an interesting finding, and replicate studies in other NR settings would be required to determine if this is a stable pattern. By way of explanation, we speculate that the difference may relate to the breakdown of non-forestry majors, which included basic scientific disciplines such as biology and zoology. While students in more applied, interdisciplinary NR majors, including forestry, may have been exposed to non-dualistic discourses, e.g., around socio-ecological systems or human dimensions of natural resources, students in the more basic science programs may have less exposure to these frameworks. This is a hypothesis for testing in future studies.
In an exploratory capacity, this study suggests interesting trends that merit investigation at a broader scale. Our results suggest there is already some worldview diversity in NR at OSU, which inspires the hypothesis that similar diversity might also exist in other undergraduate NR programs. Yet this hypothesis also leads us to question whether current NR programs are set up to support students with diverse worldviews. Enrollments in traditional NR programs, including forestry, have been dropping (Sharik et al. 2015, Bal and Sharik 2019). This may be, in part, because incoming students do not find resonance in the ethical, metaphysical, and epistemological orientations of NR programs. Institutionally, NR remains largely aligned with dominant (anthropocentric, dualistic, hierarchical, utilitarian, mechanistic) values and beliefs (Crist 2019). It may be important to consider how NR programs could re-define themselves to remain relevant and attract incoming students.
One strategy might be to increase offerings in the humanities within NR programs. Overall, our sample reported positive attitudes toward the humanities, yet most respondents were unsure or did not want humanities studies as part of their degree program. This finding suggests NR students recognize the value of alternative ways of knowing, but still believe science is sufficient to understand and manage interactions between humans and the environment. This view is not consistent with scholarship suggesting a rich array of disciplinary perspectives is required to address wicked environmental challenges (Allen and Gould 1968, Brown et al. 2010, Balint et al. 2011, Hulme 2011). There are many ways NR programs might be expanded to incorporate the humanities. For example, readings in environmental philosophy, ethics, or history could be integrated into the curricula of introductory, elective, or capstone courses. Programs might also develop short courses or one-credit seminars that feature guest lecturers from humanities programs across campus. By these or other channels, integrating scholarship from the humanities into NR programs may equip students not only to become better environmental problem-solvers, but also to build vocabularies and skills that allow them to express and critically evaluate aspects of both dominant and non-dominant worldviews. In this way, NR programs can create space for, and give voice to, diverse people expressing diverse perspectives.
Finally, students entering NR fields should be appreciated as complex individuals who bring different values, beliefs, and ways of knowing. Programs that do not intentionally create space for diverse perspectives may alienate students who hold alternative values and beliefs, or assimilate them to prevailing institutional norms, thus flattening an important yet often invisible and unacknowledged dimension of diversity (e.g., see discussions in Wolsko et al. 2006, Marvasti and McKinney 2011; also Lee 2019). Educators need to understand the environmental worldviews of their students in order to meet aspiring NR professionals where they are, designing programs that broaden students’ horizons while also nurturing their unique beliefs and experiences. We challenge readers to reflect on current diversity efforts, and ask how NR might at once remain committed to reducing social inequities, while also considering invisible but nonetheless critical elements of diversity. We encourage the NR community to broaden its definition of diversity to include environmental worldviews by actively recruiting, retaining, and supporting students who represent diverse worldviews.