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.