ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR AND AGAINST VALUING ECOSYSTEMS
Hello everyone! I recently had a thought-provoking session about valuing ecosystems, and I wanted to share it with all of you. It’s a complex topic with arguments for and against, but I believe it’s crucial to understand the value of our natural world and its impact on our daily lives. Most of the arguments presented here were derived after following the SPERI Annual Lecture of George Monbiot (2014)
Arguments in favor of valuing ecosystems
Argument 1
Valuing ecosystems in economic terms is important because it helps to recognize the valuable services they provide to humans, which are often overlooked or taken for granted. Coral reefs, for example, provide important ecosystem services such as food, tourism, and shoreline protection, which support the economies of many countries around the world. By valuing these ecosystem services, we can ensure that they are protected and maintained for future generations, which will ultimately lead to greater economic prosperity and well-being.
Argument 2
Valuing ecosystems can also help to incentivize sustainable practices and reduce environmental degradation. By assigning economic value to ecosystem services, we can create market-based incentives for sustainable land use practices, such as conservation and restoration, and discourage activities that degrade ecosystems, such as deforestation and overfishing. This can help to promote the long-term sustainability of natural resources and support the development of more resilient and sustainable economies.
Argument 3
Valuing ecosystems in economic terms can help inform policy decisions and promote more effective management of natural resources. By understanding the economic value of ecosystem services, decision-makers can make more informed decisions about the trade-offs between different land uses and resource allocations. This can help to ensure that natural resources are managed in a way that maximizes their benefits for society while minimizing their negative impacts on the environment.
Arguments against valuing ecosystems
Argument 1 — Power Dynamics
Valuing ecosystems as commodities reinforces power dynamics by creating a market for the trading of natural resources, which may benefit certain actors over others. Those who have control over natural resources, such as landowners or corporations, may benefit from the marketization of ecosystems, while others, such as local communities or marginalized groups, may be excluded from the benefits. Furthermore, regulatory intervention is still required to regulate the so-called market, which can create and reinforce power dynamics. The regulatory framework could be biased in favor of certain actors or industries, leading to an unequal distribution of benefits and costs. In this way, valuing ecosystems as commodities could exacerbate existing power dynamics and fail to address the underlying issues of social and environmental inequality.
Argument 2 — Disembedding Complexity
Ecosystems are complex, interconnected systems that are dependent on each other for their function and resilience. The natural processes that occur in an ecosystem, such as nutrient cycling and predator-prey relationships, are interlinked and cannot be separated without altering the entire system. The loss of biodiversity, for example, can have cascading effects on the entire ecosystem, leading to a loss of ecosystem services and reducing the resilience of the system as a whole. By valuing ecosystems as separate commodities, there is a risk of overlooking the interdependence and complexity of these systems, which could lead to unintended consequences and negative outcomes. It is important to recognize the holistic nature of ecosystems and the importance of preserving their diversity and interconnectivity. Failure to do so could have significant negative impacts on human well-being and the health of the planet.
Argument 3 — Not All Commensurable
Ecosystems may have values that are not purely economic or utilitarian, such as intrinsic values like solace, shared social values, recreation, and cultural significance. These values are difficult to quantify and monetize but are important to many people and communities. The commensurability of intrinsic values is often contested and subject to different interpretations and perspectives. For example, what one person may consider a valuable ecosystem service, such as recreation or aesthetic beauty, may not be valued equally by others. Thus, the process of valuing ecosystems is not static.
I do hope you enjoyed reading!
Merci!
