TY - CHAP

T1 - Ecological economics perspectives on ecosystem services valuation

AU - Gómez-Baggethun, Erik

AU - Martín-López, Berta

PY - 2015/9/25

Y1 - 2015/9/25

N2 - Interest in ecosystem services valuation has grown steadily since the 1990s and gained renewed attention after the launch of the international initiative The Economics of Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity (TEEB). Ecological Economics is the journal that hosts the largest number of papers on ecosystem services valuation (Abson et al., 2014) and yet this topic remains a highly divisive question among ecological economists (Spangenberg and Settele, 2010; Baveye et al., 2013; Kallis et al., 2013). Costanza et al.’s (1997) study on the monetary value of the world’s ecosystems divided ecological economists between those who accept valuing nature in monetary terms as a pragmatic choice, and those who reject it on methodological, ethical or political grounds (Toman, 1998; Spash, 2008). After years of polarized debates, the impasse in the valuation debate is slowly giving way to discussions that aim to define specific conditions under which monetary valuation may or may not be appropriate. This includes considerations on whether valuations are scientifically sound (Baveye et al., 2013), socially just (Martinez-Alier, 2002; Boeraeve et al., 2015), or ethically fair (Jax et al., 2013; Luck et al., 2012).

AB - Interest in ecosystem services valuation has grown steadily since the 1990s and gained renewed attention after the launch of the international initiative The Economics of Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity (TEEB). Ecological Economics is the journal that hosts the largest number of papers on ecosystem services valuation (Abson et al., 2014) and yet this topic remains a highly divisive question among ecological economists (Spangenberg and Settele, 2010; Baveye et al., 2013; Kallis et al., 2013). Costanza et al.’s (1997) study on the monetary value of the world’s ecosystems divided ecological economists between those who accept valuing nature in monetary terms as a pragmatic choice, and those who reject it on methodological, ethical or political grounds (Toman, 1998; Spash, 2008). After years of polarized debates, the impasse in the valuation debate is slowly giving way to discussions that aim to define specific conditions under which monetary valuation may or may not be appropriate. This includes considerations on whether valuations are scientifically sound (Baveye et al., 2013), socially just (Martinez-Alier, 2002; Boeraeve et al., 2015), or ethically fair (Jax et al., 2013; Luck et al., 2012).

KW - Sustainability Science

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84957991365&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4337/9781783471416.00015

DO - 10.4337/9781783471416.00015

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:85087718368

SN - 9781783471409

SP - 260

EP - 282

BT - Handbook of Ecological Economics

A2 - Martinez-Alier, Joan

A2 - Muradian, Roldan

PB - Edward Elgar Publishing

ER -