Understanding the diversity of values of “Nature’s contributions to people”: insights from the IPBES Assessment of Europe and Central Asia
Research output: Journal contributions › Scientific review articles › Research
Standard
In: Sustainability Science, Vol. 14, No. 5, 02.09.2019, p. 1267–1282.
Research output: Journal contributions › Scientific review articles › Research
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Understanding the diversity of values of “Nature’s contributions to people”
T2 - insights from the IPBES Assessment of Europe and Central Asia
AU - Christie, Mike
AU - Martín-López, Berta
AU - Church, Andrew
AU - Siwicka, Ewa
AU - Szymonczyk, Pawel
AU - Mena Sauterel, Jasmin
N1 - Arts and Humanities Research Council : AH/I507655/1, AH/J006866/1 Publisher Copyright: © 2019, The Author(s).
PY - 2019/9/2
Y1 - 2019/9/2
N2 - Assessments of the value of nature (e.g., TEEB. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: ecological and economic foundations, London, 2010) have tended to focus on the instrumental values of ecosystem services. However, recent academic and policy debate have highlighted a wider range of values (e.g., relational and intrinsic values), valuation methods (e.g., socio-cultural methods), and worldviews [e.g., indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) systems]. To account for these new perspectives, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) has developed the concept of ‘Nature’s contributions to people’ (NCP), which aims to be a more inclusive approach to understanding and accounting for the diversity of values held by different stakeholders. In this paper, we aim to critically appraise the merits of the IPBES conceptual framework by reviewing of the findings the IPBES Europe and Central Asia (ECA) assessment. Our objectives are: (1) To review and assess the instrumental and relational values of NCP in Europe and Central Asia? (2) To consider what additional insights into the value of NCP are gained through the inclusion of socio-cultural valuations and ILK? Our analysis demonstrates that the ECA assessment captures a wide range of instrumental and relational values of NCP; however, we acknowledge variation in the availability of this value evidence. We also highlight new insights that can be uncovered through the adoptions of socio-cultural valuation methods and analysis of ILK knowledge. We conclude that the NCP paradigm, with its focus on instrumental and relational values, treats values more holistically than previous assessments such as TEEB (2010). For example, by giving a ‘voice’ to ILK holders, we demonstrated new types of NCP such as carrion removal, along with evidence of relational values including sense of place, identity, symbolic values and sacredness. While the ECA assessments may be defined as an example of a ‘Multiple evidence base’ approach to valuation of ecosystem assessments, the ECA assessment fails to demonstrate how to incorporate this wider range of values in decision-making processes.
AB - Assessments of the value of nature (e.g., TEEB. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: ecological and economic foundations, London, 2010) have tended to focus on the instrumental values of ecosystem services. However, recent academic and policy debate have highlighted a wider range of values (e.g., relational and intrinsic values), valuation methods (e.g., socio-cultural methods), and worldviews [e.g., indigenous and local knowledge (ILK) systems]. To account for these new perspectives, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) has developed the concept of ‘Nature’s contributions to people’ (NCP), which aims to be a more inclusive approach to understanding and accounting for the diversity of values held by different stakeholders. In this paper, we aim to critically appraise the merits of the IPBES conceptual framework by reviewing of the findings the IPBES Europe and Central Asia (ECA) assessment. Our objectives are: (1) To review and assess the instrumental and relational values of NCP in Europe and Central Asia? (2) To consider what additional insights into the value of NCP are gained through the inclusion of socio-cultural valuations and ILK? Our analysis demonstrates that the ECA assessment captures a wide range of instrumental and relational values of NCP; however, we acknowledge variation in the availability of this value evidence. We also highlight new insights that can be uncovered through the adoptions of socio-cultural valuation methods and analysis of ILK knowledge. We conclude that the NCP paradigm, with its focus on instrumental and relational values, treats values more holistically than previous assessments such as TEEB (2010). For example, by giving a ‘voice’ to ILK holders, we demonstrated new types of NCP such as carrion removal, along with evidence of relational values including sense of place, identity, symbolic values and sacredness. While the ECA assessments may be defined as an example of a ‘Multiple evidence base’ approach to valuation of ecosystem assessments, the ECA assessment fails to demonstrate how to incorporate this wider range of values in decision-making processes.
KW - Sustainability Science
KW - IPBES
KW - NCP
KW - Valuation
KW - Nature
KW - Ecosystems Research
KW - Ecosystem services
KW - Nature’s contribution to people
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85069213187&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/d9727f2c-3dfe-3a42-87ba-e29e71696ad3/
U2 - 10.1007/s11625-019-00716-6
DO - 10.1007/s11625-019-00716-6
M3 - Scientific review articles
AN - SCOPUS:85069213187
VL - 14
SP - 1267
EP - 1282
JO - Sustainability Science
JF - Sustainability Science
SN - 1862-4065
IS - 5
ER -