TY - CHAP

T1 - Why the measurement of species diversity requires prior value judgements

AU - Baumgärtner, Stefan

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © Cambridge University Press 2007 and Cambridge University Press, 2009.

PY - 2007/1/1

Y1 - 2007/1/1

N2 - Introduction In the discussion about biodiversity loss and conservation (cf. Wilson 1988; McNeely et al. 1990; Watson et al. 1995; Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005), the two issues of (i) quantitative measurement of biodiversity and (ii) its economic valuation play a major role. Concerning the first issue, there exists an extensive ecological literature (see, for example, Pielou 1975; Magurran 1988; Purvis and Hector 2000) to which, lately, economists have made important contributions (e.g. Solow et al. 1993; Weitzman 1992, 1993, 1998; Weikard 1998, 1999, 2002; Nehring and Puppe 2002, 2004). Concerning the second issue, there also exists an extensive and still growing literature (e.g. Hanley and Spash 1993; Pearce and Moran 1994; Smith 1996; Goulder and Kennedy 1997; Nunes and van den Bergh 2001; Freeman 2003). The conventional wisdom on the relation between these two issues seems to be that the quantitative measurement of biodiversity is a value-free task which precedes the valuation of biodiversity. In contrast to this view, I shall argue in this chapter that the measurement of biodiversity requires prior value judgements about biodiversity and its role in ecological-economic systems. The argument proceeds as follows. Section 2 briefly discusses why and how biodiversity can be thought of as an economic good, so as to provide a background for the discussion of the measurement of biodiversity. Section 3 then surveys different ecological and economic measures of species diversity. A conceptual comparison of those reveals systematic differences between the two.

AB - Introduction In the discussion about biodiversity loss and conservation (cf. Wilson 1988; McNeely et al. 1990; Watson et al. 1995; Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005), the two issues of (i) quantitative measurement of biodiversity and (ii) its economic valuation play a major role. Concerning the first issue, there exists an extensive ecological literature (see, for example, Pielou 1975; Magurran 1988; Purvis and Hector 2000) to which, lately, economists have made important contributions (e.g. Solow et al. 1993; Weitzman 1992, 1993, 1998; Weikard 1998, 1999, 2002; Nehring and Puppe 2002, 2004). Concerning the second issue, there also exists an extensive and still growing literature (e.g. Hanley and Spash 1993; Pearce and Moran 1994; Smith 1996; Goulder and Kennedy 1997; Nunes and van den Bergh 2001; Freeman 2003). The conventional wisdom on the relation between these two issues seems to be that the quantitative measurement of biodiversity is a value-free task which precedes the valuation of biodiversity. In contrast to this view, I shall argue in this chapter that the measurement of biodiversity requires prior value judgements about biodiversity and its role in ecological-economic systems. The argument proceeds as follows. Section 2 briefly discusses why and how biodiversity can be thought of as an economic good, so as to provide a background for the discussion of the measurement of biodiversity. Section 3 then surveys different ecological and economic measures of species diversity. A conceptual comparison of those reveals systematic differences between the two.

KW - Sustainability sciences, Management & Economics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84926978145&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/056d62c2-2110-3120-9a34-fd8f73065ecc/

U2 - 10.1017/CBO9780511551079.013

DO - 10.1017/CBO9780511551079.013

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9780521154659

SP - 293

EP - 310

BT - Biodiversity economics

A2 - Kontoleon, Andreas

A2 - Pascual, Unai

A2 - Swanson, Timothy M.

PB - Cambridge University Press

CY - Cambridge

ER -