A new valuation school: Integrating diverse values of nature in resource and land use decisions

Abstract

A B S T R A C TWe are increasingly confronted with severe social and economic impacts of environmental degradation all over the world. From a valuation perspective, environmental problems and conflicts originate from trade-offs http://dx.Ecosystem Services (xxxx) xxxx-xxxx 2212-0416/ Ecosystem services Intrinsic value Benefits of nature Quality of life Participation Social and environmental justice Decision supportbetween values. The urgency and importance to integrate nature's diverse values in decisions and actions stand out more than ever.Valuation, in its broad sense of 'assigning importance', is inherently part of most decisions on natural resource and land use. Scholars from different traditions -while moving from heuristic interdisciplinary debate to applied transdisciplinary science-now acknowledge the need for combining multiple disciplines and methods to represent the diverse set of values of nature. This growing group of scientists and practitioners share the ambition to explore how combinations of ecological, socio-cultural and economic valuation tools can support real-life resource and land use decision-making.The current sustainability challenges and the ineffectiveness of single-value approaches to offer relief demonstrate that continuing along a single path is no option. We advocate for the adherence of a plural valuation culture and its establishment as a common practice, by contesting and complementing ineffective and discriminatory single-value approaches. In policy and decision contexts with a willingness to improve sustainability, integrated valuation approaches can be blended in existing processes, whereas in contexts of power asymmetries or environmental conflicts, integrated valuation can promote the inclusion of diverse values through action research and support the struggle for social and environmental justice.The special issue and this editorial synthesis paper bring together lessons from pioneer case studies and research papers, synthesizing main challenges and setting out priorities for the years to come for the field of integrated valuation.

Exploring intrinsic, instrumental, and relational values for sustainable management of social-ecological systems

“…Exploring plural values beyond instrumental values is gaining momentum in social-ecological systems and ecosystem services research (Chan et al 2016, Kenter 2016a, Jacobs et al 2016, Jones et al 2016, Pascual et al 2017, Arias-Arévalo et al 2018. Instrumental values represent the value of ecosystems as merely means to an end and are often measured in monetary terms.…”

“…In recent years, ecosystem services valuation scholars have adhered to value pluralism: the recognition of different and often conflicting value domains that are neither reducible to each other nor to some ultimate value (Gómez-Baggethun and Martín-López 2015, Jacobs et al 2016, Kenter 2016a, Pascual et al 2017, Arias-Arévalo et al 2018. The spectrum of ecosystems valuation has broadened through the integration of relational values, which are those concerns associated with relationships and responsibilities between people or between nature and people (Chan et al 2016).…”

Ecosystem services and biodiversity trends in Mozambique as a consequence of land cover change

“…However, their ability to support mankind is being threatened by the increasing demand of land for agriculture, forest, industrial, and urban areas (Halpern et al 2008;Kareiva et al 2011). Considerable efforts have been carried out to draw attention to the importance of preserving natural capital, and also to providing useful information for decision-making through biophysical (Bai et al 2013;Leh et al 2013) and economic valuation studies of ES (Kubiszewski et al 2013;Frélichová et al 2014;Jacobs et al 2016;Kindu et al 2016). ES mapping tools and quantitative biophysical and economic indicators make ES values visible thereby helping to assess the trade-offs associated with these interactions Polasky 2009, 2011;Maes et al 2012;Burkhard et al 2013).…”

Welcoming different perspectives in IPBES: “Nature’s contributions to people” and “Ecosystem services”

“…For instance, a large number of national and international policies are already actively integrating ecosystem services generation and interactions into planning and management, which is a crucial achievement for reaching sustainability goals (e.g., Bai et al 2016, Beery et al 2016). In the same way, multiple values are already being included in ecosystem services assessments (Jacobs et al 2016, AriasArévalo et al 2017. Secondly, as pointed out by Braat (2018), the Díaz et al (2018a) paper proposes but does not provide substantial evidence that the nature's contributions to people framework will prove to be more useful that the ecosystem services concept.…”