New foundations for ecological economics

Spash, Clive L.

doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.02.004

Cited by 214 publications

(207 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

173

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In recent years, articles have been published envisaging the future of ecological economics (Spash, 2011;Anderson and M'Gonigle, 2012;Spash, 2012). These articles have echoed and increased the large number of publications analyzing ecological economics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of course, these methods need to share the same basic ontologies (Ahmed and Sil, 2012;Spash, 2012). Here, I combine a hermeneutic of statistical treatment of texts with an historical approach to discourse production.…”

Section: 2mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, the notion of ecosystem services was coined as a metaphor to appeal to public opinion (Norgaard, 2010). Spash (2009Spash ( , 2011Spash ( , 2012Spash ( , 2013b termed this approach 'New Environmental Pragmatism': "the most important role for research is to be pragmatic and employ whatever approaches are effective to inform the policy community about environmental problems and their solution" Ryan, 2012, p.1101, authors' emphasis). Although there is a lack of consensus on this approach at the community level (Douai and Vivien, 2009;Spash and Ryan, 2012), increasing references to ecosystem services through a monetary valuation perspective can be interpreted as a sign that New Environmental Pragmatism is growing within ecological economics.…”

Section: The Risks Of Pragmatismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These articles have echoed and increased the large number of publications analyzing ecological economics. In this line of research, we can distinguish historical analysis and reports from personal experience (Spash, 1999;Pearce, 2002;Costanza, 2003;Røpke, 2004Røpke, , 2005Spash, 2006) and from more normative works defining the goal of ecological economics (Costanza, 1989;Norgaard, 1989;Van den Bergh, 2001;Özkaynak et al, 2002;Gowdy and Erickson, 2005a;Spash, 2012;Martinez-Alier, (forthcoming)). Although both kinds of research aim at finding common ground for the community of researchers, they also employ discourse on the reasons why we should adopt an ecological economics approach towards environmental problems (Luks, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The second generation of ecological economics: How far has the apple fallen from the tree?

Plumecocq

2014

Ecological Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International audienceThis paper examines the discourse produced in the academic journal Ecological Economics from its inception in 1989, and compares this discourse with that of the field of environmental economics. I used methods for discourse analysis (Alceste and Iramuteq) on 6,308 abstracts of papers published in four journals – namely Ecological Economics, the Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Environmental Values, and Environmental and Resource Economics, published between 1989 and 2013. The results suggest that the discourse of ecological economics and environmental economics have grown closer over time. The semantic classification of co-occurrent terms used in Ecological Economics indicates increasing significance of the notions of ecosystem services and of monetary valuation. I argue that this trend is parallel to Costanza’s career-path, which suggests the rise of a tacit recognition of the New Environmental Pragmatic scientific approach. I conclude with some of the implications for EE of promoting this kind of discourse to such an extent

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: 2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Risks Of Pragmatismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The second generation of ecological economics: How far has the apple fallen from the tree?

Plumecocq

2014

Ecological Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Here, assistance can be sought from scholars who re-open the debate on the basis of ecological economics (e.g. Spash, 2012).…”

Section: Core Questions To Advance a Holistic Perspectivementioning

confidence: 99%

Conceptualizing sustainable development and global supply chains

Boons

Baumann

Hall

2012

Ecological Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper introduces a holistic approach to the study of sustainable development of global product chains. We first present a number of perspectives on this topic from disciplines such as economic geography, management science, sociology and environmental sciences. Each of these approaches brings in a specific focus: the consequences of geographical dispersion of economic activities, measurement of ecological and social impact, managing sustainability in supply chains, and power asymmetry among economic actors. Until now, these disciplinary research lines have remained unconnected. We argue that ecological economics provides a promising background for a more holistic conceptualization. To this end, we formulate five basic questions that serve to advance the study of sustainability throughout the product chain by connecting the foci of the identified scientific disciplines. The aim of advancing a holistic perspective has guided the selection of papers for this special subsection, which are introduced throughout the text.

show abstract

Unlocking environmental accounting for healthy future landscapes

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Competing land-use demands for agriculture and nature conservation is one of the most significant global challenges. To improve the health of landscapes, collaborative transdisciplinary solutions are required.2. Environmental accounting is an attractive governance approach for helping to deliver healthy future landscapes; however, the diversity of approaches to environmental accounting makes this field complex to navigate, which limits transdisciplinary collaboration and impedes implementation. 3. We seek to address this issue by presenting a new framework to clarify environmental accounting. This framework classifies the currently disparate branches of the literature into four newly described environmental accounting types: Organisational Environmental Management Accounting, Organisational Environmental Reporting Accounting, Area Environmental Management Accounting and Area Environmental Reporting Accounting.4. The framework is then used to discuss, across multiple scales (organisational, ecosystem and national), existing environmental accounting tools which could assist in delivering healthy future landscapes, and areas for future research.5. Finally, we demonstrate the potential for environmental accounting research approaches (materiality assessment, dialogic accounting and critical accounting) to assist in defining healthy future landscapes.6. This paper presents the first substantial exploration of environmental accounting in the landscapes context and presents a research agenda to progress this exciting area of transdisciplinary research.

show abstract

New foundations for ecological economics

Cited by 214 publications

References 56 publications

The second generation of ecological economics: How far has the apple fallen from the tree?

The second generation of ecological economics: How far has the apple fallen from the tree?

Conceptualizing sustainable development and global supply chains

Unlocking environmental accounting for healthy future landscapes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About