The Practical Fit of Concepts: Ecosystem Services and the Value of Nature

Abstract

Conceptual innovations are a central feature of global environmental governance. Confronting degradation and unsustainability, scholars and practitioners turn to new concepts to identify, make sense of, and chart new directions towards meaningful governance solutions. But why do some concepts create lasting changes to governance institutions and governance practices, while others do not? Ideational theories of international relations highlight the importance of normative fit. In this paper we analysis the concept of ecosystem services to show that normative fit is just one dimension of governance fitness, which also includes practical fitness. Ecologists and economists coined the concept of ecosystem services to make biodiversity conservation intelligible to decision-makers versed in economic thinking. It has gained rhetorical traction, but ultimately failed to change how we treat nature because it lacks practical fitness. We interviewed fifty-six individuals working in twelve international organizations that have sought to translate the concept of ecosystem services into practice. Our analysis reveals forces limiting practical fit and constraining institutional uptake at three levels of analysis: structural, organizational, and agent. We present a cautionary tale that pushes scholars to carefully consider practical fit alongside normative fit when suggesting new concepts as organizing frames for how we govern global environmental challenges.

Invasive Species in Post-2020 Global Environmental Politics

“…How might these consequences shape IAS governance boundaries within the international system? These questions align with and advance emerging GEP research examining how problem structures and frames in environmental governance shape how, where, and when a problem can or will be governed in international arenas (Stevenson et al 2021).…”

Do planning concepts matter? A Lacanian interpretation of the urban village in a British context

“…Many critics and policymakers are eager to interpret new concepts based on their own knowledge system before the popularity disappears (McCann and Ward, 2011). However, concepts need both a normative fit of blending into the existing discourse and a practical fit of translating into an actionable program to retain lasting popularity (Stevenson et al, 2021). Although new concepts might be as ephemeral as the British ‘urban village’, which faded after its popularity of nearly 15 years, their legacy remains for a significantly longer duration if some ideas can be implemented in (re)creating the built environment.…”

Indigenous Meanings of Provenance in the Context of Alternative Food Movements and Supply-Chain Traceability: A Review

“…Indeed, the Western concept of "conservation" cannot be translated, yet indigenous equivalents are often framed under the terms of "respecting nature" or "taking care of things", but whether they fall under the Western measure of conservation is a long-standing question (Gonzales 2000). Ecologists and economists coined the concept of ecosystem services to make biodiversity conservation intelligible to decision-makers versed in economic thinking but unlike indigenous cosmology, ecosystem service grounds environmental decisions in financial and economic modes of reasoning which further delimits ecosystem to economic benefits (Stevenson et al 2021). In indigenous cosmology, "Mother Nature", "respecting nature or taking care of things" is not a discrete or special activity; instead, they are all interconnected and that is why they are not apparent as such or measured specifically.…”