The rationale for moving beyond monetization in valuing ecosystem services

Ecosystem services: Value is in the eye of the beholder

“…When changes in ES are monetized, tradeoffs among policy alternatives become more transparent (Calow ), ideally reducing both uncertainty and unintended consequences. Despite the uneasiness with and perceived shortcomings of neoclassical economics (Kapustka and McCormick ), environmental protection will be well served by embracing the values of ES as seen in the eyes of the beholder.…”

Ecosystem services, environmental stressors, and decision making: How far have we got?

“…Valuation was considered as part of the broader context and different viewpoints on ecosystem service valuation and types of valuation methods were discussed. In addition to reflections in Munns et al (this issue) and Moore et al (this issue), these discussions resulted in 3 opinion pieces by workshop participants that outline the case for valuation of ecosystem services based solely on monetization (Calow ) versus inclusion of nonmonetized values (Kapustka and McCormick ; Munns and Rea ).…”

Why money matters in ecological valuation

“…Put a value on the services that we enjoy from ecosystems and there is a better chance of showing their importance in economic and social development (Norgaard ). Yet there are still concerns that the monetization of these services is at best inappropriate and at worst flawed on ethical grounds and in terms of basic principles (Kapustka and McCormick ). Here, I argue that these views are missing the point about the need for a transparent approach to valuation.…”

“…Kapustka and McCormick () raise even more fundamental concerns about the market model: that markets often fail to deliver because of externalities and this leads to the overexploitation of nature, that we do not operate as rationally as we should in making decisions based on preferences, and that aggregating across the people affected misses the point that some of these will be winners and some losers thus leading to increased inequality. However, the whole aim of the ecosystem services approach is to internalize ecological externalities so that they are not forgotten in policy development; this should have the effect of reducing not enhancing exploitation.…”

“…Not all will want to accept a form of decision making that is based on the preferences of the individuals affected, even though it is fundamentally empowering. There are alternative models that seek to emphasize the limits that nature puts on economic development and this includes economic ecology (Kapustka and McCormick ). However, decisions still have to be made about what those limits mean for the economy and on balancing the inevitable tradeoffs between our activities and the environment.…”