The Valuation And Commodification Of Ecosystem Services

Decisions regarding environmental problems require both knowledge and values. Placing value on specific issues can be sorted into four categories of justification: utilitarian, ecological, aesthetic and moral. California Blue focuses on the interplay of environmental issues and ethics emphasizing the conflict between industry and species preservation. Timber cutting in the Northwest United States is a mainstay of the economy. Although clear cutting is not as environmentally sensitive as selective harvesting and redwood cutting, some is essential to America's continued growth and prosperity. To ban timber operations and to throw people out of work, all to preserve an endangered blue butterfly, is to test the limits and logic of ecological priorities. The national policy of preserving endangered species serves the purpose of promoting biological diversity, which if not followed might threaten the ecosystem. This national policy of species preservation is a matter of social policy balanced with the competing interests of the local economy and human needs. Under the utilitarian approach one must balance the benefits of species preservation with the detriment of stopping human activity which threatens that species or the environment in which the

Putting a higher value on nature is a step towards the creation of a green economy. Jobs are created on better terms locally and the people can work together, with a better cleaner water supply.

The message of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment’s Governing Board is that human impacts on this resilient natural world are so unprecedented and extensive that we crossed the line into unsustainable consumption some time ago and are now depleting ecosystem capital stock instead of living off its sustainable goods and services.

Instead of focusing on the individual, “ecological economics invites us to picture ourselves not as isolated individuals but as housemates” (McFague 132). This model has two goals striving for sustainability and distributive justice which will allow for the earth’s resources to be sustained for future generations. McFague feels that the ecological economic system will provide an efficient system that will suit and support the needs of the world.

Leopold expresses, “a system of conservation based solely on economic self-interest is hopelessly lopesided,” (p. 251). The self-interest economists who are only interested in the profit of which they gain from the land cannot spread the importance of the respect for the community. The people who share a knowledge and passion for the environment will educate those who are unaware. As well as being educated on the land, it is essential for humanity to understand that we are not users of what Earth has to offer us, but associates,

The Biodiversity Treaty sanctioned that countries whose biological resources are exploited by bioprospecting companies have a right to share the financial benefits resulting from the sale of these resources (Adair, 1997). National parklands are owned by the federal government. Therefore, our national parks have the legal right to share in the financial benefits that

In the piece “Selling out on nature” (McCauley, 2006), Douglas J. McCauley describes how conservation efforts are fueled by the economic advantages it possesses and are carried out solely for the purpose of benefiting our economic markets. McCauley states that ecosystem services are “economic benefits provided by natural ecosystems” (27), arguing that the only incentive for mankind to save nature depends on how profitable nature can be. He emphasizes that our attention should not be put forth in commodifying nature but rather, inculcating respect and love for it so that we can preserve it for many years to come. I oppose McCauley’s argument because it’s impractical and unachievable. Humanity will

Economic analysis that weighs all costs and benefits of a particular model must include environmental considerations. That is to say, the potential for short-term economic losses caused by conservation in the present, should be measured against the dividends that conservation will pay in the future (Nordhaus, 2007). If the earth is truly our most valuable commodity, then analysis under these conditions should recognize that if a “dollar value” were placed on environmental sustainability, more often than not it would outweigh any initial monetary loss resultant of the implementation of more sustainable practices.

At the very beginning of the report, “the functioning of natural ecosystems and the health of the human economy have been intrinsically linked”

The economic considerations in wildlife management describes the use of economic theory for wildlife management, which includes approaches of non-market evaluation, economic impact, modeling, and simulation. Furthermore, the a point that stood out to me in reading was the aspect of economic value of nature and how it can change based off the population of the animals that inhabit, like too many or too little deer. What should we consider before addressing a “nuisance” animal problem? In addition, which taxonomy of economic values of life would like more for preservation than conservation and vice

Goldman indicates that in order to place value on goods and services humans use, costs such as production and transportation can be used to link people’s decisions with natural services. Water is a resource that is crucial to life and is used everywhere, including for washing jeans and making coffee. In order to compare and contrast various processes, Goldman points out that prices should be placed on services. She begins by discussing the importance of ecosystem services for human development, and then links services to economic values. She introduces important, yet underrated, protection services like mangroves, or coastal forest systems, to help reduce damage caused by tsunamis and storms. Goldman makes a strong argument when she asserts that decision-making involved with nature would be made simpler and more informative with calculated costs and benefits. For instance, one cannot decide between buying a coastal home or cutting down mangroves to sell more fish unless the values of each action are accounted for. By assessing the lowest cost options to provide access to clean water, humans have had great success in taking care of ecosystems in South America. Thus, assessing economic values of ecosystem services holistically provides the most efficient low-cost alternatives and best improve people’s

The ecosystems around us in nature provide us with many services that humans benefit from, such as water filtration and clean air. However, these benefits are not something many people think about how we benefit from these services since they typically aren’t something we are used to paying for. Still, people benefit from the services offered by ecosystems everyday. Within cities, urban parks can be found throughout the USA. Some are home to forests, wetlands, grasslands, while others are manicured parks where plants and animals have adapted to form novel ecosystems. Nevertheless, measuring the economic value of those services, whether they are from novel or natural has always been a challenge. Some services such as air and water filtration are relatively simple to quantify, while other services like a park’s biodiversity are not. This

Many private agents, according to these studies, have no interest in maintaining the forest’s beauty and biodiversity, as services provided by forests are benefits that cannot be priced, so are not profit-making.

Right from the end of the 19th Century and the beginning of the 20th Century, there has been a fierce debate concerning how economic growth or development affects the environment or ecological setup of a country. The debate has its basis on whether it would be recommendable for a nation to concentrate on growing its economy while at the same time hurting or harming its ecological system. Naturalists like Pinchot Gifford, John Muir, Love Canal and Cuyahoga County always argued in favor of environmental preservation as opposed to concentrating all efforts towards developing the economy (Olmes 154; Miller 150-51). This paper will, therefore, discuss the struggle between economics and ecology specifically looking at particular events across the Twentieth Century. It will also attempt to explain the factors involved in the pursuit for change on the way people and the administration perceived the environmental conservation as opposed to economic growth.

To achieve forest conservation requires making the forests profitable enough to compete with agricultural activities. This appears as an obvious conclusion of this model. To find the way to incorporate local and global forest services, which naturally do not belong to any market, into the agent’s decisions (those who will decide whether cutting down the forest or