Building the consensus: The moral space of earth measurement

Ecological Economics

Volumn 130, Issue , 2016, Pages 74-81

  Saner, Marc A ^a,b   Bordt, Michael ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^b CARLETON UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Convergence; Critical natural capital; Ecosystem accounting frameworks; Environmental services; Strong sustainability; Substitutability; Systems approach; Weak anthropocentrism

Indexed keywords

ANTHROPOLOGY; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; CONVERGENCE; ECOSYSTEM SERVICE; ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS; NATURAL CAPITAL; STAKEHOLDER; SUSTAINABILITY; SYSTEMS ANALYSIS;

EID: 84978142014     PISSN: 09218009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.06.019     Document Type: Review

References (52)

1. Admiraal, J.F., Wossink, A., de Groot, W.T., de Snoo, G.R., More than total economic value: how to combine economic valuation of biodiversity with ecological resilience. Ecol. Econ. 89 (2013), 115–122.
2. Afeissa, H.-S., The transformative value of ecological pragmatism. An introduction to the work of Bryan G. Norton. S.A.P.I.E.N.S., 2008 (Online, 1.1).
3. Arrow, K.J., Dasgupta, P., Goulder, L.H., Mumford, K.J., Oleson, K., Sustainability and the measurement of wealth. NBER Working Paper No. 16599, 2010, National Bureau of Economic Research (December, JEL No. D69,O10,O47,O50,Q32,Q39).
4. Attfield, R., Existence value and intrinsic value. Ecol. Econ. 24:2 (1998), 163–168.
5. Ayres, R., van den Berrgh, J., Gowdy, J., Strong versus weak sustainability: economics, natural sciences, and consilience. Environ. Ethics 23:2 (2001), 155–168.
6. Bordt, M., Addressing Divergence in the Ecosystem Accounting Community of Practice. 2016 (Manuscript, 31 pp., in preparation).
7. Bordt, M., Saner, M., A Review of Ecosystem Accounting and Services Frameworks and Nine Modest Suggestions for Improvements. 2016 (Manuscript, 18 pp., under review).
8. Borie, M., Hulme, M., Framing global biodiversity: IPBES between mother earth and ecosystem services. Environ. Sci. Pol. 54 (2015), 487–496.
9. Brand, F., Critical natural capital revisited: ecological resilience and sustainable development. Ecol. Econ. 68:3 (2009), 605–612.
10. Chan, K.M., Guerry, A.D., Balvanera, P., Klain, S., Satterfield, T., Basurto, X. Halpern, B.S., Where are cultural and social in ecosystem services? A framework for constructive engagement. Bioscience 62:8 (2012), 744–756.
11. Chan, K.M.A., Balvanera, P., Benessaiah, K., Chapman, M., Díaz, S., Gómez-Baggethun, E. Turner, N., Opinion: why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 113:6 (2016), 1462–1465.
12. Costanza, R., Visions of alternative (unpredictable) futures and their use in policy analysis. Conserv. Ecol., 4(1), 2000, 5.
13. Davidson, M.D., On the relation between ecosystem services, intrinsic value, existence value and economic valuation. Ecol. Econ. 95 (2013), 171–177.
14. De Groot, R., Van der Perk, J., Chiesura, A., van Vliet, A., Importance and threat as determining factors for criticality of natural capital. Ecol. Econ. 44:2 (2003), 187–204.
15. de Groot, R., Fisher, B., Christie, M., Aronson, J., Braat, L., Haines-Young, R., Polasky, S., Integrating the Ecological and Economic Dimensions in Biodiversity and Ecosystem Service Valuation; TEEB Foundations. 2010, Earthscan, London.
16. Díaz, S., Demissew, S., Carabias, J., Joly, C., Lonsdale, M., Ash, N., Baldi, A., The IPBES conceptual framework—connecting nature and people. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 14 (2015), 1–16.
17. Elliott, K.C., The ethical significance of language in the environmental sciences: case studies from pollution research. Ethics Place Environ. 12:2 (2009), 157–173.
18. European Commission, International Monetary Fund, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, United Nations, World Bank, System of National Accounts, 2008. 2009, United Nations, New York.
19. Fisher, B., Turner, K., Zylstra, M., Brouwer, R., de Groot, R., Farber, S., Harlow, J., Ecosystem services and economic theory: integration for policy-relevant research. Ecol. Appl. 18:8 (2008), 2050–2067.
20. Folke, C., Ecologists and economists can find common ground. Bioscience, 45(4), 1995.
21. Future Earth, Strategic Research Agenda 2014: Priorities for a Global Sustainability Research Strategy., 2014 [online] URL: http://www.futureearth.org/sites/default/files/strategic_research_agenda_2014.pdf.
22. Holling, C.S., Two cultures of ecology. Conserv. Ecol., 2(2), 1998, 4.
23. Jax, K., Barton, D.N., Chan, K., de Groot, R., Doyle, U., Eser, U., Haber, W., Ecosystem services and ethics. Ecol. Econ. 93 (2013), 260–268.
24. Kosoy, N., Corbera, E., Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism. Ecol. Econ. 69:6 (2010), 1228–1236.
25. Leopold, A., A Sand County Almanac. 1949. 1970, Ballantine, New York.
26. Lovelock, J.E., Gaia as seen through the atmosphere. Atmos. Environ. (1967) 6:8 (1972), 579–580.
27. MA, Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-being: A Framework for Assessment: Summary. 2005, Island Press, Washington, DC.
28. McCauley, D.J., Selling out on nature. Nature 443:7107 (2006), 27–28.
29. Naess, A., The shallow and the deep, long-range ecology movement. A summary ∗. Inquiry 16:1–4 (1973), 95–100.
30. Naess, A., Sessions, G., Basic principles of deep ecology. Ecophilosophy, 6(3), 1984, 7.
31. Nahlik, A.M., Kentula, M.E., Fennessy, M.S., Landers, D.H., Where is the consensus? A proposed foundation for moving ecosystem service concepts into practice. Ecol. Econ. 77 (2012), 27–35.
32. Norton, B.G., Environmental ethics and weak anthropocentrism. Environ. Ethics 6:2 (1984), 131–148.
33. Norton, B.G., Conservation and preservation: a conceptual rehabilitation. Environ. Ethics 8 (1986), 195–220.
34. Norton, B.G., Toward Unity Among Environmentalists. 1991, Oxford University Press, New York.
35. Norton, B.G., Convergence and contextualism: some clarifications and a reply to Steverson. Minteer, B.A., (eds.) Environmental Ethics, vol. 19, 1997, Temple University Press, 87–100.
36. Norton, B.G., Sustainability: A Philosophy of Adaptive Ecosystem Management. 2005, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago & London.
37. Pelenc, J., Ballet, J., Strong sustainability, critical natural capital and the capability approach. Ecol. Econ. 112 (2015), 36–44.
38. Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin, F.S. III, Lambin, E., Schellnhuber, H.J., Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecol. Soc., 14(2), 2009, 32 (online, URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art32/).
39. Rodman, J., Four forms of ecological consciousness reconsidered. Drengson, A., Inoue, Y., (eds.) The Deep Ecology Movement: An Introductory Anthology, 1995, North Atlantic Books, Berkely, California, 242–256.
40. Routley, R., Is there a need for a new, an environmental, ethic?. Proceedings of the XV World Congress of Philosophy, Varna, Bulgaria, 1973, 105.
41. Saner, M., Biotechnology, the limits of Norton's convergence hypothesis and implications for an inclusive concept of health. Ethics Environ. 5 (2000), 229–241.
42. Saner, M., An ethical analysis of the precautionary principle. Int. J. Biotechnol. 4 (2002), 81–95.
43. Singer, P., All animals are equal. Sterba, J.P., (eds.) Earth Ethics: Environmental Ethics, Animal Rights, and Practical Applications, 1995, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 41.
44. Smith, R., Dick, J.M., Scott, E., The role of statistics in the analysis of ecosystem services. Environmetrics 22:5 (2011), 608–617.
45. Steel, D., Philosophy and the Precautionary Principle: Science, Evidence, and Environmental Policy. 2015, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K.
46. Stirling, A., Keep it complex. Nature 468:7327 (2010), 1029–1031.
47. Taylor, P.W., Respect for Nature: A Theory of Environmental Ethics. 1986, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.
48. United Kingdom House of Commons S&T Committee, Scientific Advice, Risk and Evidence Based Policy Making. 2006, House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited (Retrieved from http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmselect/cmsctech/900/900-i.pdf).
49. United Nations, Sustainable Development Goals., 2015 Retrieved from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/topics.
50. United Nations Environment Programme, Convention on Biological Diversity., 1992 Retrieved from https://www.cbd.int/convention/text.
51. United Nations, European Commission, Food and Agriculture Organization, International Monetary Fund, OECD, World Bank, System of Environmental-Economic Accounting 2012 - Central Framework. 2014, United Nations Statistics Division, New York, NY.
52. United Nations, European Commission, Food and Agriculture Organization, OECD, World Bank, System of Environmental-Economic Accounting 2012 - Experimental Ecosystem Accounting. 2014, United Nations Statistics Division, New York, NY.