Ecosystem services: From bio-physical to economic values

Green Energy and Technology

Volumn , Issue , 2020, Pages 37-50

  Bottero, Marta ^a   Bravi, Marina ^a   Giaimo, Carolina ^a   Barbieri, Carlo Alberto ^a  

^a POLITECNICO DI TORINO   (Italy)

Author keywords

Ecosystem services quality; Ecosystem services valuation; Life Satisfaction Approach; Subjective Well Being; Sustainable development

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT;

ECONOMIC BENEFITS; ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONS; ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; INTEGRATED APPROACH; LIFE SATISFACTION APPROACH; TERRITORIAL PLANNING; WELL BEING;

ECOSYSTEMS;

EID: 85070554558     PISSN: 18653529     EISSN: 18653537     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-23786-8_3     Document Type: Chapter

References (54)

1. Alberini A, Kahn J (2006) Handbook on contingent valuation. Edward Elgar Publishing
2. Ambrey CL, Fleming CM (2011) Valuing scenic amenity using life satisfaction data. Ecol Econ 72:106–115
3. Arcidiacono A, Giaimo C, Talia M (2018) Priorità per il progetto urbanistico. Reti ambientali, nuovi standard e rigenerazione urbana. In: Moccia FD, Sepe M (eds) Sviluppare, rigenerare, ricostruire città. INU Edizioni, Questioni e sfide contemporanee, pp 166–179
4. Bateman IJ, Harwood AR, Mace GM, Watson RT et al (2013) Bringing ecosystem services into economic decision-making: land use in the United Kingdom. Science 341(6141):45–50
5. Bateman IJ, Harwood AR, Abson DJ et al (2014) Economic analysis for the UK National Ecosystem Assessment: synthesis and scenario valuation of changes in ecosystem services. Environ Resour Econ 57:273–297
6. Bertram C, Rehdanz C (2015) The role of urban green space for human well-being. Ecol Econ 120:139–152
7. Boxall PC, Adamowicz WL, Swait J, Williams M, Louviere JJ (1996) A comparison of stated preference methods for environmental valuation. Ecol Econ 18:243–253
8. Bravi M, Sichera M (2016) Valuing environmental and social quality impacts on subjective well-being. Aestimum 68:5–28
9. Brunetta G, Salizzoni E, Bottero M, Monaco R, Assumma V (2018) Measuring resilience for territorial enhancement: an experimentation in Trentino. Valori e Valutazioni 20:69–78
10. Clark AE, Frijters P, Shields MA (2008) Relative income, happiness, and utility: an explanation for the Easterlin paradox and other puzzles. J Econ Lit 46(1):95–14
11. Costanza R, d’Arge R, de Groot R et al (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387:253–260
12. Costanza R, de Groot R, Sutton P et al (2014) Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Glob Environ Change 26:152–158
13. Czajkowski M, Bartczak M et al (2014) Providing preference-based support for forest ecosystem service management. For Policy Econ 39:1–12
14. de Groot R, Brander L, van der Ploeg S et al (2012) Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units. Ecosyst Serv 1:50–61
15. Doherty ST, Lemieux CJ, Canally C (2014) Tracking human activity and well-being in natural environments using wearable sensors and experience sampling. Soc Sci Med 106:83–92
16. Easterlin RA (1974) Does economic growth improve the human lot? Some empirical evidence. In: David PA, Reder MW (eds) Nations and households in economic growth: essays in honor of Moses Abramowitz. Academic Press, New York, pp 89–125
17. Freeman AM III, Herriges JA, Kling CL (2003) The measurement of environmental and resource values: theory and methods. Resources for the future. Routledge, Washington DC
18. Frey B, Stutzer A, Luechinger S (2010) Life satisfaction approach to environmental valuation. Ann Rev Resour Econ 2:139–160
19. Gascoigne WR, Hong D, Koontz L et al (2011) Valuing ecosystem and economic services across land-use scenarios in the Prairie Pothole Region of The Dakotas, USA. Ecol Econ 70:1715–1725
20. Giannelli A, Giuffrida S, Trovato MR (2018) Madrid Río Park. Symbolic values and contingent valuation. Valori e Valutazioni 21:75–85
21. ISTAT (Istituto Nazionale di Statistica) (2017) BES 2017. Il Benessere Equo e Sostenibile in Italia. Roma. https://www.istat.it/it/files//2017/12/Bes_2017.pdf
22. Jobstvogt N, Watson V, Kenter J (2014) Looking below the surface: the cultural ecosystem service values of UK marine protected areas (MPAs). Ecosyst Ser 10:97–110
23. Kahneman D, Sugden R (2005) Experienced utility as a standard of policy evaluation. Environ Resour Econ 32:161–181
24. Kopmann A, Rehdanz C (2015) A human well-being approach for assessing the value of natural land areas. Ecol Econ 93:20–33
25. Krekel C, Zerrahn A (2017) Does the presence of wind turbines have negative externalities for people in their surroundings? Evidence from well-being data. J Environ Econ Manag 82:221–238
26. Laurans Y, Pascal N et al (2013) Economic valuation of ecosystem services from coral reefs in the South Pacific: taking stock of recent experience. J Environ Manage 116:135–144
27. Li Z, Folmer H, Xue J (2014) To what extent does air pollution affect happiness? The Case of The Jinchuan Mining Area, China. Ecol Econ 99:88–99
28. LIFE SAM4CP, Soil Administration for Community Profit. http://www.sam4cp.eu/en/
29. Louviere JJ, Flynn TA, Carson RT (2010) Discrete choice experiments are not conjoint analysis. J Choice Model 3(3):57–72
30. Luechinger S (2011) Life satisfaction and transboundary air pollution. Econ Lett 107:4–6
31. Ma S (2010) Hedonic valuation of ecosystem services using agricultural land prices. Master thesis in Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics. Michigan State University
32. Mayer M, Woltering M (2018) Assessing and valuing the recreational ecosystem services of Ger-many’s National Parks using travel cost models. Ecosyst Serv 31:371–386
33. MEA (2005) Millennium ecosystem assessment ecosystems and human well-being: current state and trends assessment. Island Press, Washington
34. Menz T (2011) Do people habituate to air pollution? Evidence from international life satisfaction data. Ecol Econ 71:211–219
35. Mondini G (2016) Integrated evaluation for the management of new social challenges. Valori e Valutazioni 17:15–17
36. Natural Capital Project, InVEST. Integrated valuation of ecosystem services. https://naturalcapitalproject.stanford.edu/invest/
37. Nelson JP, Kennedy PE (2009) The use (and abuse) of meta-analysis in environmental and natural resource economics: an assessment. Environ Resour Econ 42:345–377
38. Newell LW, Swallow SK (2013) Real-payment choice experiments: valuing forested wetlands and spatial attributes within a landscape context. Ecol Econ 92:37–47
39. Rehdanz C, Welsch H, Narita D, Okubo T (2015) Well-being effects of a major natural disaster: the case of Fukushima. J Econ Behav Organ 116:500–517
40. Rosen S (1974) Hedonic prices and implicit markets: product differentiation in pure competition. J Polit Econ 82(1):34–55
41. Sekulova F, van den Bergh J (2013) Climate change, income and happiness: an empirical study for Barcelona. Glob Environ Change 23:1467–1475
42. TEEB (2010) The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity report for business. Executive summary. United Nations Environment Programme and European Commission
43. Tsurumi T, Imauji A, Managi S (2018) Greenery and subjective well-being: assessing the monetary value of greenery by type. Ecol Econ 148:152–169
44. Voke M, Fairley I, Willis M et al (2013) Economic evaluation of the recreational value of the coastal environment in a marine renewable deployment area. Ocean Coast Manag 78:77–87
45. von Möllendorff C, Hirschfeld J (2016) Measuring impacts of extreme weather events using the life satisfaction approach. Ecol Econ 121:108–116
46. Welsch H (2002) Preferences over prosperity and pollution: environmental valuation based on happiness surveys. Kyklos 55:473–494
47. Welsch H (2007) Environmental welfare analysis: a life satisfaction approach. Ecol Econ. 62:544–551
48. Welsch H (2009) Implications of happiness research for environmental economics. Ecol Econ 68:2735–2742
49. Welsch H, Biermann P (2014a) Fukushima and the preference for nuclear power in Europe: evidence from subjective well-being data. Ecol Econ 108:171–179
50. Welsch H, Biermann P (2014b) Electricity supply preferences in Europe: evidence from subjective well-being data. Resour Energy Econ 38:38–60
51. Welsch H, Kuhling J (2009) Using happiness data for environmental valuation: issues and applications. J Econ Surv 23(2):385–406
52. Welsch H, Kühling J (2010) Pro-environmental behavior and rational consumer choice: evidence from surveys of life satisfaction. J Econ Psychol 31:405–420
53. Welsch H, Kühling J (2011) Are pro-environmental consumption choices utility-maximizing? evidence from subjective well-being data. Ecol Econ 72:75–87
54. Yuan L, Shin K, Managi S (2018) Subjective well-being and environmental quality: the impact of air pollution and green coverage in China. Ecol Econ 153:124–138