Purposes and degrees of commodification: Economic instruments for biodiversity and ecosystem services need not rely on markets or monetary valuation

被引:66
作者
Hahn, Thomas [1 ]
McDermott, Constance [2 ]
Ituarte-Lima, Claudia [1 ]
Schultz, Maria [1 ]
Green, Tom [3 ]
Tuvendal, Magnus [1 ]
机构
[1] Stockholm Univ, Stockholm Resilience Ctr, SE-10691 Stockholm, Sweden
[2] Univ Oxford, Environm Change Inst, Oxford OX1 3QY, England
[3] Simon Fraser Univ, Ctr Dialogue, Vancouver, BC V6B 1L6, Canada
关键词
Biodiversity financing mechanisms; Innovative financial mechanisms; Financialization; Non-monetary valuation; Adaptive governance; PAYMENTS; CONSERVATION; MITIGATION; MECHANISMS; IDEOLOGY; GAP; PES;
D O I
10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.10.012
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
Commodification of nature refers to the expansion of market trade to previously non-marketed spheres. This is a contested issue both in the scientific literature and in policy deliberations. The aim of this paper is to analytically clarify and distinguish between different purposes and degrees of commodification and to focus attention to the safeguards: the detailed institutional design. We identify six degrees of commodification and find that all ecosystem services policies are associated with some degree of commodification but only the two highest degrees can properly be associated with neoliberalisation of nature. For example, most payments for ecosystem services (PES) are subsidy-like government compensations not based on monetary valuation of nature. Biodiversity offsets can be designed as market schemes or non-market regulations; the cost-effectiveness of markets cannot be assumed. To avoid the confusion around the concept 'market-based instrument' we suggest replacing it with 'economic instruments' since relying on the price signal is not the same thing as relying on the market. We provide a comprehensive framework emphasising the diversity in institutional design, valuation approaches and role of markets. This provides flexibility and options for policy integration of biodiversity and ecosystem services in different countries according to their political and cultural context. (C) 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
引用
收藏
页码:74 / 82
页数:9
相关论文
共 74 条
[1]   Cost-benefit analysis, incommensurability and rough equality [J].
Aldred, J .
ENVIRONMENTAL VALUES, 2002, 11 (01) :27-47
[2]  
Ambrose R.F., 2007, EVALUATION COMPENSAT
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2010, The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature: A synthesis of the approach, conclusions and recommendations of TEEB
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1997, NATURES SERVICES SOC
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2014, WORKING PAPER
[6]  
Assessment Millennium Ecosystem, 2005, ECOSYSTEMS HUMAN WEL
[7]   What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units [J].
Boyd, James ;
Banzhaf, Spencer .
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2007, 63 (2-3) :616-626
[8]   Habitat banking-how it could work in the UK [J].
Briggs, Brian D. J. ;
Hill, David A. ;
Gillespie, Robert .
JOURNAL FOR NATURE CONSERVATION, 2009, 17 (02) :112-122
[9]   THE IDEOLOGY OF EFFICIENCY - SEARCHING FOR A THEORY OF POLICY ANALYSIS [J].
BROMLEY, DW .
JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT, 1990, 19 (01) :86-107
[10]  
Brown SC, 2001, WETLANDS, V21, P508, DOI 10.1672/0277-5212(2001)021[0508:EOCWMI]2.0.CO