Ecological economics. Farber & bradley

I

Leyendo el texto completo, responda: 1) ¿Cuál es el problema que aborda la economía ecológica? 2) ¿Cuál es el asunto primario bajo el paradigma de administración de la economía ecológica? Puede responder en inglés o español.

ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS
Stephen Farber
Graduate School of Public and International Affairs
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, PA 15101
Dennis Bradley
USDA Forest Service
North Central Forest Experiment Station
1992 Folwell Ave
St. Paul, MN 55108
In this paper, we outline how the emerging interdisciplinary perspective of
Ecological Economics can be of use in providing conceptual and concrete
approaches to identifying, understanding, and maintaining those features of
ecosystem and human economic interactions that are necessary to achieve
sustainable futures for economic and natural systems.
WHAT IS ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS?
Ecological economics is a policy-oriented perspective that addresses the
interdependence and coevolution between human economies and their natural
ecosystems. Interest in this area has been prompted by concerns for the adverse
impacts of human economic growth processes on natural systems. Ecological
economics is positive, in its development of understanding of the physical,
biological and social structural and functional relations between economies and
natural ecosystems. Ecological economics is also normative in addressing
appropriate roles of human economies within natural ecosystems. The guiding
norm is the somewhat operationally vague notion of jointly sustainable human
and natural ecosystems. Finally, ecological economics is prescriptive, in
proposing institutions and behaviors compatible with sustainability norms. Its
position as a discipline is on the boundary of economic and natural systems,
focussing on impacts of each system on the other.
WHAT IS THE ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS PERSPECTIVE?
Ecological economics recognizes that humans and their economies are parts of
larger natural ecosystems and coevolve with those natural systems. There is a
material and energy basis for the relations between human economies and their
ecosystems, defining not only economic, but social, structures and processes.
Economies possess general ecosystem properties, such as dynamism, evolution,
integrity, stability and resilience. Economies are inextricably embedded in larger
natural ecosystems, and exchange flows of materials and energy with natural
systems.
What makes humans and their economies unique as a sub-ecosystem is their
ability, through willful effort, ignorance and human designed tools, to
dramatically restructure and reform processes in ecosystems of which they are a
part; and to such a magnitude that human welfare can be diminished or enhanced
by those original actions. There are many factual examples (World Commission
on Environment and Development, 1987; Goudie, 1994). Some types of
economic activities, and the welfare that originates from them, would not be
sustainable if they substantially adversely impact natural systems.
The willful effort to extract useful things from natural systems is motivated by
the satisfaction of basic biological needs and the seemingly limitless search for
pleasure through consumption of goods and through social associations. The
magnitude of potential impact on their own welfare through effects on natural
systems requires that human decisions be guided by some notion of the value of
their actions and the value of their impacts on ecosystems, either in terms of
benefits of use or costs of abuse. Some concept of value is required for rational
activities of human economies within their natural systems (Page, 1992).
Both the structures and processes of natural systems have identifiable
instrumental value to the human economy. These narrow use values may be
reflected by the summation of individual values, to the extent they are private.
However, natural systems also have aesthetic, moral and cultural values (Sagoff,
1988). These values are more intrinsic and unmeasurable using traditional human
preferences. They may not be reflected in the simple summation across social
members of individual values, since they are social and not wholly private.
Valuation is made more complicated by the fact that our natural environment is
highly likely to shape values through establishing social and economic relations,
aesthetic standards and culture. If so, our decisions now about the natural
environment will shape future value systems, making values endogenous and,
therefore, a poor guide to behavior. A way out of this dilemma is to make
valuations of natural systems based on "What we would like to see society
become," rather than to ask what current valuations are (Page, 1992). The value
of natural systems is then based on their ability to assist us in becoming what we
wish to be. The management dilemma is to organize a method for establishing
what society wishes to see itself become, then assist in attaining that wish
through knowledge of economic and ecological systems, and then to prescribe
methods of attainment.
Unless there is evidence to the contrary, an initial working presumption about
human society is that any society would like to see the welfare of its members
exceed some minimal level, and would like to provide the opportunities to meet
the aspirations for a better life (World Commission on Environment and
Development, 1987). Such a society would seek to have welfare sustainable
above minimum levels and to have a sustainable development toward welfare
enhancements, where the latter is interpreted more broadly than growth in
material things and includes educational attainment, health, and increases in basic
freedoms (Pearce, et al., 1990).
WHAT IS THE ECOLOGICAL ECONOMIC PROBLEM?
Tools, insatiable wants and the potential danger of ignorance place humans in a
unique position of being able to alter their ecosystems in ways that jeopardize
their own social and economic structures and processes. While any species could
exceed its own natural ecosystem's carrying capacity or diminish that capacity to
the point of self-extinction, only the human species has both the will and capacity
to jeopardize itself, as well as the will and capacity to avoid it.
Furthermore, our understanding of ecosystems is primitive. We know that
structures change through normal succession and evolution, that processes are
altered as the structures through which they occur change, that processes have
various temporal and spatial scales, and that catastrophic changes can occur
without much evident alteration of structures and processes. However, beyond
this abstract knowledge and except for a finite number of circumstances, we
know too little about ecosystems to be confident that we can predict the full
range of impacts of human economies on ecosystems.
Finally, moral systems in human society may be incompatible with what a
society would like to see itself become; e.g., individualism and instrumental
valuation may be inconsistent with sustainable welfare norms. Social morality is
embodied in an entire set of institutions, social relations and views of natural
systems.
The ecological economics problem is to address the potential willful capacity of
humans to alter their own relatively unknown environment to such an extent that
they can adversely impact their own current or future welfare. This means
monitoring for instances where this is a serious problem and informing through
meaningful communication. It also means making suggestions for altering human
behaviors or moral systems that appear incompatible with the sustainability of
economic and natural systems, or that are incompatible with what society wishes
to become.
WHAT TASKS ARE REQUIRED FOR ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS?
The ecological economics problem, outlined above, is addressed through five
tasks:
1. Modelling and Science--Understand the interdependence between economic
and natural systems, particularly between the structures, processes, and fluxes of
material and energy upon which each system depends. This includes
understanding the tolerances of ecosystems to human induced changes as well as
the tolerances of economies to ecosystem changes.
2. Conditions for Sustainability--Establish conditions on human economies that
would allow for the sustainability and growth of human welfare, conditioned
upon the sustainability of the economy's supporting ecosystem.
3. Indicators and Signals--Establish indicators reflecting the current status of
economies and ecosystems relative to the norm of sustainability, and include
measures of ecosystem and economic health. Also, establish signals reflecting
potential impacts of human activity on welfare insofar as those impacts result
from alterations in ecosystem structures and processes.
4. Instruments, Laws and Institutions--Develop necessary regulatory instruments,
laws and associated institutions that assist human economies in attaining
sustainable welfare development goals.
5. Moral Systems--Examine the implications of various moral systems for the
sustainability of human welfare, and place in bold relief those instances where
there are apparent incompatibilities between moral systems and sustainability
norms.
WHAT IS THE CONTRAST BETWEEN THE PREVAILING
MANAGEMENT PARADIGM AND THAT PROPOSED BY
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS?
In order to understand the management implication of the ecological economics
framework, it would be useful to contrast it to a characterization of the current
management paradigm. The two paradigms differ primarily on the primacy given
to human economies versus natural ecosystems. The Prevailing Management
Paradigm focusses on how humans can manage ecosystems for instrumental
purposes of optimizing human economic wealth. This wealth is typically
measured in the value of utility enhancing things and actions, frequently
measured by "willingness to pay" or "willingness to accept" monetary
compensation for gains or losses, and by summing across independent
individuals. Preferences are typically taken as given and immutable, and the
manipulation of natural systems for human benefit addresses those preferences.
This management paradigm approaches uncertainty about natural systems by
either denying or opting in favor of human economies. If not denying the
uncertainty, the optimistic argument is given that natural processes are either
reversible with enough time and engineering skill, or economic systems can find
human-made replacements for lost ecosystem materials and services. The
prevailing issue for this paradigm is "How can we use the ecosystem to more
effectively enhance human wealth and welfare?"
An alternative to this paradigm is suggested if we weight more highly the belief
that ecosystems are critical to social survival, our ignorance about how
ecosystems work, our uncertainty about the full potential value of natural
ecosystems to the economy, and our ignorance about preferences of future
generations. Ecological economics, using what we may term an Ecological
Economic Stewardship Paradigm, would ask the following management
questions:
1. What does society wish to become?
2. What is the requisite health of an ecosystem relative to that social objective?
3. What set of human economic artifacts, structures and processes is feasible
within that requisite healthy ecosystem?
4. How can we use the adaptability and behaviors of human economies to assure
they meet their own welfare needs as well as the needs for preservation of a
healthy ecosystem?
This perspective first requires a social dialogue to establish what society would
like itself to become. This is primary to development of ecosystem health
concepts since it establishes the basic value system from which ecosystem and
economic health are measured. In the presence of ignorance about ecosystems,
the presumption is made that human systems are adaptable to the constraint of a
healthy ecosystem and, possibly, more adaptable than the natural system itself,
the latter being more slowly evolutionary and potentially susceptible to
catastrophes in response to apparently minor changes. Adaptable and flexible
human economic systems are seen as the key to successful long term
management of ecosystems. The management focus is shifted from ecosystem
manipulation under the prevailing paradigm to exploitation of the adaptability of
human economies.
Under the ecological economics Stewardship Paradigm, the primary issue is
preserving basic properties of natural systems. Once these are established, the
management problem is to develop a compatible adaptation strategy for the
human economy to the constraints set by the goal of preservation of natural
ecosystem health. Health is defined implicitly by what society would like to see
itself and the world around it become. Preserving particular ecosystem forms
would not be as important as preserving ecosystem structures and functions, such
as nutrient and hydrologic cycles, and preserving the resilience of the ecosystem
to dramatic external changes; and allowing ecosystems to evolve rather than face
catastrophic change. Long run sustainability of the human economy is viewed
within a larger context of sustaining the health and integrity of the natural
ecosystem within which humans are embedded. Adaptation requires defining
alternative courses of human action and increasing flexibility and resiliency of
human economies. Optimal human adaptation and flexibility under the
constraints of a long term, healthy, resilient natural ecosystem are the operative
concepts in this paradigm.
WHAT IS CRITICAL KNOWLEDGE UNDER THE ECOLOGICAL
ECONOMIC STEWARDSHIP PARADIGM?
The ecological economics Stewardship paradigm requires knowledge of how
ecosystems and economies work, and how they interact at various spatial and
temporal scales. This would be required under any responsible management
framework.
First, the ecological economics Stewardship framework requires knowledge of
both how natural ecosystems respond to economic activity, as well as how
economic activity responds to ecosystem changes. A seemingly useful analytical
construct at this boundary is a full ecological-economic, input-output matrix.
Flows of material, energy, nutrients, etc. between the economic and ecological
systems would be quantified and impacts of one system on the other could be
established. Such a model has been well-developed for the economy alone, and
ecologists have established energy flow models for ecosystems. However, little
progress has been made in coupling these two separate models in any meaningful
practical way (Isard, 1972; Daly, 1968; Cumberland, 1987; Costanza and
Hannon, 1989). A potentially useful coupling is currently being undertaken at the
University of Maryland (Costanza, Bockstael, et al.). An ecosystem model of the
Patuxent, Maryland watershed has been developed, where flows of nutrients and
energy flow between spatial cells. Economic land uses are predicted, with the
ecosystem configuration being an input to that prediction. Land use then feeds
back to the ecosystem through runoffs based on land use. The system is dynamic
and can be used in a practical way to predict land use and ecosystem
configuration.
The appropriate "Scale" and "Mix" of the human economic activity relative to the
natural ecosystem are critical issues at the ecological-economic interface (Daly,
1992). The carrying capacity of an ecosystem has been proposed to address
appropriate scale, and has been mechanistically applied in some circumstances
(Ehrlich, 1994; Hardin, 1991). A single number, for example the number of
humans, is meaningless since human innovation and biological evolution may
interact to moderate potentially adverse welfare effects of natural systems
changes. Also, a level of human welfare must be specified to make the concept
operational. A general index of the physical intensity of the human economy
relative to the natural system would be useful, such as Vitousek, et al.'s (1986)
estimation that humans appropriate forty percent of the net terrestrial primary
production of the biosphere, is striking although we do not know what level of
appropriation places the health of the natural system at risk. Recent attention has
moved toward the notion that an appropriate scale of economic activities would
preserve the resilience of the life-support systems on which they depend (Arrow,
et al., 1995). Resilience is the ability of the ecosystem to take shocks without
making catastrophic changes in structure or processes. In this perspective,
indicators of loss of resilience would be used to measure whether the scale or mix
of economic activities is "too large."
A more micro issue at the economy-ecosystem interface is the production
relation between natural systems and human or human-made capital. First, in a
pure production framework, natural systems can be viewed as natural capital
(Jansson, et al., 1994; Bradley and Xu, 1994), which is combined with economic
and social capital to generate welfare. Considerable social policy energy has been
expended in arguing that enhancements in natural capital reduce the need for
human or human-made capital. Instances in which natural systems and human-
based capital are complementary are most certainly cases where sustainability of
the natural system is valuable, if not critical, to human economies in the most
instrumental sense. For example, fishing boats have no value absent fishing
stock. On the margin, a larger fish stock increases the productivity of human and
human-made capital. On the margin, labor is more productive the cleaner the air
and water. These relations are the bases for the proposition that jobs and the
quality of ecosystems are positively linked (Templet and Farber, 1994).
Explorations of these relations between natural systems and human economic
productivities are undertaken by a wide range of disciplines.
Second, indicators of sustainable economic health are critical under Ecological
Economics Stewardship. Sustaining a flow of income (welfare) requires the
maintenance of the source of income, which is wealth (capital). Using the
analogy of natural capital, measures of sustainable economic health require the
subtraction from traditional economic income an amount necessary to replace
any net degradations in the quality of natural capital. The presumption is that
these degradations are reversible through investments from the economic sector
to the natural sector. Practical examples include full welfare indicators (Daly and
Cobb, 1989), and integrated adjustments of National Economic Accounts, or
Sector Accounts (agriculture, forestry, fishery, etc), for natural ecosystem
degradation (Van Dieren, 1995; Repetto, et al., 1989). The integrated accounts
approach seeks to measure sustainable economic welfare by subtracting the loss
in potential productivity of ecosystem degradation, or the cost of ecosystem
remediation, from positive values of the economy's production of useful goods
and services. Valuation of that natural capital loss is made from a purely
anthropogenic, current or discounted future generations perspective. The full
welfare indicators go further in proposing to measure a more general concept of
welfare than that represented by economic consumption opportunities, including
such factors as income inequities and crime rates. Non-integrated accounts
include, side by side, both traditional economic accounts and some physical
indicators of natural system conditions (Bradley and Xu, 1994).
Third, some concept of value must be established since human decisions are
going to be based on values gained versus values lost. Valuation could be
narrowly based on individual preferences, or more broadly on social preferences.
Basic physical and biological needs would have infinite value on an individual
basis, but may have only finite values on a social basis. Beyond basic physical
and biological needs of human economies, preferences can be viewed as molded
by a complex of social, genetic and natural forces. Ecological economics
suggests that preferences are mutable and adaptable. Requisite adaptations for
sustainability of natural systems, and how these preferences can be reshaped are
suggested research issues necessary for managing sustainable economic and
natural systems. Furthermore, aggregations of individual values may be less
important in valuing ecosystems than the value that society as a whole places on
them. Social valuation may be weighted more highly than individual valuations.
Studies of the divergence between the aggregate of independent, individual
valuations and joint, socially-based valuations, where these individuals set a
consensual value in some social decision setting, are necessary before valuing
large ecosystems.
Valuations of ecosystem services have typically been from the perspective of
current generations and propose that value is represented by the willingness to
pay for these services. Extensive valuation methods have been developed by
environmental economists (Freeman, 1993) and have been applied to large
ecosystems (Farber, 1996). However, these valuation procedures may not be
appropriate to valuing such services in a sustainability context. In a sustainability
context, ecosystem structure and functions would be evaluated on the basis of the
extent to which they contribute to the goal of economic and ecosystem health and
sustainability, rather than on the basis of their immediate contribution to current
economic welfare.
Valuation of ecosystems based on individual preferences can be useful where
spatial scales are narrow and temporal scales are short. However, the dramatic
and potentially most serious ecosystem issues, such as global warming, are huge
spatial and temporal scale problems. Preference-based valuations appear shallow
in this context. For example, an appropriate question would be the willingness of
future generations to pay current generations to avoid passing a legacy of a
severely degraded ecosystem. Future generations' preferences are simply
unknown, albeit possibly formable by current generations, through education and
cultural legacies, and adaptable to future circumstances. The current generation's
most empathetic valuation would consist of asking "How maximally sorry could
the future be if we altered their inherited ecosystem by action X?" Then, "What
would the valuation of that sorrow be?" Neither of these questions is answerable.
This conundrum may suggest the expedient policy of simply attempting to pass
to the future an ecosystem that has the ecological properties of integrity and
resilience.
Preference based valuations are further complicated by the time-dependence of
benefits from ecosystems. Traditional discounting is preference based. One
justification is based on extrapolating the presumption that a unit of something is
worth more to an individual today than years from now to the presumption that
this would also be true if it were different individuals at different points in time.
To avoid this individualistic presumption, economists have suggested using rates
of social time preference, which reflect how much an existing society would
discount the same society's benefits in the future. The problem with even this
social concept is that it places the members of the present society in a position of
dictating the legacy to be passed to the future, with the weighting of future
generations' welfare less than the current generations'. Arguments are made that
discounting is appropriate because investments will be made in the present that
will provide a legacy of increased productive capacity to the future, or that the
future will be more well-off than the present. Neither of these may be the case;
and if economic decisions result in irreversible destruction of ecosystem capital,
they will likely not be the case.
A discounting procedure consistent with sustainability goals could be as follows.
In making decisions over the management of ecosystems, those changes that
would enhance or degrade the human life support capacity of the ecosystem, in
the sense of providing for basic physical and biological needs would not be
discounted at all; i.e., have a zero discount rate. Those ecosystem changes that
impacted welfare above the threshold basic needs level would be discounted, but
at the social rate of discount (Mikesell, 1977).
A proposed, purely ecological valuation designed to avoid preferences altogether
would value ecosystem structures and processes solely by their capacity to
transform energy or matter; hence an "energy-based" valuation (Costanza, 1980;
Costanza, et al., 1989). This valuation is extreme in placing a zero weight on
human preferences, and may be too sterile to be attractive for ecosystem
management, although it is consistent with measuring ecosystem value relative to
the goal of preserving ecosystem processes.
as exceeding these points may irreversibly create a catastrophic change in
ecosystem form.
Fourth, the Ecological Economics Stewardship focus requires understanding of
human economic adaptability. This includes adaptability of preferences to new
circumstances, noted above. In addition, this requires knowledge of trade-offs
that the human economy has available to meet human needs and wants.
Knowledge about preference formation, and the speed and costs of adjustment to
changes in markets for economic goods and services are important to understand
how the economy can adapt to changes in ecosystem structure and processes.
Fifth, Ecological Economics Stewardship requires the use of property rights
systems, laws, and institutions that are incentive compatible with sustainability
norms. All economically driven incentive systems that have adverse
consequences for ecosystem health (Farber, 1991), and existing institutional
impediments to economic adaptability, such as farm subsidy programs and land
tenure systems, have to be illuminated to portray their full ecological-economic
impact. We are developing increasing knowledge about these perverse incentive
systems and institutional barriers to sustaining ecosystem health.
WHAT ARE THE BASES FOR DECISIONS UNDER UNCERTAINTY
WITH ECOLOGICAL ECONOMIC STEWARDSHIP?
We can distinguish between risk and uncertainty. Classic risk presumes that we
know some probability distribution associated with events and states of the
world. The concepts of expected value or most likely states are definable. Classic
uncertainty presumes there is no a prior knowledge of probabilities. As noted
above, the prevailing management paradigm approaches uncertainty about
natural systems by either denying or opting in favor of human economies. If not
denying the uncertainty, the optimistic argument is given that natural processes
are either reversible with enough time and engineering skill, or economic systems
can find human-made replacements for lost ecosystem materials and services.
Under Ecological Economics Stewardship, there is a presumed higher cost
associated with being wrong about reversibility, remediation, and mitigation of
degradations in natural system health. A precautionary (Perrings, 1991) or
minimum regrets approach to decisions that may adversely impact natural system
would opt in favor of ecosystem health protection. The cost of this decision rule
may not be so high, particularly if basic human needs are not at stake, since
human preferences and economic structures are adaptable.

Recommandé

Ecological economics par
Ecological economicsEcological economics
Ecological economicssunil prasad
3.7K vues7 diapositives
Economics And Ecology par
Economics And EcologyEconomics And Ecology
Economics And EcologyToni Menninger
3.8K vues30 diapositives
Environment and Economy Interaction par
Environment and Economy InteractionEnvironment and Economy Interaction
Environment and Economy InteractionVivek Patidar
12.8K vues19 diapositives
Econ Env Sus par
Econ Env SusEcon Env Sus
Econ Env SusMasood Zaidi
451 vues19 diapositives
Relationship between Economic Gain and Environmental Quality, Industry’s Resp... par
Relationship between Economic Gain and Environmental Quality, Industry’s Resp...Relationship between Economic Gain and Environmental Quality, Industry’s Resp...
Relationship between Economic Gain and Environmental Quality, Industry’s Resp...Shaharuf Islam
459 vues11 diapositives
effects of economic growth on environment par
effects of economic growth on environmenteffects of economic growth on environment
effects of economic growth on environmentKamaljit Singh
5.7K vues14 diapositives

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Ecology Against Capitalism by Christopher Pickering par
Ecology Against Capitalism  by Christopher PickeringEcology Against Capitalism  by Christopher Pickering
Ecology Against Capitalism by Christopher PickeringRatbag Media
3.9K vues21 diapositives
Key Debates in Environmental Governance par
Key Debates in Environmental GovernanceKey Debates in Environmental Governance
Key Debates in Environmental GovernanceShahadat Hossain Shakil
3.3K vues20 diapositives
Ekomenzoge, CARErural par
Ekomenzoge, CAREruralEkomenzoge, CARErural
Ekomenzoge, CAREruralEkomenzoge Metuge
507 vues6 diapositives
Capitalism and environment par
Capitalism and environment Capitalism and environment
Capitalism and environment MARIAJOSEFLORESRANGE
112 vues19 diapositives
YOUR COLOUR IS GREEN - PAPER OF LUISA VINCIGUERRA ITALY par
YOUR COLOUR IS GREEN - PAPER OF LUISA VINCIGUERRA ITALYYOUR COLOUR IS GREEN - PAPER OF LUISA VINCIGUERRA ITALY
YOUR COLOUR IS GREEN - PAPER OF LUISA VINCIGUERRA ITALYLuisa Vinciguerra
421 vues9 diapositives
Guercio sustainability and economic degrowth par
Guercio sustainability and economic degrowthGuercio sustainability and economic degrowth
Guercio sustainability and economic degrowthMaria Rita Guercio
44 vues3 diapositives

Tendances(20)

Ecology Against Capitalism by Christopher Pickering par Ratbag Media
Ecology Against Capitalism  by Christopher PickeringEcology Against Capitalism  by Christopher Pickering
Ecology Against Capitalism by Christopher Pickering
Ratbag Media3.9K vues
YOUR COLOUR IS GREEN - PAPER OF LUISA VINCIGUERRA ITALY par Luisa Vinciguerra
YOUR COLOUR IS GREEN - PAPER OF LUISA VINCIGUERRA ITALYYOUR COLOUR IS GREEN - PAPER OF LUISA VINCIGUERRA ITALY
YOUR COLOUR IS GREEN - PAPER OF LUISA VINCIGUERRA ITALY
Watershed Conference - "The value nature vs the nature of value" - 2006 par Steve McKinney
Watershed Conference - "The value nature vs the nature of value" - 2006Watershed Conference - "The value nature vs the nature of value" - 2006
Watershed Conference - "The value nature vs the nature of value" - 2006
Steve McKinney664 vues
Winslow ecological econonomics par maggiewinslow
Winslow ecological econonomicsWinslow ecological econonomics
Winslow ecological econonomics
maggiewinslow1.1K vues
Ch 1ppt Notes par heasulli
Ch 1ppt NotesCh 1ppt Notes
Ch 1ppt Notes
heasulli2.1K vues
Environmental Management par Ajithnebu
Environmental ManagementEnvironmental Management
Environmental Management
Ajithnebu186 vues
Sustainability Reading: Natural Capital and Ecosystem Rights par Sam Bleiberg
Sustainability Reading: Natural Capital and Ecosystem RightsSustainability Reading: Natural Capital and Ecosystem Rights
Sustainability Reading: Natural Capital and Ecosystem Rights
Sam Bleiberg113 vues
Dipak gyawali par ClimDev15
Dipak gyawaliDipak gyawali
Dipak gyawali
ClimDev15390 vues
Permaculture design I- intro, state of the world, ethics and principles 1-4 par Doug Crouch
Permaculture design I- intro, state of the world, ethics and principles 1-4Permaculture design I- intro, state of the world, ethics and principles 1-4
Permaculture design I- intro, state of the world, ethics and principles 1-4
Doug Crouch1.9K vues
Environmental Ethics ..ssss par Salah Belkher
Environmental Ethics ..ssssEnvironmental Ethics ..ssss
Environmental Ethics ..ssss
Salah Belkher2.2K vues

En vedette

Ecological Economics !101Pres par
Ecological Economics !101PresEcological Economics !101Pres
Ecological Economics !101PresRobertoPiccioni2
2K vues46 diapositives
Ecological economics and biodiversity conservation par
Ecological economics and biodiversity conservationEcological economics and biodiversity conservation
Ecological economics and biodiversity conservationSaroj Upadhyay
3.1K vues16 diapositives
Environmental LAW par
Environmental LAWEnvironmental LAW
Environmental LAWRajesh Shetty
2.6K vues21 diapositives
Environmental threats par
Environmental threatsEnvironmental threats
Environmental threatsAna Mena
6.7K vues20 diapositives
positive and negative right of consumer par
positive and negative right of consumerpositive and negative right of consumer
positive and negative right of consumermandalina landy
2.6K vues18 diapositives
The ethics of job discrimination (chapter 7) and The individual in the organi... par
The ethics of job discrimination (chapter 7) and The individual in the organi...The ethics of job discrimination (chapter 7) and The individual in the organi...
The ethics of job discrimination (chapter 7) and The individual in the organi...Heickal Pradinanta
5.7K vues58 diapositives

En vedette(20)

Ecological economics and biodiversity conservation par Saroj Upadhyay
Ecological economics and biodiversity conservationEcological economics and biodiversity conservation
Ecological economics and biodiversity conservation
Saroj Upadhyay3.1K vues
Environmental threats par Ana Mena
Environmental threatsEnvironmental threats
Environmental threats
Ana Mena6.7K vues
positive and negative right of consumer par mandalina landy
positive and negative right of consumerpositive and negative right of consumer
positive and negative right of consumer
mandalina landy2.6K vues
The ethics of job discrimination (chapter 7) and The individual in the organi... par Heickal Pradinanta
The ethics of job discrimination (chapter 7) and The individual in the organi...The ethics of job discrimination (chapter 7) and The individual in the organi...
The ethics of job discrimination (chapter 7) and The individual in the organi...
Heickal Pradinanta5.7K vues
1 29-13 welcome introduction to environ sociology par John Bradford
1 29-13 welcome introduction to environ sociology1 29-13 welcome introduction to environ sociology
1 29-13 welcome introduction to environ sociology
John Bradford6.6K vues
Discrimination in employment 2013 par emilykreger
Discrimination in employment 2013Discrimination in employment 2013
Discrimination in employment 2013
emilykreger4.4K vues
Ethics- Discrimination in workplace. par Kevin John
Ethics- Discrimination in workplace.Ethics- Discrimination in workplace.
Ethics- Discrimination in workplace.
Kevin John4.5K vues
Discrimination at work par alben1983
Discrimination at workDiscrimination at work
Discrimination at work
alben19833.9K vues
Positive and negative freedom 1 par aquinaspolitics
Positive and negative freedom 1Positive and negative freedom 1
Positive and negative freedom 1
aquinaspolitics24.2K vues
Environmental Geography- An Intro par Mr Melson
Environmental Geography- An IntroEnvironmental Geography- An Intro
Environmental Geography- An Intro
Mr Melson7.5K vues
environmental laws par Subham Dhar
environmental lawsenvironmental laws
environmental laws
Subham Dhar1.4K vues
Higher RMPS - Kantian Ethics (SlideCast) par RMPSuccess
Higher RMPS - Kantian Ethics (SlideCast)Higher RMPS - Kantian Ethics (SlideCast)
Higher RMPS - Kantian Ethics (SlideCast)
RMPSuccess6.1K vues
Job discrimination par bishaltmkr
Job discriminationJob discrimination
Job discrimination
bishaltmkr7.4K vues
job discrimination,job specification and job analysis par piyush dobariya
job discrimination,job specification and job analysisjob discrimination,job specification and job analysis
job discrimination,job specification and job analysis
piyush dobariya12.5K vues
Cultural Diversity & Bias, Prejudice, & Discrimination par Clarence Goodlein
Cultural Diversity & Bias, Prejudice, & DiscriminationCultural Diversity & Bias, Prejudice, & Discrimination
Cultural Diversity & Bias, Prejudice, & Discrimination
Clarence Goodlein43.2K vues
Script for the water conservation and management presentation par Nandita Mehta
Script for the water conservation and management presentationScript for the water conservation and management presentation
Script for the water conservation and management presentation
Nandita Mehta120.7K vues

Similaire à Ecological economics. Farber & bradley

Werner Sattmann-Frese - Psychological Perspectives of Ecological Crises par
Werner Sattmann-Frese - Psychological Perspectives of Ecological CrisesWerner Sattmann-Frese - Psychological Perspectives of Ecological Crises
Werner Sattmann-Frese - Psychological Perspectives of Ecological CrisesWerner Sattmann-Frese
932 vues35 diapositives
What Is Economics? par
What Is Economics?What Is Economics?
What Is Economics?Gregar Donaven Valdehueza
28.3K vues14 diapositives
Environmental Planning And Restoration Section par
Environmental Planning And Restoration SectionEnvironmental Planning And Restoration Section
Environmental Planning And Restoration SectionYessica Diaz
2 vues39 diapositives
Bp3 par
Bp3Bp3
Bp3Mizan Misran
453 vues23 diapositives
HLEG thematic workshop on measuring economic, social and environmental resili... par
HLEG thematic workshop on measuring economic, social and environmental resili...HLEG thematic workshop on measuring economic, social and environmental resili...
HLEG thematic workshop on measuring economic, social and environmental resili...StatsCommunications
312 vues15 diapositives
Green Development and Complex Risk Governance , Andreas RECHKEMMER par
Green Development and Complex Risk Governance , Andreas RECHKEMMERGreen Development and Complex Risk Governance , Andreas RECHKEMMER
Green Development and Complex Risk Governance , Andreas RECHKEMMERGlobal Risk Forum GRFDavos
530 vues44 diapositives

Similaire à Ecological economics. Farber & bradley(20)

Werner Sattmann-Frese - Psychological Perspectives of Ecological Crises par Werner Sattmann-Frese
Werner Sattmann-Frese - Psychological Perspectives of Ecological CrisesWerner Sattmann-Frese - Psychological Perspectives of Ecological Crises
Werner Sattmann-Frese - Psychological Perspectives of Ecological Crises
Environmental Planning And Restoration Section par Yessica Diaz
Environmental Planning And Restoration SectionEnvironmental Planning And Restoration Section
Environmental Planning And Restoration Section
Yessica Diaz2 vues
HLEG thematic workshop on measuring economic, social and environmental resili... par StatsCommunications
HLEG thematic workshop on measuring economic, social and environmental resili...HLEG thematic workshop on measuring economic, social and environmental resili...
HLEG thematic workshop on measuring economic, social and environmental resili...
Population ecology theory postulates and lessons for strategic management par Jack Onyisi Abebe
Population ecology theory  postulates and lessons for strategic managementPopulation ecology theory  postulates and lessons for strategic management
Population ecology theory postulates and lessons for strategic management
Jack Onyisi Abebe6.9K vues
Eco-social feedback technology par Dion Rezki
Eco-social feedback technologyEco-social feedback technology
Eco-social feedback technology
Dion Rezki282 vues
Research Paper On Hopf Bifurcation par Renee Franco
Research Paper On Hopf BifurcationResearch Paper On Hopf Bifurcation
Research Paper On Hopf Bifurcation
Renee Franco2 vues
HBSE2 macro power point.ppt par ROOAOmar
HBSE2 macro power point.pptHBSE2 macro power point.ppt
HBSE2 macro power point.ppt
ROOAOmar7 vues
Participatory Action Research for Sustainable Tribal Livelihood: An Eco Chain... par IBRADKolkata
Participatory Action Research for Sustainable Tribal Livelihood: An Eco Chain...Participatory Action Research for Sustainable Tribal Livelihood: An Eco Chain...
Participatory Action Research for Sustainable Tribal Livelihood: An Eco Chain...
IBRADKolkata173 vues
Environmentalism And Environment par Amanda Reed
Environmentalism And EnvironmentEnvironmentalism And Environment
Environmentalism And Environment
Amanda Reed3 vues
OECD Well-being and Mental Health Conference, Gregory Bratman, University of ... par StatsCommunications
OECD Well-being and Mental Health Conference, Gregory Bratman, University of ...OECD Well-being and Mental Health Conference, Gregory Bratman, University of ...
OECD Well-being and Mental Health Conference, Gregory Bratman, University of ...

Plus de Introsust

El mundo ante el cenit del petroleo par
El mundo ante el cenit del petroleoEl mundo ante el cenit del petroleo
El mundo ante el cenit del petroleoIntrosust
686 vues16 diapositives
P10 par
P10P10
P10Introsust
437 vues1 diapositive
C10 gestión par
C10 gestiónC10 gestión
C10 gestiónIntrosust
469 vues21 diapositives
C10 gestión par
C10 gestiónC10 gestión
C10 gestiónIntrosust
335 vues17 diapositives
C10 t2 par
C10 t2C10 t2
C10 t2Introsust
496 vues1 diapositive
C10 t3 par
C10 t3C10 t3
C10 t3Introsust
395 vues1 diapositive

Plus de Introsust(20)

El mundo ante el cenit del petroleo par Introsust
El mundo ante el cenit del petroleoEl mundo ante el cenit del petroleo
El mundo ante el cenit del petroleo
Introsust686 vues
C10 gestión par Introsust
C10 gestiónC10 gestión
C10 gestión
Introsust469 vues
C10 gestión par Introsust
C10 gestiónC10 gestión
C10 gestión
Introsust335 vues
Pregunta de refuerzo clase 9 par Introsust
Pregunta de refuerzo clase 9Pregunta de refuerzo clase 9
Pregunta de refuerzo clase 9
Introsust426 vues
Manual for calculating adjusted net savings par Introsust
Manual for calculating adjusted net savingsManual for calculating adjusted net savings
Manual for calculating adjusted net savings
Introsust2.2K vues
On the methodology of isew, gpi... (neumayer, 2000) par Introsust
On the methodology of isew, gpi... (neumayer, 2000)On the methodology of isew, gpi... (neumayer, 2000)
On the methodology of isew, gpi... (neumayer, 2000)
Introsust605 vues
Living planet report (español) par Introsust
Living planet report (español)Living planet report (español)
Living planet report (español)
Introsust1.4K vues
Introducción a la sustentabilidad, octava clase par Introsust
Introducción a la sustentabilidad, octava claseIntroducción a la sustentabilidad, octava clase
Introducción a la sustentabilidad, octava clase
Introsust472 vues
Development of ecological economics (constanza, 1997) par Introsust
Development of ecological economics (constanza, 1997)Development of ecological economics (constanza, 1997)
Development of ecological economics (constanza, 1997)
Introsust1.6K vues
Manual de economía ecológica par Introsust
Manual de economía ecológicaManual de economía ecológica
Manual de economía ecológica
Introsust16.6K vues
C7 energia II par Introsust
C7 energia IIC7 energia II
C7 energia II
Introsust295 vues
P7 - Energías Alternativas par Introsust
P7 - Energías AlternativasP7 - Energías Alternativas
P7 - Energías Alternativas
Introsust302 vues
C7 T2 Reporte Zanelli par Introsust
C7 T2 Reporte ZanelliC7 T2 Reporte Zanelli
C7 T2 Reporte Zanelli
Introsust413 vues
C7 T1 Perspectivas Legales - Energía Nuclear en Chile par Introsust
C7 T1 Perspectivas Legales - Energía Nuclear en ChileC7 T1 Perspectivas Legales - Energía Nuclear en Chile
C7 T1 Perspectivas Legales - Energía Nuclear en Chile
Introsust356 vues
C7 P3 Mapa ERNC par Introsust
C7 P3 Mapa ERNCC7 P3 Mapa ERNC
C7 P3 Mapa ERNC
Introsust984 vues

Dernier

Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Practical Approach For CISOs par
Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Practical Approach For CISOsDigital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Practical Approach For CISOs
Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Practical Approach For CISOsPriyanka Aash
162 vues59 diapositives
KVM Security Groups Under the Hood - Wido den Hollander - Your.Online par
KVM Security Groups Under the Hood - Wido den Hollander - Your.OnlineKVM Security Groups Under the Hood - Wido den Hollander - Your.Online
KVM Security Groups Under the Hood - Wido den Hollander - Your.OnlineShapeBlue
225 vues19 diapositives
Optimizing Communication to Optimize Human Behavior - LCBM par
Optimizing Communication to Optimize Human Behavior - LCBMOptimizing Communication to Optimize Human Behavior - LCBM
Optimizing Communication to Optimize Human Behavior - LCBMYaman Kumar
38 vues49 diapositives
ESPC 2023 - Protect and Govern your Sensitive Data with Microsoft Purview in ... par
ESPC 2023 - Protect and Govern your Sensitive Data with Microsoft Purview in ...ESPC 2023 - Protect and Govern your Sensitive Data with Microsoft Purview in ...
ESPC 2023 - Protect and Govern your Sensitive Data with Microsoft Purview in ...Jasper Oosterveld
35 vues49 diapositives
"Running students' code in isolation. The hard way", Yurii Holiuk par
"Running students' code in isolation. The hard way", Yurii Holiuk "Running students' code in isolation. The hard way", Yurii Holiuk
"Running students' code in isolation. The hard way", Yurii Holiuk Fwdays
36 vues34 diapositives
Mitigating Common CloudStack Instance Deployment Failures - Jithin Raju - Sha... par
Mitigating Common CloudStack Instance Deployment Failures - Jithin Raju - Sha...Mitigating Common CloudStack Instance Deployment Failures - Jithin Raju - Sha...
Mitigating Common CloudStack Instance Deployment Failures - Jithin Raju - Sha...ShapeBlue
183 vues18 diapositives

Dernier(20)

Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Practical Approach For CISOs par Priyanka Aash
Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Practical Approach For CISOsDigital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Practical Approach For CISOs
Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Practical Approach For CISOs
Priyanka Aash162 vues
KVM Security Groups Under the Hood - Wido den Hollander - Your.Online par ShapeBlue
KVM Security Groups Under the Hood - Wido den Hollander - Your.OnlineKVM Security Groups Under the Hood - Wido den Hollander - Your.Online
KVM Security Groups Under the Hood - Wido den Hollander - Your.Online
ShapeBlue225 vues
Optimizing Communication to Optimize Human Behavior - LCBM par Yaman Kumar
Optimizing Communication to Optimize Human Behavior - LCBMOptimizing Communication to Optimize Human Behavior - LCBM
Optimizing Communication to Optimize Human Behavior - LCBM
Yaman Kumar38 vues
ESPC 2023 - Protect and Govern your Sensitive Data with Microsoft Purview in ... par Jasper Oosterveld
ESPC 2023 - Protect and Govern your Sensitive Data with Microsoft Purview in ...ESPC 2023 - Protect and Govern your Sensitive Data with Microsoft Purview in ...
ESPC 2023 - Protect and Govern your Sensitive Data with Microsoft Purview in ...
"Running students' code in isolation. The hard way", Yurii Holiuk par Fwdays
"Running students' code in isolation. The hard way", Yurii Holiuk "Running students' code in isolation. The hard way", Yurii Holiuk
"Running students' code in isolation. The hard way", Yurii Holiuk
Fwdays36 vues
Mitigating Common CloudStack Instance Deployment Failures - Jithin Raju - Sha... par ShapeBlue
Mitigating Common CloudStack Instance Deployment Failures - Jithin Raju - Sha...Mitigating Common CloudStack Instance Deployment Failures - Jithin Raju - Sha...
Mitigating Common CloudStack Instance Deployment Failures - Jithin Raju - Sha...
ShapeBlue183 vues
Elevating Privacy and Security in CloudStack - Boris Stoyanov - ShapeBlue par ShapeBlue
Elevating Privacy and Security in CloudStack - Boris Stoyanov - ShapeBlueElevating Privacy and Security in CloudStack - Boris Stoyanov - ShapeBlue
Elevating Privacy and Security in CloudStack - Boris Stoyanov - ShapeBlue
ShapeBlue224 vues
State of the Union - Rohit Yadav - Apache CloudStack par ShapeBlue
State of the Union - Rohit Yadav - Apache CloudStackState of the Union - Rohit Yadav - Apache CloudStack
State of the Union - Rohit Yadav - Apache CloudStack
ShapeBlue303 vues
2FA and OAuth2 in CloudStack - Andrija Panić - ShapeBlue par ShapeBlue
2FA and OAuth2 in CloudStack - Andrija Panić - ShapeBlue2FA and OAuth2 in CloudStack - Andrija Panić - ShapeBlue
2FA and OAuth2 in CloudStack - Andrija Panić - ShapeBlue
ShapeBlue152 vues
Future of AR - Facebook Presentation par Rob McCarty
Future of AR - Facebook PresentationFuture of AR - Facebook Presentation
Future of AR - Facebook Presentation
Rob McCarty65 vues
TrustArc Webinar - Managing Online Tracking Technology Vendors_ A Checklist f... par TrustArc
TrustArc Webinar - Managing Online Tracking Technology Vendors_ A Checklist f...TrustArc Webinar - Managing Online Tracking Technology Vendors_ A Checklist f...
TrustArc Webinar - Managing Online Tracking Technology Vendors_ A Checklist f...
TrustArc176 vues
Redefining the book supply chain: A glimpse into the future - Tech Forum 2023 par BookNet Canada
Redefining the book supply chain: A glimpse into the future - Tech Forum 2023Redefining the book supply chain: A glimpse into the future - Tech Forum 2023
Redefining the book supply chain: A glimpse into the future - Tech Forum 2023
BookNet Canada44 vues
How to Re-use Old Hardware with CloudStack. Saving Money and the Environment ... par ShapeBlue
How to Re-use Old Hardware with CloudStack. Saving Money and the Environment ...How to Re-use Old Hardware with CloudStack. Saving Money and the Environment ...
How to Re-use Old Hardware with CloudStack. Saving Money and the Environment ...
ShapeBlue171 vues
CloudStack Object Storage - An Introduction - Vladimir Petrov - ShapeBlue par ShapeBlue
CloudStack Object Storage - An Introduction - Vladimir Petrov - ShapeBlueCloudStack Object Storage - An Introduction - Vladimir Petrov - ShapeBlue
CloudStack Object Storage - An Introduction - Vladimir Petrov - ShapeBlue
ShapeBlue139 vues
"Package management in monorepos", Zoltan Kochan par Fwdays
"Package management in monorepos", Zoltan Kochan"Package management in monorepos", Zoltan Kochan
"Package management in monorepos", Zoltan Kochan
Fwdays34 vues
Why and How CloudStack at weSystems - Stephan Bienek - weSystems par ShapeBlue
Why and How CloudStack at weSystems - Stephan Bienek - weSystemsWhy and How CloudStack at weSystems - Stephan Bienek - weSystems
Why and How CloudStack at weSystems - Stephan Bienek - weSystems
ShapeBlue247 vues
Import Export Virtual Machine for KVM Hypervisor - Ayush Pandey - University ... par ShapeBlue
Import Export Virtual Machine for KVM Hypervisor - Ayush Pandey - University ...Import Export Virtual Machine for KVM Hypervisor - Ayush Pandey - University ...
Import Export Virtual Machine for KVM Hypervisor - Ayush Pandey - University ...
ShapeBlue120 vues
"Node.js Development in 2024: trends and tools", Nikita Galkin par Fwdays
"Node.js Development in 2024: trends and tools", Nikita Galkin "Node.js Development in 2024: trends and tools", Nikita Galkin
"Node.js Development in 2024: trends and tools", Nikita Galkin
Fwdays33 vues

Ecological economics. Farber & bradley

  • 1. ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS Stephen Farber Graduate School of Public and International Affairs University of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh, PA 15101 Dennis Bradley USDA Forest Service North Central Forest Experiment Station 1992 Folwell Ave St. Paul, MN 55108 In this paper, we outline how the emerging interdisciplinary perspective of Ecological Economics can be of use in providing conceptual and concrete approaches to identifying, understanding, and maintaining those features of ecosystem and human economic interactions that are necessary to achieve sustainable futures for economic and natural systems. WHAT IS ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS? Ecological economics is a policy-oriented perspective that addresses the interdependence and coevolution between human economies and their natural ecosystems. Interest in this area has been prompted by concerns for the adverse impacts of human economic growth processes on natural systems. Ecological economics is positive, in its development of understanding of the physical, biological and social structural and functional relations between economies and natural ecosystems. Ecological economics is also normative in addressing appropriate roles of human economies within natural ecosystems. The guiding norm is the somewhat operationally vague notion of jointly sustainable human and natural ecosystems. Finally, ecological economics is prescriptive, in proposing institutions and behaviors compatible with sustainability norms. Its position as a discipline is on the boundary of economic and natural systems, focussing on impacts of each system on the other. WHAT IS THE ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS PERSPECTIVE? Ecological economics recognizes that humans and their economies are parts of larger natural ecosystems and coevolve with those natural systems. There is a material and energy basis for the relations between human economies and their ecosystems, defining not only economic, but social, structures and processes. Economies possess general ecosystem properties, such as dynamism, evolution, integrity, stability and resilience. Economies are inextricably embedded in larger
  • 2. natural ecosystems, and exchange flows of materials and energy with natural systems. What makes humans and their economies unique as a sub-ecosystem is their ability, through willful effort, ignorance and human designed tools, to dramatically restructure and reform processes in ecosystems of which they are a part; and to such a magnitude that human welfare can be diminished or enhanced by those original actions. There are many factual examples (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987; Goudie, 1994). Some types of economic activities, and the welfare that originates from them, would not be sustainable if they substantially adversely impact natural systems. The willful effort to extract useful things from natural systems is motivated by the satisfaction of basic biological needs and the seemingly limitless search for pleasure through consumption of goods and through social associations. The magnitude of potential impact on their own welfare through effects on natural systems requires that human decisions be guided by some notion of the value of their actions and the value of their impacts on ecosystems, either in terms of benefits of use or costs of abuse. Some concept of value is required for rational activities of human economies within their natural systems (Page, 1992). Both the structures and processes of natural systems have identifiable instrumental value to the human economy. These narrow use values may be reflected by the summation of individual values, to the extent they are private. However, natural systems also have aesthetic, moral and cultural values (Sagoff, 1988). These values are more intrinsic and unmeasurable using traditional human preferences. They may not be reflected in the simple summation across social members of individual values, since they are social and not wholly private. Valuation is made more complicated by the fact that our natural environment is highly likely to shape values through establishing social and economic relations, aesthetic standards and culture. If so, our decisions now about the natural environment will shape future value systems, making values endogenous and, therefore, a poor guide to behavior. A way out of this dilemma is to make valuations of natural systems based on "What we would like to see society become," rather than to ask what current valuations are (Page, 1992). The value of natural systems is then based on their ability to assist us in becoming what we wish to be. The management dilemma is to organize a method for establishing what society wishes to see itself become, then assist in attaining that wish through knowledge of economic and ecological systems, and then to prescribe methods of attainment.
  • 3. Unless there is evidence to the contrary, an initial working presumption about human society is that any society would like to see the welfare of its members exceed some minimal level, and would like to provide the opportunities to meet the aspirations for a better life (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987). Such a society would seek to have welfare sustainable above minimum levels and to have a sustainable development toward welfare enhancements, where the latter is interpreted more broadly than growth in material things and includes educational attainment, health, and increases in basic freedoms (Pearce, et al., 1990). WHAT IS THE ECOLOGICAL ECONOMIC PROBLEM? Tools, insatiable wants and the potential danger of ignorance place humans in a unique position of being able to alter their ecosystems in ways that jeopardize their own social and economic structures and processes. While any species could exceed its own natural ecosystem's carrying capacity or diminish that capacity to the point of self-extinction, only the human species has both the will and capacity to jeopardize itself, as well as the will and capacity to avoid it. Furthermore, our understanding of ecosystems is primitive. We know that structures change through normal succession and evolution, that processes are altered as the structures through which they occur change, that processes have various temporal and spatial scales, and that catastrophic changes can occur without much evident alteration of structures and processes. However, beyond this abstract knowledge and except for a finite number of circumstances, we know too little about ecosystems to be confident that we can predict the full range of impacts of human economies on ecosystems. Finally, moral systems in human society may be incompatible with what a society would like to see itself become; e.g., individualism and instrumental valuation may be inconsistent with sustainable welfare norms. Social morality is embodied in an entire set of institutions, social relations and views of natural systems. The ecological economics problem is to address the potential willful capacity of humans to alter their own relatively unknown environment to such an extent that they can adversely impact their own current or future welfare. This means monitoring for instances where this is a serious problem and informing through meaningful communication. It also means making suggestions for altering human behaviors or moral systems that appear incompatible with the sustainability of economic and natural systems, or that are incompatible with what society wishes to become.
  • 4. WHAT TASKS ARE REQUIRED FOR ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS? The ecological economics problem, outlined above, is addressed through five tasks: 1. Modelling and Science--Understand the interdependence between economic and natural systems, particularly between the structures, processes, and fluxes of material and energy upon which each system depends. This includes understanding the tolerances of ecosystems to human induced changes as well as the tolerances of economies to ecosystem changes. 2. Conditions for Sustainability--Establish conditions on human economies that would allow for the sustainability and growth of human welfare, conditioned upon the sustainability of the economy's supporting ecosystem. 3. Indicators and Signals--Establish indicators reflecting the current status of economies and ecosystems relative to the norm of sustainability, and include measures of ecosystem and economic health. Also, establish signals reflecting potential impacts of human activity on welfare insofar as those impacts result from alterations in ecosystem structures and processes. 4. Instruments, Laws and Institutions--Develop necessary regulatory instruments, laws and associated institutions that assist human economies in attaining sustainable welfare development goals. 5. Moral Systems--Examine the implications of various moral systems for the sustainability of human welfare, and place in bold relief those instances where there are apparent incompatibilities between moral systems and sustainability norms. WHAT IS THE CONTRAST BETWEEN THE PREVAILING MANAGEMENT PARADIGM AND THAT PROPOSED BY ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS? In order to understand the management implication of the ecological economics framework, it would be useful to contrast it to a characterization of the current management paradigm. The two paradigms differ primarily on the primacy given to human economies versus natural ecosystems. The Prevailing Management Paradigm focusses on how humans can manage ecosystems for instrumental purposes of optimizing human economic wealth. This wealth is typically measured in the value of utility enhancing things and actions, frequently measured by "willingness to pay" or "willingness to accept" monetary compensation for gains or losses, and by summing across independent individuals. Preferences are typically taken as given and immutable, and the
  • 5. manipulation of natural systems for human benefit addresses those preferences. This management paradigm approaches uncertainty about natural systems by either denying or opting in favor of human economies. If not denying the uncertainty, the optimistic argument is given that natural processes are either reversible with enough time and engineering skill, or economic systems can find human-made replacements for lost ecosystem materials and services. The prevailing issue for this paradigm is "How can we use the ecosystem to more effectively enhance human wealth and welfare?" An alternative to this paradigm is suggested if we weight more highly the belief that ecosystems are critical to social survival, our ignorance about how ecosystems work, our uncertainty about the full potential value of natural ecosystems to the economy, and our ignorance about preferences of future generations. Ecological economics, using what we may term an Ecological Economic Stewardship Paradigm, would ask the following management questions: 1. What does society wish to become? 2. What is the requisite health of an ecosystem relative to that social objective? 3. What set of human economic artifacts, structures and processes is feasible within that requisite healthy ecosystem? 4. How can we use the adaptability and behaviors of human economies to assure they meet their own welfare needs as well as the needs for preservation of a healthy ecosystem? This perspective first requires a social dialogue to establish what society would like itself to become. This is primary to development of ecosystem health concepts since it establishes the basic value system from which ecosystem and economic health are measured. In the presence of ignorance about ecosystems, the presumption is made that human systems are adaptable to the constraint of a healthy ecosystem and, possibly, more adaptable than the natural system itself, the latter being more slowly evolutionary and potentially susceptible to catastrophes in response to apparently minor changes. Adaptable and flexible human economic systems are seen as the key to successful long term management of ecosystems. The management focus is shifted from ecosystem manipulation under the prevailing paradigm to exploitation of the adaptability of human economies.
  • 6. Under the ecological economics Stewardship Paradigm, the primary issue is preserving basic properties of natural systems. Once these are established, the management problem is to develop a compatible adaptation strategy for the human economy to the constraints set by the goal of preservation of natural ecosystem health. Health is defined implicitly by what society would like to see itself and the world around it become. Preserving particular ecosystem forms would not be as important as preserving ecosystem structures and functions, such as nutrient and hydrologic cycles, and preserving the resilience of the ecosystem to dramatic external changes; and allowing ecosystems to evolve rather than face catastrophic change. Long run sustainability of the human economy is viewed within a larger context of sustaining the health and integrity of the natural ecosystem within which humans are embedded. Adaptation requires defining alternative courses of human action and increasing flexibility and resiliency of human economies. Optimal human adaptation and flexibility under the constraints of a long term, healthy, resilient natural ecosystem are the operative concepts in this paradigm. WHAT IS CRITICAL KNOWLEDGE UNDER THE ECOLOGICAL ECONOMIC STEWARDSHIP PARADIGM? The ecological economics Stewardship paradigm requires knowledge of how ecosystems and economies work, and how they interact at various spatial and temporal scales. This would be required under any responsible management framework. First, the ecological economics Stewardship framework requires knowledge of both how natural ecosystems respond to economic activity, as well as how economic activity responds to ecosystem changes. A seemingly useful analytical construct at this boundary is a full ecological-economic, input-output matrix. Flows of material, energy, nutrients, etc. between the economic and ecological systems would be quantified and impacts of one system on the other could be established. Such a model has been well-developed for the economy alone, and ecologists have established energy flow models for ecosystems. However, little progress has been made in coupling these two separate models in any meaningful practical way (Isard, 1972; Daly, 1968; Cumberland, 1987; Costanza and Hannon, 1989). A potentially useful coupling is currently being undertaken at the University of Maryland (Costanza, Bockstael, et al.). An ecosystem model of the Patuxent, Maryland watershed has been developed, where flows of nutrients and energy flow between spatial cells. Economic land uses are predicted, with the ecosystem configuration being an input to that prediction. Land use then feeds back to the ecosystem through runoffs based on land use. The system is dynamic and can be used in a practical way to predict land use and ecosystem configuration.
  • 7. The appropriate "Scale" and "Mix" of the human economic activity relative to the natural ecosystem are critical issues at the ecological-economic interface (Daly, 1992). The carrying capacity of an ecosystem has been proposed to address appropriate scale, and has been mechanistically applied in some circumstances (Ehrlich, 1994; Hardin, 1991). A single number, for example the number of humans, is meaningless since human innovation and biological evolution may interact to moderate potentially adverse welfare effects of natural systems changes. Also, a level of human welfare must be specified to make the concept operational. A general index of the physical intensity of the human economy relative to the natural system would be useful, such as Vitousek, et al.'s (1986) estimation that humans appropriate forty percent of the net terrestrial primary production of the biosphere, is striking although we do not know what level of appropriation places the health of the natural system at risk. Recent attention has moved toward the notion that an appropriate scale of economic activities would preserve the resilience of the life-support systems on which they depend (Arrow, et al., 1995). Resilience is the ability of the ecosystem to take shocks without making catastrophic changes in structure or processes. In this perspective, indicators of loss of resilience would be used to measure whether the scale or mix of economic activities is "too large." A more micro issue at the economy-ecosystem interface is the production relation between natural systems and human or human-made capital. First, in a pure production framework, natural systems can be viewed as natural capital (Jansson, et al., 1994; Bradley and Xu, 1994), which is combined with economic and social capital to generate welfare. Considerable social policy energy has been expended in arguing that enhancements in natural capital reduce the need for human or human-made capital. Instances in which natural systems and human- based capital are complementary are most certainly cases where sustainability of the natural system is valuable, if not critical, to human economies in the most instrumental sense. For example, fishing boats have no value absent fishing stock. On the margin, a larger fish stock increases the productivity of human and human-made capital. On the margin, labor is more productive the cleaner the air and water. These relations are the bases for the proposition that jobs and the quality of ecosystems are positively linked (Templet and Farber, 1994). Explorations of these relations between natural systems and human economic productivities are undertaken by a wide range of disciplines. Second, indicators of sustainable economic health are critical under Ecological Economics Stewardship. Sustaining a flow of income (welfare) requires the maintenance of the source of income, which is wealth (capital). Using the analogy of natural capital, measures of sustainable economic health require the subtraction from traditional economic income an amount necessary to replace
  • 8. any net degradations in the quality of natural capital. The presumption is that these degradations are reversible through investments from the economic sector to the natural sector. Practical examples include full welfare indicators (Daly and Cobb, 1989), and integrated adjustments of National Economic Accounts, or Sector Accounts (agriculture, forestry, fishery, etc), for natural ecosystem degradation (Van Dieren, 1995; Repetto, et al., 1989). The integrated accounts approach seeks to measure sustainable economic welfare by subtracting the loss in potential productivity of ecosystem degradation, or the cost of ecosystem remediation, from positive values of the economy's production of useful goods and services. Valuation of that natural capital loss is made from a purely anthropogenic, current or discounted future generations perspective. The full welfare indicators go further in proposing to measure a more general concept of welfare than that represented by economic consumption opportunities, including such factors as income inequities and crime rates. Non-integrated accounts include, side by side, both traditional economic accounts and some physical indicators of natural system conditions (Bradley and Xu, 1994). Third, some concept of value must be established since human decisions are going to be based on values gained versus values lost. Valuation could be narrowly based on individual preferences, or more broadly on social preferences. Basic physical and biological needs would have infinite value on an individual basis, but may have only finite values on a social basis. Beyond basic physical and biological needs of human economies, preferences can be viewed as molded by a complex of social, genetic and natural forces. Ecological economics suggests that preferences are mutable and adaptable. Requisite adaptations for sustainability of natural systems, and how these preferences can be reshaped are suggested research issues necessary for managing sustainable economic and natural systems. Furthermore, aggregations of individual values may be less important in valuing ecosystems than the value that society as a whole places on them. Social valuation may be weighted more highly than individual valuations. Studies of the divergence between the aggregate of independent, individual valuations and joint, socially-based valuations, where these individuals set a consensual value in some social decision setting, are necessary before valuing large ecosystems. Valuations of ecosystem services have typically been from the perspective of current generations and propose that value is represented by the willingness to pay for these services. Extensive valuation methods have been developed by environmental economists (Freeman, 1993) and have been applied to large ecosystems (Farber, 1996). However, these valuation procedures may not be appropriate to valuing such services in a sustainability context. In a sustainability context, ecosystem structure and functions would be evaluated on the basis of the
  • 9. extent to which they contribute to the goal of economic and ecosystem health and sustainability, rather than on the basis of their immediate contribution to current economic welfare. Valuation of ecosystems based on individual preferences can be useful where spatial scales are narrow and temporal scales are short. However, the dramatic and potentially most serious ecosystem issues, such as global warming, are huge spatial and temporal scale problems. Preference-based valuations appear shallow in this context. For example, an appropriate question would be the willingness of future generations to pay current generations to avoid passing a legacy of a severely degraded ecosystem. Future generations' preferences are simply unknown, albeit possibly formable by current generations, through education and cultural legacies, and adaptable to future circumstances. The current generation's most empathetic valuation would consist of asking "How maximally sorry could the future be if we altered their inherited ecosystem by action X?" Then, "What would the valuation of that sorrow be?" Neither of these questions is answerable. This conundrum may suggest the expedient policy of simply attempting to pass to the future an ecosystem that has the ecological properties of integrity and resilience. Preference based valuations are further complicated by the time-dependence of benefits from ecosystems. Traditional discounting is preference based. One justification is based on extrapolating the presumption that a unit of something is worth more to an individual today than years from now to the presumption that this would also be true if it were different individuals at different points in time. To avoid this individualistic presumption, economists have suggested using rates of social time preference, which reflect how much an existing society would discount the same society's benefits in the future. The problem with even this social concept is that it places the members of the present society in a position of dictating the legacy to be passed to the future, with the weighting of future generations' welfare less than the current generations'. Arguments are made that discounting is appropriate because investments will be made in the present that will provide a legacy of increased productive capacity to the future, or that the future will be more well-off than the present. Neither of these may be the case; and if economic decisions result in irreversible destruction of ecosystem capital, they will likely not be the case. A discounting procedure consistent with sustainability goals could be as follows. In making decisions over the management of ecosystems, those changes that would enhance or degrade the human life support capacity of the ecosystem, in the sense of providing for basic physical and biological needs would not be discounted at all; i.e., have a zero discount rate. Those ecosystem changes that
  • 10. impacted welfare above the threshold basic needs level would be discounted, but at the social rate of discount (Mikesell, 1977). A proposed, purely ecological valuation designed to avoid preferences altogether would value ecosystem structures and processes solely by their capacity to transform energy or matter; hence an "energy-based" valuation (Costanza, 1980; Costanza, et al., 1989). This valuation is extreme in placing a zero weight on human preferences, and may be too sterile to be attractive for ecosystem management, although it is consistent with measuring ecosystem value relative to the goal of preserving ecosystem processes. as exceeding these points may irreversibly create a catastrophic change in ecosystem form. Fourth, the Ecological Economics Stewardship focus requires understanding of human economic adaptability. This includes adaptability of preferences to new circumstances, noted above. In addition, this requires knowledge of trade-offs that the human economy has available to meet human needs and wants. Knowledge about preference formation, and the speed and costs of adjustment to changes in markets for economic goods and services are important to understand how the economy can adapt to changes in ecosystem structure and processes. Fifth, Ecological Economics Stewardship requires the use of property rights systems, laws, and institutions that are incentive compatible with sustainability norms. All economically driven incentive systems that have adverse consequences for ecosystem health (Farber, 1991), and existing institutional impediments to economic adaptability, such as farm subsidy programs and land tenure systems, have to be illuminated to portray their full ecological-economic impact. We are developing increasing knowledge about these perverse incentive systems and institutional barriers to sustaining ecosystem health. WHAT ARE THE BASES FOR DECISIONS UNDER UNCERTAINTY WITH ECOLOGICAL ECONOMIC STEWARDSHIP? We can distinguish between risk and uncertainty. Classic risk presumes that we know some probability distribution associated with events and states of the world. The concepts of expected value or most likely states are definable. Classic uncertainty presumes there is no a prior knowledge of probabilities. As noted above, the prevailing management paradigm approaches uncertainty about natural systems by either denying or opting in favor of human economies. If not denying the uncertainty, the optimistic argument is given that natural processes are either reversible with enough time and engineering skill, or economic systems
  • 11. can find human-made replacements for lost ecosystem materials and services. Under Ecological Economics Stewardship, there is a presumed higher cost associated with being wrong about reversibility, remediation, and mitigation of degradations in natural system health. A precautionary (Perrings, 1991) or minimum regrets approach to decisions that may adversely impact natural system would opt in favor of ecosystem health protection. The cost of this decision rule may not be so high, particularly if basic human needs are not at stake, since human preferences and economic structures are adaptable.