Critical natural capital: a socio-cultural perspective

By A. Chiesura, R.W.J. de Groot. 2003

303 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Critical natural capital revisited: Ecological resilience and sustainable development (2009, background): “Regardingthe multidimensionalcharacter of naturalcapital, it is not surprising to find conceptual confusion about ‘critical naturalcapital’(Turner,1993,MacDonaldetal.,1999).Thisisdue to the existence of different domains under which natural capital can be considered as critical, as different discipl”
Natural capital, subjective well-being, and the new welfare economics of sustainability: Some evidence from cross-country regressions (2009, result): “The findings support the view of those, like Chiesura and de Groot (2003) , who argue that natural capital provides immaterial and often intangible functions that are nevertheless important for the quality of human life, i.e.”
A framework for the practical application of the concepts of critical natural capital and strong sustainability (2003, background): “For example, Daily (1997) defines ecosystem services as ‘the conditions and processes through which natural ecosystems, and the species that make them up, sustain and fulfil human life’ and Barbier et al.”
Is Corruption Bad for Environmental Sustainability? A Cross-National Analysis. (2006, methodology): “These are essential concerns in the application of the CNC for policy making and management (Chiesura and de Groot 2003) Despite the limitations of the ESI it has been employed in this analysis for a number of reasons.”