Ethical Considerations in On-Ground Applications of the Ecosystem Services Concept

161 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.

Soil “Ecosystem” Services and Natural Capital: Critical Appraisal of Research on Uncertain Ground (2016, background): “Luck et al. (2012) define valuation as “scoring on the basis of importance.””
Motivation crowding by economic incentives in conservation policy: A review of the empirical evidence (2015, background): “whereas others reflect non-instrumental approaches to valuing nature (O'Neill et al., 2008; Jax et al., 2013; Luck et al., 2012), such as stewardship, moral duty, or respect for nature and wild animals.”
Payments for Ecosystem Services: Rife With Problems and Potential—For Transformation Towards Sustainability (2017, background): “Several authors have pointed to this general danger in the context of PES, as participants pursue funding from the program without regard for other environmental concerns (Kosoy & Corbera, 2010; Luck et al., 2012; van Hecken & Bastiaensen, 2010).”
In markets we trust? Setting the boundaries of Market-Based Instruments in ecosystem services governance (2015, background): “Discussions about ethical limits to money and market values have gained new momentum in relation with ecosystem services (Luck et al., 2012; Jax et al., 2013).”