Economic valuation and the commodification of ecosystem services

By E. Gómez‐Baggethun, M. Ruiz-Pérez. 2011

659 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/a7f135021952c23aaf8f60e34a9a71386b98536e

How researchers see this paper

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

In Economics and Econometrics

In Global and Planetary Change

Citations in the corpus

In markets we trust? Setting the boundaries of Market-Based Instruments in ecosystem services governance (2015, background): “…and economic valuation are forms of ‘commodification in discourse’, that can pave the way for real commodification through frame shifting and monetization (Robertson, 2006; Wynne-Jones, 2012), often leading to the “tragedy of well-intentioned valuation” (Gómez-Baggethun and Ruiz-Pérez, 2011: 624).”
Between markets and hierarchies: The challenge of governing ecosystem services (2012, background): “The goal is to convert hypothetical (and unrecognized) market values into actual cash flows (Gómez-Baggethun and Ruiz-Perez, 2011).”
The impact of information, value-deliberation and group-based decision-making on values for ecosystem services : integrating deliberative monetary valuation and storytelling (2016, methodology): “Such methods, however, have had limited application in practice, mostly focused on localised case studies (Bunse et al., 2015; Hattam et al., 2015; Kenter, 2016a; Martín-López et al., 2013; Raymond et al., 2014; Spash, 2008; Turner, 2016).”
Social Equity Matters in Payments for Ecosystem Services (2014, background): “Moreover, the various nonmaterial and noneconomic (e.g., religious, relational, cultural, ecological) benefits of ecosystems are often difficult to capture and to consider within the prevailing market logic and economic valuation (Gómez-Baggethun and Ruiz-Pérez 2011, Chan et al 2012).”
A comparative analysis of ecosystem services valuation approaches for application at the local scale and in data scarce regions (2016, background): “The focus of monetary valuation of ecosystem services has attracted political support for conservation but it also initiated a neoclassical paradigm to address environmental issues (Gomez-Baggethun et al., 2010).”
Effects of Monetary Versus Environmental Information Framing: Implications for Long-Term Pro-Environmental Behavior and Intrinsic Motivation (2018, neutral): “Other studies show that monetary incentives may undermine long-term efforts regarding ecosystem conservation (Gómez-Baggethun & Ruiz-Pérez, 2011; Kosoy & Corbera, 2010; Muradian et al., 2013; Vatn, 2010).”
Where is the value in valuing pollination ecosystem services to agriculture (2015, background): “Efforts to estimate the value of ecosystem services provided by wild species to humanwell-being originate in the1980s andhave grown into a widely asserted justification for international conservation initiatives (Gomez-Baggethun and Ruiz-Perez, 2011).”
In search of lost time: the rise and fall of limits to growth in international sustainability policy (2015, neutral): “based instruments is to be understood in the context of the economic crises of the 1970s that paved the way for the rise of neoliberalism (Harvey 2005) and what some authors have called ‘market environmentalism’ (Smith 1995; Gómez-Baggethun and Ruiz-Pérez 2011).”
Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis and Cost-Benefit Analysis: Comparing alternative frameworks for integrated valuation of ecosystem services (2016, neutral): “Yet monetary valuation of the environment is also criticized on the grounds that it can actually undermine environmental protection and pave the way for commodification of nature (Gómez-Baggethun and Ruiz-Pérez 2011).”
The political ecology of ecosystem services (2015, neutral): “…that constitute ES, of course, have a deep history in a variety of intellectual trends linking environment and the economy (Gómez-Baggethun et al., 2010; Gómez-Baggethun and Ruiz, 2011), particularly in the fields of environmental and ecological economics (Pearce, 1993; Costanza et al., 1997a).”
Payments for Ecosystem Services: Rife With Problems and Potential—For Transformation Towards Sustainability (2017, background): “…to those who were previously polluting/degrading, as commonly required for additionality (hence “polluter is paid” rather than “steward earns” as in Gómez-Baggethun & Ruiz-Pérez 2011); it applies less to programs that fund active positive stewardship (e.g., encouragement to create new…”
When payments for environmental services will work for conservation (2013, background): “If PES seldom work through genuine markets, and if services need not be valued in monetary terms, what is then left of the reiterative ecological economics critique that PES induces “commodity fetishism” (Kosoy & Corbera 2010; Brockington 2011; Gomez-Baggethun & Ruiz-Perez 2011)?”