Assessing the Economic Value of Ecosystem Conservation

By S. Pagiola, K. V. Ritter, J. Bishop. 2004

284 citations recorded by the source corpus.

This paper seeks to clarify how valuation should be conducted to answer specific environmental policy questions. In particular, it looks at how valuation should be used to examine four distinct aspects of the value of ecosystems: 1) Determining the value of the total flow of benefits from ecosystems; 2) Determining the net benefits of interventions that alter ecosystem conditions: 3) Examining how the costs and benefits of ecosystems are distributed; and, 4) Identifying potential financing sources for conservation. These four approaches are closely linked, and build on each other. They represent four different ways to look at similar data regarding the value of an ecosystem: its total value, or contribution to society, the change in this value if a conservation action is undertaken, how this change affects different stakeholders. Each of these approaches to valuation uses similar data, yet in very different ways, that is, sometimes at a subset, sometimes looking at a snapshot, and sometimes looking at changes over time. Each approach has its uses and its limitations.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, Global and Planetary Change

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b9207926de9d9a596604608bb2f12e302c671381

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

Ecosystem services (2011, unknown): “Thethirdand fourth application areas described by Pagiola et al. (2004) further emphasize the importance of what economic analysis can and cannot achieve.”
How to value biodiversity in environmental management (2015, methodology): “The total value of environmental assets includes both use and non-use values (Fig. 3, Pearce and Moran, 1994; Pagiola et al., 2004).”
Ecosystem services and biodiversity in developing countries (2007, methodology): “As an alternative, authors such as Balmford et al. (2002) and Pagiola et al. (2004) Wnd it more useful to estimate the marginal rather than the total value.”
Valuation of the ecosystem services: A psycho-cultural perspective (2008, unknown): “…Goulder and Kennedy, 1997; Costanza et al., 1997; Bishop, 1999; Barbier, 2000; Chee, 2004; Dasgupta et al., 2000; Spash, 2000; O'Neill and Spash, 2000; Howarth and Farber, 2000; McCracken and Abza, 2001; Spash, 2002; Freeman, 2003; Pagiola et al., 2004; Farber et al., 2006; Spash and Vatn, 2006).”
Policy instruments to enhance multi-functional forest management (2007, unknown): “While promising, PES is not likely to surpass other opportunities for conservation instruments (Pagiola et al., 2004).”
Challenges in framing the economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: the TEEB initiative (2010, background): “Economic valuation thus aids the design of institutions that provide incentives for the conservation of life-sustaining ecological systems [69,70].”
The Concept of Ecosystem Services Regarding Landscape Research: A Review (2011, background): “Valuation can be conducted in many different ways (Pagiola et al., 2004).”