Valuation without action? On the use of economic valuations of ecosystem services

Economic valuations have raised high expectations to influence policy and alleviate the accelerating degradation of the environment. This was reaffirmed by the publication of The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) report, during the Tenth Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in Nagoya in 2010.

---

Bonn, 24 October 2013 - It is undeniable that international discussions and publications are now massively promoting Ecosystem Services Economic Valuation (ESV) as a tool susceptible to make key contributions to biodiversity protection. Questioning the supposed pragmatism and influence of ESV, while standing clear from ideological statements, is thus both timely and vital.

ESV methods are now highly mature. They have been the subject of a large and growing literature since the beginning of the 1990s. Yet, economic valuation is not sufficient in itself. The hope that it will become an efficient political lever to alleviate environmental degradation supposes above all that it actually be used for decision-making. For this reason, one of the key issues relating to the development of ESV is understanding how and to what extent they are actually used. This policy brief synthesizes some key elements of a bibliographic analysis recently conducted on that topic.

The authors are giving explanations to the following topics:

• How are ecosystem services Valuations supposed to be used?
• The use of ecosystem services Valuations in decision-making: a strikingly under-investigated issue
• Questioning an international literature blindspot

ESV are abundantly produced and disseminated within the current trend of a utilitarian view of the environment. These economic valuations are therefore promoted on the assumption that they respond to decision-makers’ needs and/or that they help guiding decisions towards more and better conservation. The positive economic impacts of maintaining or increasing ecosystem services are demonstrated and supposedly taken into account; as are, conversely, the negative economic impacts of their degradation or destruction.

The pivotal finding of the review is that the issue of valuation use for decision-making is rarely addressed beyond general statements and suggestions about possible uses. The common rule is to present an economic valuation, then suggest that it be used for decision-making, but without this use being either explicited or contextualized, and without concrete examples being provided or analyzed. Authors often argue that valuations are highly useful for decisions, but aren't practically used in a way they should be.

Various hypotheses can be put forward to help explain this blindspot. They open up avenues of research to give greater weight to the issue of UESV, provide deeper insight into the subject and step up efforts to find ways to enhance use. These hypotheses can be combined to explain the literature blindspot and/or the shortcomings of UESV to date. Evidence provided by the literature analysis leads to the conclusion that: 

1. the vast majority of ESV are produced in a "supply-side logic";
2. it is thus uncertain that the type of tools offered for use purposes are the best match for real decision-making needs; and
3. ESV is primarily geared towards an informative role for overall influence and awareness-raising.

The complete article can be downloaded here.

For more information, visit the IDDRI Homepage here.

---