The Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Science-Policy Interface

School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287, USA.
Science (Impact Factor: 33.61). 02/2011; 331(6021):1139-40. DOI: 10.1126/science.1202400
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Assessments must provide conditional predictions of specific policy outcomes, at well-defined spatial and temporal scales.

Download full-text


Available from: Harold Mooney, Sep 26, 2015
674 Reads
  • Source
    • "Millennium global targets on biodiversity (2000–2010) (Butchart et al., 2010). Expectations are high that the accumulation of research, theoretical approaches and practical experience with ESV will finally coalesce under the Intergovernmental Panel on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) (Cardinale et al., 2012; Perrings et al., 2011, 2010). This assessment, however, presupposes that the prior limitations of ESV were technical in nature and that future limitations can be resolved by simply more research, theory and operationalization (e.g. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Ecosystem services valuation (ESV) attempts to transform the opposition of human economic necessity and ecological conservation by valuing the latter in terms of the services rendered by the former. However, despite a number of ESV-inspired sustainability initiatives since the 1990s, global ecological degradation continues to accelerate. This suggests that ESV has fallen far short of its goals of sustainable social transformation—a failure which has generated considerable criticism. This paper reviews three prominent lines of ESV criticism: 1) the neo-Marxist criticism, which emphasizes the “fictitious” character of ecosystem commodities; 2) the liberal criticism through Friedrich Hayek’s concept “scientistic objectivism”; and 3) the pragmatist criticism of “value monism”. Although each form of criticism provides insight into the limitations of ESV, all share ESV’s inability to discern what kind of social transformation is possible. Unable to provide an account of their own immersion in social and historical context, these approaches operate in the hypothetical. In light of these shortcomings, this paper advances a critical theory approach, which we contend provides conceptual tools uniquely well-suited to more adequately address the question of social transformation.
    Ecological Economics 09/2015; Forthcoming. DOI:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.06.023 · 2.72 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Practical conservation involves complex social-ecological systems (Karanth and deFries, 2010; Pereira et al., 2010; Perrings et al., 2011; Balmford, 2012; Barnosky et al., 2012; McCarthy et al., 2012; Waldron et al., 2013; Le Saout et al., 2014; Mace, 2014; Pimm et al., 2014; Schwitzer et al., 2014). This applies particularly for conservation on private landholdings, which involves legal, financial, and social interactions between multiple stakeholders (Knight et al., 2010; Bodin et al., 2014; Kamal et al., 2015a). "
  • Source
    • "address economic and environmental problems in the developing world (Adams et al. 2004) and (ii) lack of an ecosystem services approach and a network that can provide strategic directions to address poverty and environmental degradation (Perrings et al. 2011). "
    AMBIO A Journal of the Human Environment 05/2015; 44(4):297 -307. · 2.29 Impact Factor
Show more