Scribd Logo
Încărcați

Bine ați venit la Scribd!

  • The Common Pitfall of Valuing Ecosystems: Tomohide Yasuda

    Încărcat de

    tomohide-yasuda
    37 vizualizări15 pagini
    This document summarizes and critiques the 1997 Nature article by Costanza et al. that estimated the value of ecosystem services globally at $16-54 trillion per year. The summary critiques include: (1) the article conflates objective and subjective value, (2) using willingness-to-pay does not equal total replacement costs, and (3) there is double counting among the 17 arbitrarily selected ecosystem services. Additionally, the document notes concerns about the political use of these estimates to overhaul environmental policies and tax ecosystem losses without consideration of valid economic criticisms that were not published in response by the journal Nature.

    Descriere originală:

    Tomohide Yasuda Austrian Scholars Conference March 12‐14, 2009, Auburn, Alabama

    Titlu original

    Yasuda-ASC-1

    Drepturi de autor

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Formate disponibile

    PDF sau citiți online pe Scribd

    Vi se pare util acest document?

    Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

    Raportați acest document
    This document summarizes and critiques the 1997 Nature article by Costanza et al. that estimated the value of ecosystem services globally at $16-54 trillion per year. The summary critiques include: (1) the article conflates objective and subjective value, (2) using willingness-to-pay does not equal total replacement costs, and (3) there is double counting among the 17 arbitrarily selected ecosystem services. Additionally, the document notes concerns about the political use of these estimates to overhaul environmental policies and tax ecosystem losses without consideration of valid economic criticisms that were not published in response by the journal Nature.

    Drepturi de autor:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Descărcați ca PDF sau citiți online pe Scribd
    Indicator pentru conținut neadecvat
    37 vizualizări15 pagini

    The Common Pitfall of Valuing Ecosystems: Tomohide Yasuda

    Încărcat de

    tomohide-yasuda
    This document summarizes and critiques the 1997 Nature article by Costanza et al. that estimated the value of ecosystem services globally at $16-54 trillion per year. The summary critiques include: (1) the article conflates objective and subjective value, (2) using willingness-to-pay does not equal total replacement costs, and (3) there is double counting among the 17 arbitrarily selected ecosystem services. Additionally, the document notes concerns about the political use of these estimates to overhaul environmental policies and tax ecosystem losses without consideration of valid economic criticisms that were not published in response by the journal Nature.

    Drepturi de autor:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Descărcați ca PDF sau citiți online pe Scribd
    Indicator pentru conținut neadecvat
    din 15

    The Common Pitfall of Valuing

    Ecosystems
    Tomohide Yasuda
    Department of Environmental, Earth
    and Ocean Sciences
    University of Massachusetts at Boston

    Austrian Scholars Conference,


    March 12-14, 2009
    Ludwig von Mises Institute,
    Auburn, Alabama
    The Nature Article by Costanza et al. (1997)
    Nature 387, 253 - 260 (15 May 1997)

    “The entire biosphere = US$16-54 trillion/year” !


    ISI Web of Knowledge Citations
    Total: 1257 citations
    No. of citations

    Feb. 2009

    Year

    Robert Costanza
    University of Vermont
    Content

    A. The article’s fundamental flaws


    B. Why do we care?
    A. The Article’s Fundamental Flaws

    • Objective vs. subjective value


    • Willingness-to-pay ≠
    Total replacement costs
    • Double counting
    Costs to Totally Replace the
    17 Ecosystem “Services”
    of Their Choice
    • Gas regulation • Pollination
    • Climate regulation • Biological control
    • Disturbance • Habitat/refugia
    regulation • Food production
    • Water regulation • Raw materials
    • Water supply • Genetic resources
    • Erosion control • Recreation
    • Soil formation • Cultural
    • Nutrient cycling
    *Services
    • Waste treatment
     Functions
    Objective vs. Subjective Value
    • An ecosystem’s value depends on:
    – How much people actually pay for it.
    – How many people pay for it.
    – How much these people can afford.
    • An individual’s valuation of an
    ecosystem is unique.

    www.ragionpolitica.it/testo.578.html

    –Carl Menger–
    Willingness-to-pay ≠
    Total Replacement Costs

    Costanza et al. (1997)


    Willingness-to-pay ≠
    Total Replacement Costs
    ∞

    Costanza et al. (1997)


    Willingness-to-pay ≠
    Total Replacement Costs

    Costanza et al. (1997)


    Costanza et al.’s Arbitrary and
    Capricious 17 Ecosystem “Services”
    • Gas regulation • Pollination
    • Climate regulation • Biological control
    • Disturbance • Habitat/refugia
    regulation • Food production
    • Water regulation • Raw materials
    • Water supply • Genetic resources
    • Erosion control • Recreation
    • Soil formation • Cultural
    • Nutrient cycling
    *Services
    • Waste treatment
     Functions
    Double Counting of
    Ecosystem “Services”
    • Gas regulation • Pollination
    • Climate regulation • Biological control
    • Disturbance • Habitat/refugia
    regulation • Food production
    • Water regulation • Raw materials
    • Water supply • Genetic resources
    • Erosion control • Recreation
    • Soil formation • Cultural
    • Nutrient cycling
    • Waste treatment
    B. Why Do We Care?
    • Political use of the estimates
    “Societies need to overhaul their
    environmental and economic policies,
    for example, by taxing the loss of
    wetlands, to avoid facing a bill of this
    magnitude.” (Costanza et al. quoted in
    Science, 1997)
    *Robert Costanza’s life-time funding: $21,760,265
    Funding from government: $19,716,215
    (=90.6% of total)
    Why Do We Need to Criticize?
    • The journal Nature decided not to
    publish follow-up to the Costanza et al.
    article.
     The readers of the journal have not
    been exposed to the article’s
    criticism.

    Lack of communication
    between scientists and
    real economists
    Consequences of the Political
    Use of the Wrong Estimate
    • Coercive misallocation of
    individuals’ resources away
    from ecosystems they value
    • Prevention of technological
    advancement

    S-ar putea să vă placă și