Presentation Abstract
Although the ecological valuation literature has been focused largely on instrumental values, there is increasing recognition that relational values might play a crucial and related role in environmental policy and practice. For example, relational values—as preferences, principles and virtues about human relationships involving nature—are identified as central in the IPBES Conceptual Framework, and recent work has investigated the implications of these for conservation and ecosystem management. But what are the implications of relational values for ecosystem valuation? In this talk, I address this question in three points. First, whereas instrumental or economic values are values of a thing, relational values are values about things, but these too can be quantitatively assessed. Second, whereas economic values are useful in a cost-benefit framework for decision-making, by which valuation outputs are aggregated to inform independent ‘rational’ decisions, relational values are complementary in first assessing whether decisions foster sustainable relationships, which may have spillover benefits for other decisions. Third, whereas economic values presume that human beings are self-interested rational agents who might be incentivized to engage in conservation or restoration—which risks crowding out moral motivations—a relational values approach recognizes explicitly that humans are value-oriented efficient complexity managers whose moral motivations can be crowded in. I illustrate these points by reference to incentive programs like payments for ecosystem services, finance tools like social impact bonds, and a new initiative that links both while addressing the apparently unassailable escalation of consumption (CoSphere).
Session Title
Panel: Towards Resilience Through a Socio-Ecological Paradigm
Keywords
Ecosystem services, Values, Valuation, Relational values, Payments for ecosystem services
Conference Track
SSE8: Policy, Management, and Regulations
Conference Name
Salish Sea Ecosystem Conference (2018 : Seattle, Wash.)
Document Type
Event
SSEC Identifier
SSE8-505
Start Date
6-4-2018 3:30 PM
End Date
6-4-2018 3:00 PM
Type of Presentation
Oral
Genre/Form
presentations (communicative events)
Contributing Repository
Digital content made available by University Archives, Heritage Resources, Western Libraries, Western Washington University.
Subjects – Topical (LCSH)
Environmental economics--Salish Sea (B.C. and Wash.)
Geographic Coverage
Salish Sea (B.C. and Wash.)
Rights
This resource is displayed for educational purposes only and may be subject to U.S. and international copyright laws. For more information about rights or obtaining copies of this resource, please contact University Archives, Heritage Resources, Western Libraries, Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA 98225-9103, USA (360-650-7534; heritage.resources@wwu.edu) and refer to the collection name and identifier. Any materials cited must be attributed to the Salish Sea Ecosystem Conference Records, University Archives, Heritage Resources, Western Libraries, Western Washington University.
Type
Text
Language
English
Format
application/pdf
Included in
Fresh Water Studies Commons, Marine Biology Commons, Natural Resources and Conservation Commons, Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Commons
Relational values and valuation: challenges, and possibilities
Although the ecological valuation literature has been focused largely on instrumental values, there is increasing recognition that relational values might play a crucial and related role in environmental policy and practice. For example, relational values—as preferences, principles and virtues about human relationships involving nature—are identified as central in the IPBES Conceptual Framework, and recent work has investigated the implications of these for conservation and ecosystem management. But what are the implications of relational values for ecosystem valuation? In this talk, I address this question in three points. First, whereas instrumental or economic values are values of a thing, relational values are values about things, but these too can be quantitatively assessed. Second, whereas economic values are useful in a cost-benefit framework for decision-making, by which valuation outputs are aggregated to inform independent ‘rational’ decisions, relational values are complementary in first assessing whether decisions foster sustainable relationships, which may have spillover benefits for other decisions. Third, whereas economic values presume that human beings are self-interested rational agents who might be incentivized to engage in conservation or restoration—which risks crowding out moral motivations—a relational values approach recognizes explicitly that humans are value-oriented efficient complexity managers whose moral motivations can be crowded in. I illustrate these points by reference to incentive programs like payments for ecosystem services, finance tools like social impact bonds, and a new initiative that links both while addressing the apparently unassailable escalation of consumption (CoSphere).
