The worth of a songbird: ecological economics as a post-normal science

Abstract

One of the very valuable features of Ecological Economics is its provision for publications under the rubric 'Commentary'.In that way, essays which are not research in the strictest sense can still find proper refereed publication, and can be submitted to the further test of open colleague criticism. This paper is intended to be read in that spirit; and where criticisms are made of the work of particular scholars, that is done because of the significance of their contribution.

A framework for the social valuation of ecosystem services

“…We provide them merely to draw attention to the fact that a large number of papers included in ''social valuation'' of ecosystem services are actually economic valuations based exclusively on social preferences. As we do not aim to expand on the differences between both approaches or the risks of limiting research on social preferences to monetary terms, we refer to other authors for further discussion (Funtowicz and Ravetz 1994;Chee 2004;Wegner and Pascual 2011;Farley 2012;Casado-Arzuaga et al 2013). Defining clear methods for the social valuation of ecosystem services would strengthen the social approach as the alternative to economics to assess ecosystem services by society.…”

Managing uncertainty, ambiguity and ignorance in impact assessment by embedding evolutionary resilience, participatory modelling and adaptive management

“…The fundamental argument Funtowicz and Ravetz made almost two decades ago was that quantification is an inadequate approach for dealing with complexity and uncertainty because people will react to uncertainty in different ways (see, for example, Funtowicz and Ravetz, 1993;Funtowicz and Ravetz, 1994a;Funtowicz and Ravetz, 1994b;Funtowicz and Ravetz, 1994c). The argument for recourse to post-normal science is grounded in an assumption that current understanding of natural systems is so incomplete that any models developed are inadequate representations where the uncertainties are based on ignorance (Funtowicz and Ravetz, 1994b).…”

Breaking Ships in the World-System: An Analysis of Two Ship Breaking Capitals, Alang-Sosiya, India and Chittagong, Bangladesh

“…Answering the question raised above as noted by some analysts (Frey 2006a(Frey , 2012a) is problematic because it is difficult to identify, estimate, and value the costs and benefits ( especially the costs) associated with hazards in monetary terms (see, e.g., Frey, McCormick, and Rosa 2007;Funtowicz and Ravetz 1994). Despite suggestions and efforts to the contrary (e.g., Logan 1991), there is no widely accepted factual or methodological basis for identifying, estimating, and valuing the costs and benefits associated with the flow of core hazards to the 13 The unequal distribution of the costs or risks between core and periphery and within the periphery is contrary to Ulrich Beck's (1992Beck's ( , 1999) "risk-society" thesis.…”