To value or not to value? That is not the question

Kallis, Giorgos; Gómez-Baggethun, Erik; Zografos, Christos

doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.07.002

Cited by 261 publications

(183 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

178

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We do not argue that MV methods should be abolished but believe that it should be used only sparsely and cautiously or that they should be adapted so that monetary considerations are given less prevalence. Due reflection about its proper role 11 This is also how to understand the 'tragedy of well-intentioned valuation' (Kallis et al, 2013, p. 100), with MV studies intending to strengthen environmental morale and protection but inadvertently, as a negative and unwanted side-effect, suppressing it. and use is needed whenever MV is to be applied to environmental cases.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Talking money: How market-based valuation can undermine environmental protection

Neuteleers

Engelen

2015

Ecological Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we want to analyze conceptually whether and when merely using economic discourse -talking money -can crowd out people's positive attitudes towards environmental goods and their reasons to protect them. We concentrate on the specific case of market-based or monetary valuation (MV) as an instance of 'commodification in discourse' and argue that it can have the same moral problems as real commodification. We aim to bring together insights from philosophy (pluralistic value theory), ethics (corruption), economics and psychology (crowding-out) to argue that there are good reasons to think about how and when to apply MV in environmental cases. On the basis of this interdisciplinary analysis and in order to promote further empirical research, we develop four empirically falsifiable hypotheses. (i) Commodification in discourse can bring about real commodification. (ii) MV can have framing and crowding effects on those who come into contact with it. (iii) Intrinsic motivation is more robust than extrinsic motivation and leads less to freeriding. (iv) MV's framing and crowding effects can decrease (demand and support for) environmental protection.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Talking money: How market-based valuation can undermine environmental protection

Neuteleers

Engelen

2015

Ecological Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such values may also affect the design of sustainability assessments more broadly via the choices made when selecting methods, metrics, system boundaries, and allocation coefficients for secondary products (Hanes et al, 2015;Sala et al, 2013b). For example, the monetising of environmental and social impacts in ECBA (Kallis et al, 2013;McCauley, 2006;Millward-Hopkins, 2016) is a contentious approach that opponents have argued is fundamentally incompatible with sustainability science (Anderson et al, 2015).…”

Section: Conceptual Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fully integrated modelling for sustainability assessment of resource recovery from waste

Millward-Hopkins

Busch

Purnell

et al. 2018

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

• We develop a multidimensional model for assessing resource recovery systems.• Social, environmental, technical and economic domains of value are fully integrated.• We propose a new typology for metrics better suited to integrated modelling.• We apply the model to a case linking electricity and concrete/cement production.• Interdependencies between domains and temporal dynamics can be modelled. G R A P H I C A L A B S T R A C Ta b s t r a c t a r t i c l e i n f o This paper presents an integrated modelling approach for value assessments, focusing on resource recovery from waste. The method tracks and forecasts a range of values across environmental, social, economic and technical domains by attaching these to material-flows, thus building upon and integrating unidimensional models such as material flow analysis (MFA) and lifecycle assessment (LCA). We argue that the usual classification of metrics into these separate domains is useful for interpreting the outputs of multidimensional assessments, but unnecessary for modelling. We thus suggest that multidimensional assessments can be better performed by integrating the calculation methods of unidimensional models rather than their outputs. To achieve this, we propose a new metric typology that forms the foundation of a multidimensional model. This enables dynamic simulations to be performed with material-flows (or values in any domain) driven by changes in value in other domains. We then apply the model in an illustrative case highlighting links between the UK coal-based electricity-production and concrete/cement industries, investigating potential impacts that may follow the increased use of low-carbon fuels (biomass and solid recovered fuels; SRF) in the former. We explore synergies and trade-offs in value across domains and regions, e.g. how changes in carbon emissions in one part of the system may affect mortality elsewhere. This highlights the advantages of recognising complex system dynamics and making high-level inferences of their effects, even when rigorous analysis is not possible. We also indicate how changes in social, environmental and economic 'values' can be understood as being driven by changes in the technical value of resources. Our work thus emphasises the advantages of building fully integrated models to inform conventional sustainability assessments, rather than applying hybrid approaches that integrate outputs from parallel models. The approach we present demonstrates that this is feasible and lays the foundations for such an integrated model. Crown

show abstract

“…Kallis et al 2013). Finally, many ecological economists are very aware of the plurality of value standards and related 'languages of valuation' (MartinezAlier 2002).…”

Section: Linking Values and Water Governance -A Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Robertson & Wainwright 2013). Unlike use values, exchange values are typically expressed in monetary terms and are not necessarily indicators of the concrete usefulness of an object or product (Kallis et al 2013). The prioritisation of exchange values is considered to be a result of processes of 'commodification' or the creation of new markets in areas that were previously non-marketed (Gómez-Baggethun & Ruiz-Pérez 2011).…”

Section: Human Geography and Political Ecologymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Value Base of Water Governance: A Multi-Disciplinary Perspective

Schulz

Martín-Ortega

Glenk

et al. 2017

Ecological Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Some scholars promote water governance as a normative concept to improve water resources management globally, while others conceive of it as an analytical term to describe the processes, systems and institutions around the management of water resources and water supply. Critics often highlight how specific water governance scenarios fail to deliver socially desirable outcomes, such as social justice or environmental sustainability. While water governance is often perceived as a technical matter, its conceptual and practical components are in fact based on multiple values that, nonetheless, often remain implicit. The present paper seeks to uncover this value base and discusses existing research on values from multiple perspectives, using material from economics, philosophy, psychology, and other social sciences. In different disciplines, values can be understood as fundamental guiding principles, governance-related values or as values assigned to water resources. Together, they shape complex relationships with water governance, which from an analytical perspective is understood as a combination of policy, politics, and polity. Introducing a new conceptual framework, this study seeks to provide a theoretical foundation for empirical research on water governance processes and conflicts.

show abstract

To value or not to value? That is not the question

Cited by 261 publications

References 46 publications

Talking money: How market-based valuation can undermine environmental protection

Talking money: How market-based valuation can undermine environmental protection

Fully integrated modelling for sustainability assessment of resource recovery from waste

The Value Base of Water Governance: A Multi-Disciplinary Perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About