Sustainable economic development: economic and ethical principles

  • R. K. Turner
  • D. W. Pearce


The current concern with global environmental issues — climate change, biodiversity loss, ozone layer depletion, etc. — reflects the evolution in thinking about environmentalism which has taken place over the last twenty years or so. During the 1970s concern was overtly focused on source limits, i.e. population growth and natural resources and food supply, with relatively less emphasis on sink limits, i.e. pollution and the assimilative capacity of the biosphere. By the time the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) had taken place in the summer of 1992, the primary focus for concern had shifted towards sink limits. Hence UNCED concentrated on two main issues, for which international agreements were signed, climate change and biodiversity.


Capital Stock Contingent Valuation Environmental Resource Natural Capital Intergenerational Equity 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1977) Attitude-behaviour relations: a theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 888–918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barbier, E.B., Markandya, A. and Pearce, D.W. (1990) Environmental sustainability and cost-benefit analysis. Environment and Planning, 22, 1269–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beckerman, W. (1992) Economic growth and the environment: Whose growth? Whose environment? World Development, 20, 481–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brennan, A. (1992) Moral pluralism and the environment. Environmental Values, 1, 15–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown, T.C. and Slovic, P. (1988) Effects of context on economic measures of value, in: Amenity Resource Valuation: Integrating Economics with Other Disciplines, (eds G.L. Peterson, B.L. Driver and R. Gregory) Venture, State College, PA, pp 23–30.Google Scholar
  6. Daly, H.E. and Cobb, J.B. (1989) For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy Towards Community, the Environment and a Sustainable Future, Beacon Press, Boston.Google Scholar
  7. Desvousges, W.H. et al. (1987) Option price estimates for water quality improvement. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 14, 248–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ehrlich, P.R. and Ehrlich, A. (1992) The value of biodiversity, Ambio, 21, 219–26.Google Scholar
  9. Green, C.H. and Tunstall, S.M. (1991) The evaluation of river quality improvements by the contingent valuation method. Applied Economics, 23, 1135–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hanemann, W.M. (1991) Willingness to pay and willingness to accept: How much can they differ? American Economic Review, 81, 635–47.Google Scholar
  11. Harris, C.C. and Brown, G. (1992) Gain, loss and personal responsibility: the role of motivation in resource valuation decision-making. Ecological Economics, 5, 73–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hirsch, F. (1976) Social Limits to Growth, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  13. Howarth, R.B. and Norgaard, R.B. (1992) Environmental valuation under sustainable development. American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 82, 473–7.Google Scholar
  14. Knetsch J. and Sinden J. (1984) Willingness to pay and compensation demanded: experimental evidence of an unexpected disparity in measures in value. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 99, 507–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Loomis, J.B. (1990) Comparative Reliability of the Dichotomous Choice and Open-Ended Contingent Valuation Technique. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 18,78–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Maslow, A. (1970) Motivation and Personality, Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Naess, A. (1973) The shallow and the deep, long range ecology movement: a summary. Inquiry 16, 95–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Norton, B.G. (1987) Why Preserve Natural Variety? Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ.Google Scholar
  19. Pearce, D.W. (1992) Green economics. Environmental Values, 1, 3–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pearce, D.W. Markandya, A. and Barbier, E.B. (1989) Blueprint for a Green Economy, Earthscan, London.Google Scholar
  21. Pearce, D.W., and Turner R.K. (1990) Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment, Harvester Wheatsheaf, Hemel Hempstead and London.Google Scholar
  22. Randall, A. (1987) The total value dilemma in: Toward the Measurement of Total Economic Value, (eds G.L. Peterson and C.F. Sorg) USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. Rm-148, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO, pp. 3–13.Google Scholar
  23. Sagoff, M. (1988) Some problems with environmental economics. Environmental Ethics, 10, 57–64.Google Scholar
  24. Scott, A. and Pearse, P. (1992) Natural resources in a high-tech economy: scarcity versus resourcefulness. Resources Policy, 18, 154–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Simon, J. and Kahn, H. (1984) Resourceful Earth, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  26. Smith., V.K. (1992) Non market valuation of environmental resources: An interpretative appraisal, draft copy of unpublished paper.Google Scholar
  27. Solow, R.M. (1974) Intergenerational equity and exhaustible resources. Review of Economic Studies Symposium, 29–46.Google Scholar
  28. Solow, R.M. (1986) On the intertemporal allocation of natural resources. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 88, 141–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Swaney, J. (1987) Elements of a neo-institutional environmental economics. Journal of Environmental Issues, 21, 1739–79.Google Scholar
  30. Turner, R.K. (1988) Wetland conservation: economics and ethics, in Economics, Growth and Sustainable Environments, (eds D. Collard et al), Macmillan, London.Google Scholar
  31. Turner, R.K. (1991) Economics and Wetland Management. Ambio 20, 59–63.Google Scholar
  32. Turner, R.K. (1992) Speculations on weak and strong sustainability, CSERGE GEC Working Paper 92–26, CSERGE, UEA, Norwich and UCL, London.Google Scholar
  33. Willig, R.D. (1976) Consumer’s Surplus without Apology. American Economic Review, 66, 587–97.Google Scholar
  34. World Commission on Environment and Development (1987) Our Common Future, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. K. Turner
  • D. W. Pearce

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations