Abstract
The continued loss and degradation of wetlands and the role of economic drivers therein, urgently call for communicating the diverse values of wetlands, and the consequences of loss of vital ecosystem services, in the language of the world’s dominant economic and ecological paradigms. Economic valuation helps bridge this communication gap by enabling expression of the impact of public and private decisions on ecosystem service values in comparable metrics. A fuller and meaningful application of economic valuation assessments merits can be enabled by understanding of why valuation is needed, whose and what values are important, how to derive values and ultimately ensure integration in decision making processes. As akin to various assessment tools, economic valuation is also associated with uncertainty of various forms and levels, which need to be understood for a meaningful application. Valuation in general, and economic valuation in particular, is an evolving field, and needs to be continually enriched with better understanding of ecosystem functioning and plurality of values.
References
Akter S, Bennett J, Akhter S. Preference uncertainty in contingent valuation. Ecol Econ. 2008;67:345–51.
Barbier EB, Baumgartner S, Chopra K, Costello C, Duraiappah A, Hassan R, Kinzig A, Lehman M, Pascual U, Polasky S, Perrings C. The valuation of ecosystem services. In: Naeem S, Bunker D, Hector A, Loreau M, Perrings C, editors. Biodiversity conservation. In: Kareiva PK, Ricketts TH, Daily GC, Tallis H, Polasky S, editors. The theory and practice of ecosystem service valuation in conservation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009.
Bromley DW, Paavola J. Economics, ethics and environmental policy. In: Bromley DW, Paavola J, editors. Economics, ethics, and environmental policy: contested choices. Malden: Blackwell; 2002.
Costanza R. Embodied energy and economic valuation. Science. 1980;210:1219–24.
Costanza R, editor. Ecological economics: the science and management of sustainability. New York: Columbia University Press; 1991.
De Groot RS, Stuip MAM, Finlayson CM, Davidson N. Valuing wetlands: guidance for valuing the benefits derived from wetland ecosystem services, Ramsar technical report No. 3/CBD technical series No. 27. Gland/Montreal: Ramsar Convention Secretariat/Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity; 2006.
Farber SC, Costanza R, Wilson MA. Economics and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services. Ecol Econ. 2002;41:375–92.
Finlayson CM, Davidson N, Pritchard D, Milton GR, MacKay H. The Ramsar convention and ecosystem based approaches to wise use and sustainable development of wetlands. J Int Wildl Law Policy. 2011;14:176–98.
Gren IM, Folke C, Turner RK, Bateman I. Primary and secondary values of wetland ecosystems. Environ Res Econ. 1994;4:55–74.
Holling CS. Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst. 1973;4:1–23.
Jacobs M. Environmental valuation, deliberative democracy and public decision-making. In: Foster J, editor. Valuing nature? Economics, ethics and environment. London: Routledge; 1997. p. 211–31.
Kontoleon A, Macrory R, Swanson T. Individual preference based values and environmental decision-making: should valuation have its day in court? J Res Law Econ. 2002;20:179–216.
McCauley DJ. Selling out on nature. Nature. 2006;443:27–8.
MEA. Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press; 2005.
Mooney H, Cropper A, Reid W. Confronting the human dilemma: how can ecosystems provide sustainable services to benefit society? Nature. 2005;434:561–2.
North DC. Economic performance through time. Am Econ Rev. 1994;8:359–68.
Odum HT. Economic impacts brought about by alterations to freshwater flow. In: Urban ER, Malloy L, editors. Improving interactions between coastal science and policy. Proceedings of the Gulf of Mexico Symposium, National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1996. p. 239–54.
Ostrom E. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science. 2009;325:419–22.
Ready RC, Whitehead JC, Blomquist GC. Contingent valuation when respondents are ambivalent. J Environ Econ Manag. 1995;29:181–97.
Sagoff M. Should preferences count? Land Econ. 1994;70:127–44.
Sagoff M. The quantification and valuation of ecosystem services. Ecol Econ. 2011;70:497–502.
Smith VK, Van Houtveen G, Pattanayaak SK. Benefit transfer via preference calibration: “Prudential algebra” for policy. Land Econ. 2002;78:132–52.
Spash C, Vatn A. Transferring environmental value estimates: issues and alternatives. Ecol Econ. 2006;60:379–88.
TEEB. In: Kumar P, editor. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: ecological and economic foundations. Abingdon: Routledge; 2012.
Turner KT, Paavola J, Cooper P, Farber S, Jessamy V, Georgiu S. Valuing nature: lessons learned and future research directions. Ecol Econ. 2003;46:493–510.
Walker BH, Holling CS, Carpenter SR, Kinzig AP. Resilience, adaptability and transformability. Ecol Soc. 2004;9:5.
Zavestoski S. Constructing and maintaining ecological identities: the strategies of deep ecologists. In: Clayton S, Opotow S, editors. Identity and the natural environment: the psychological significance of nature. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 2004. p. 297–316.
Zografos C, Paavola J. Critical perspectives on human action and deliberative ecological economics. Delhi: Oxford University Press; 2008. p. 146–66.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature
About this entry
Cite this entry
Kumar, R. (2018). Economic Valuation of Wetlands: Overview. In: Finlayson, C.M., et al. The Wetland Book. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9659-3_296
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9659-3_296
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-3493-9
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-9659-3
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesReference Module Biomedical and Life Sciences