An anonymous questioner recently asked: "What is ecological economics?"
As an ecological economist, I feel a responsibility to reply.
First, ecological economics (EE) is not traditional natural resource &
environmental economics. Ecological economics is a departure from the
traditional ways economists view environmental issues # a new paradigm.
Robert Costanza, President of the International Society for Ecological
Economics, has a concise definition: #Ecological Economics addresses the
relationships between ecosystems and economic systems.# (Costanza
1989:1). The relationships & linkages between ecosystems & economic
systems are what most (if not all) of the environmental issues we face
revolve around # from the spotted owl to global warming. All call for
an EE approach.
EE can be viewed as an attempt to bring together some of the insights from
economics with the insights of ecology to provide a new, richer, more realistic
& more relevant perspective on economic/ecological systems & interactions.
The following statement by John Proops is a good statement of the
rationale for EE: #Economists are increasingly coming to recognize that
the study of human activities on a finite planet, in the long-run,
requires a different set of concepts to those useful for the economic
analysis of households, firms, and nation states in the short- and
medium-run. In a complementary way, ecologists, and other natural
scientists, are increasingly recognizing that economic activity is here
to stay; human activities are coming to dominate the global ecosystem,
and ecosystem analysis which does not explicitly include economic
activities makes less and less sense. The stage seems to be set for a
coming together of these two disciplines so that problems of resource
use and pollution in the global ecosystem can be discussed and assessed
in a conceptual framework worthy of these problems.# (Proops
1989:73-74).
There are at least 6 major themes of EE that distinguish it from
conventional (neoclassical) economic approaches to natural resources &
the environment:
SUSTAINABILITY. Traditional economic analysis focuses on the goals of
allocative efficiency and growth. Ecological economists maintain that
the integrity and sustainability of the ecosystem are essential to
future economic well-being, and that the criterion of sustainability
should be built into economic models and policies.
MULTIPLE VALUES, BROADER NOTIONS OF VALUE. Economic value is limited to
two narrow types: Value in exchange (market price) and value in use
(willingness to pay or willingness to accept compensation). As someone
once observed, #Economic value is a species of the genus value.# EE
proposes a much broader theory of value that includes social, aesthetic,
life support, intrinsic, and energy values, in addition to traditional
economic value.
INTERGENERATIONAL EQUITY. In conventional economics, decisions about
how to use resources over time are treated as investment questions, as
if all resources belonged to the present generation. The practice of
discounting future values in economics means that a resource 10 years
from now is only about half as valuable as that same resource today
(depending on the discount rate). Ecological economists believe that
the future should not be so heavily discounted, and that we need to make
decisions that won#t compromise the quality of life (or life itself) for
future generations.
UNCERTAINTY. Another theme of Ecological Economics is uncertainty #
recognition that there are fundamental uncertainties and high levels of
risk surrounding large scale or irreversible changes in the environment.
For example, we don#t know with any precision what the future impacts of
increased concentrations of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere will be.
In the face of such uncertainty, the prudent course is to proceed with
caution: #One does not run blindly through a dark landscape that may
contain crevasses. One assumes they are there and goes gingerly and with
eyes wide open, at least until one can see a little better.# (Costanza
1989:5).
METHODOLOGICAL PLURALISM. Sole reliance on any one analytical framework
or method would provide an incomplete picture of the relationships
between ecosystems and economic systems. As Christopher Stone notes,
summarizing the view of Paul Feyerabend, #... the history of sciences
reveals an incompleteness and even inconsistency of each framework which
should be regarded as routine and inevitable, and... a pluralism of
theories and metaphysical viewpoints should be nourished as a means of
advancing on the truth.#
LAND ETHIC. Utilitarianism # the philosophical doctrine that considers
utility as the criterion of action and the useful as good # is the
philosophical base of traditional economics and traditional forestry.
In contrast, the philosophical underpinning of EE is an environmental or
land ethic: #When we see land as a community to which we belong, we may
begin to use it with love and respect.# (Leopold 1966: xviii).
There is an Ecological Economics group in IUFRO (Project Group P6.03). Leaders
of this group include my colleague Dennis Bradley (deputy) and Jan Erik Mattsson
(leader). If you're interested in learning more about this group and receiving
its newsletter, contact: Dennis Bradley, North Central Forest Experiment
Station, 1992 Folwell Ave., St. Paul, MN 55108 USA. Internet:
bradl008@staff.tc.umn.edu
Ecological Economics: Selected References
Bradley, Dennis P. and Bernard J. Lewis. 1992. Ecological economics:
An integrative approach to forest research and practice. Journal of
Forestry 90(2):30-33.
Bradley, Dennis P. and P.O. Nilsson (eds.). 1991. Ecological
Economics: Its Implications for Forest Management and Practice,
Proceedings of a workshop, 2-4 April 1990, St. Paul, MN. USDA Forest
Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station and Swedish University
of Agricultural Sciences, Garpenberg.
Costanza, Robert. 1989. What is ecological economics? Ecological
Economics 1(1): 1-7.
Costanza, Robert and Herman E. Daly. 1987. Toward an ecological
economics. Ecological Modeling (special issue on ecological economics)
38:1-7.
Costanza, Robert (ed.). 1991. Ecological Economics: The Science and
Management of Sustainability. New York: Columbia University Press.
525 p.
Daly, Herman E. 1991. Steady State Economics (Second Edition with New
Essays). Island Press. 300 p.
Daly, Herman E. (ed.). 1980. Economics, Ecology, Ethics: Essays
Toward a Steady-State Economy. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and
Company. 372 p.
Daly, Herman E. and John B. Cobb, Jr. 1989. For the Common Good:
Redirecting the Economy Toward Community, the Environment, and a
Sustainable Future. Beacon Press. 448 p.
Folke, Carl and Tomas K#berger (eds.). 1991. Linking the Natural
Environment and the Economy: Essays from the Eco-Eco Group. Dordrecht,
The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 305 p.
Georgescu-Roegen, N. 1971. The Entropy Law and the Economic Process.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
Hall, Charles A.S. and Dennis P. Bradley. 1990. Ecological economics:
Its implications for forest management and research (a workshop
summary). Conservation Biology 4(3): 221-224.
Maxwell, Judith and Robert Costanza. 1989. An ecological economics for
ecological engineering. pp. 57-77 in: Ecological Engineering: An
Introduction to Ecotechnology, William J. Mitsch and Sven Erik J#rgensen
(eds.). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Proops, John L.R. 1989. Ecological economics: Rationale and problem areas.
Ecological Economics 1(1): 59-76.
Sagoff, Mark. 1988. The Economy of the Earth: Philosophy, Law, and the
Environment. New York: Cambridge University Press. 271 p.
____ __ ------------------------------------
\________| _) | Mail: David N. Bengston |
/ \ / \ | Ecological Economist |
* */ \_ / \* * | North Central Forest |
* / * \| / * \ * | Experiment Station |
* /____*__O/ * \ * | 1992 Folwell Ave. |
* * |_ * * | St. Paul, MN 55108 |
* * * * | Phone: (612) 649-5162 |
* * * * | Fax: (612) 649-5285 |
david bengston | e-mail: bengs001@staff.tc.umn.edu |
----------------------------------
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0