By the same authors

From the same journal

The interplay between economics, legislative power and social influence examined through a social-ecological framework for marine ecosystems services

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

The interplay between economics, legislative power and social influence examined through a social-ecological framework for marine ecosystems services. / Martino, Simone; Tett, Paul; Kenter, Jasper.

In: Science of the Total Environment, Vol. 651, No. 1, 651 part 1, 15.02.2019, p. 1388-1404.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

Martino, S, Tett, P & Kenter, J 2019, 'The interplay between economics, legislative power and social influence examined through a social-ecological framework for marine ecosystems services', Science of the Total Environment, vol. 651, no. 1, 651 part 1, pp. 1388-1404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.09.181

APA

Martino, S., Tett, P., & Kenter, J. (2019). The interplay between economics, legislative power and social influence examined through a social-ecological framework for marine ecosystems services. Science of the Total Environment, 651(1), 1388-1404. [651 part 1]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.09.181

Vancouver

Martino S, Tett P, Kenter J. The interplay between economics, legislative power and social influence examined through a social-ecological framework for marine ecosystems services. Science of the Total Environment. 2019 Feb 15;651(1):1388-1404. 651 part 1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.09.181

Author

Martino, Simone ; Tett, Paul ; Kenter, Jasper. / The interplay between economics, legislative power and social influence examined through a social-ecological framework for marine ecosystems services. In: Science of the Total Environment. 2019 ; Vol. 651, No. 1. pp. 1388-1404.

Bibtex - Download

@article{b31b64fabfb14dd79345246994014e6a,
title = "The interplay between economics, legislative power and social influence examined through a social-ecological framework for marine ecosystems services",
abstract = "In the last 15 years, conservation has shifted increasingly towards perspectives based on the instrumental value of nature, where what counts is what provides benefits to humans. The ecosystem services framework embraces this vision of nature through monetary valuation of the environment to correct market failures and government distortions that hinder efficient allocation of public goods, including goods and services provided by biodiversity and ecosystems. The popularity of this approach is reflected in different countries legislation; for instance, US, EU and UK have introduced economic criteria for comparing costs and benefits of environmental policies in protecting ecosystem services. From an operational perspective, the ecosystem services framework requires ecologists to estimate how the supply of services is affected by changes in the functionality and/or the extent of ecosystems; and economists to identify how changes in the supply affect the flow of direct and indirect benefits to people. However, this approach may be simplistic when faced with the complexity of social-ecological systems. We investigated this for three different marine services: assimilative capacity of waste, coastal defense and renewable energy. We find that economic valuation could provide efficient and fair allocations in the case of assimilative capacity, but leads to social clashes between outputs generated by cost benefit analysis and citizens{\textquoteright} expectation in the case of coastal defense. In the case of renewable energy, controversies can be generated by regulatory mechanisms that are not necessarily aligned with the interests of industry or important social groups. We conclude that there is a need to integrate perspectives arising from utilitarian allocation of resources with those involving legislation and communal values in order to reconcile conflicting interests and better sustain marine social-ecological systems.",
keywords = "Complexity, Economic valuation, Legislation, Marine ecosystem services, Social-ecological systems",
author = "Simone Martino and Paul Tett and Jasper Kenter",
note = "{\textcopyright} 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher{\textquoteright}s self-archiving policy. ",
year = "2019",
month = feb,
day = "15",
doi = "10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.09.181",
language = "English",
volume = "651",
pages = "1388--1404",
journal = "Science of the Total Environment",
issn = "0048-9697",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "1",

}

RIS (suitable for import to EndNote) - Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - The interplay between economics, legislative power and social influence examined through a social-ecological framework for marine ecosystems services

AU - Martino, Simone

AU - Tett, Paul

AU - Kenter, Jasper

N1 - © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy.

PY - 2019/2/15

Y1 - 2019/2/15

N2 - In the last 15 years, conservation has shifted increasingly towards perspectives based on the instrumental value of nature, where what counts is what provides benefits to humans. The ecosystem services framework embraces this vision of nature through monetary valuation of the environment to correct market failures and government distortions that hinder efficient allocation of public goods, including goods and services provided by biodiversity and ecosystems. The popularity of this approach is reflected in different countries legislation; for instance, US, EU and UK have introduced economic criteria for comparing costs and benefits of environmental policies in protecting ecosystem services. From an operational perspective, the ecosystem services framework requires ecologists to estimate how the supply of services is affected by changes in the functionality and/or the extent of ecosystems; and economists to identify how changes in the supply affect the flow of direct and indirect benefits to people. However, this approach may be simplistic when faced with the complexity of social-ecological systems. We investigated this for three different marine services: assimilative capacity of waste, coastal defense and renewable energy. We find that economic valuation could provide efficient and fair allocations in the case of assimilative capacity, but leads to social clashes between outputs generated by cost benefit analysis and citizens’ expectation in the case of coastal defense. In the case of renewable energy, controversies can be generated by regulatory mechanisms that are not necessarily aligned with the interests of industry or important social groups. We conclude that there is a need to integrate perspectives arising from utilitarian allocation of resources with those involving legislation and communal values in order to reconcile conflicting interests and better sustain marine social-ecological systems.

AB - In the last 15 years, conservation has shifted increasingly towards perspectives based on the instrumental value of nature, where what counts is what provides benefits to humans. The ecosystem services framework embraces this vision of nature through monetary valuation of the environment to correct market failures and government distortions that hinder efficient allocation of public goods, including goods and services provided by biodiversity and ecosystems. The popularity of this approach is reflected in different countries legislation; for instance, US, EU and UK have introduced economic criteria for comparing costs and benefits of environmental policies in protecting ecosystem services. From an operational perspective, the ecosystem services framework requires ecologists to estimate how the supply of services is affected by changes in the functionality and/or the extent of ecosystems; and economists to identify how changes in the supply affect the flow of direct and indirect benefits to people. However, this approach may be simplistic when faced with the complexity of social-ecological systems. We investigated this for three different marine services: assimilative capacity of waste, coastal defense and renewable energy. We find that economic valuation could provide efficient and fair allocations in the case of assimilative capacity, but leads to social clashes between outputs generated by cost benefit analysis and citizens’ expectation in the case of coastal defense. In the case of renewable energy, controversies can be generated by regulatory mechanisms that are not necessarily aligned with the interests of industry or important social groups. We conclude that there is a need to integrate perspectives arising from utilitarian allocation of resources with those involving legislation and communal values in order to reconcile conflicting interests and better sustain marine social-ecological systems.

KW - Complexity

KW - Economic valuation

KW - Legislation

KW - Marine ecosystem services

KW - Social-ecological systems

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85053870657&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.09.181

DO - 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.09.181

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85053870657

VL - 651

SP - 1388

EP - 1404

JO - Science of the Total Environment

JF - Science of the Total Environment

SN - 0048-9697

IS - 1

M1 - 651 part 1

ER -