SUBJECT: RE: Approaches to the Estimation of the values of biodiversity
AUTHOR: Felix Rauschmayer
DATE: 11th April 2003

KEYWORDS: Valuation of biodiversity, social values, ecological values, economic values.

SUMMARY: There are further methods available for valuing biodiversity than those described by Timo Goeschl, Andreas Kontoleon and Timothy Swanson in their contribution of 11th April. The difficulty is not finding the optimal method for all cases (there is no such thing), but (1) to identify the whole range of values associated with biodiversity, (2) to capture these values and (3) to aggregate them. Approaches based on monetarisation are one type of method that can be used in the first and second step, but must be complemented by many other approaches. Multi-criteria analysis is a method that can be used for the third step, and the whole process (1) to (3) can be called (social) multicriteria decision aid.

Goeschl et al. give the impression that they described all available methods for biodiversity valuation. They picked one non-monetary evaluation method (developed by an economist) which is valuing "diversity" as an intrinsic value, and added 4 other methods which are all based on markets (even though one is currently called "non-market valuation techniques"). I will not insist on the strong assumptions that any of these methods implies, but rather insist on the evidence that neither the valuation of diversity as an intrinsic value nor the capturing of monetary values is able to cover all values that are linked to biodiversity (there is an extensive literature on this issue in the journals Environmental Ethics, Ecological Economics, and Environmental Values, see for one possible structure of values: Krebs 1999).

There is nothing wrong with capturing monetary values for some parts of biodiversity, but it is more important to analyse which values are captured, and which aren't. And then: how can we capture these other values? and how can we aggregate them?

For the first step, an interdisciplinary (and mostly transdisciplinary, i.e. including the concerned public interactively) scoping process is necessary. Ecological, sociological and economic methods can be judged appropriate to capture all values in a second step. But before capturing, it must be clear how these values are aggregated in order to be of use to responsible decision-makers. Only if the aggregation method (it can be verbal, mathematical, or a combination of both) is known, can the choice of methods make sense. Up to now, environmental economists focused intensively on the further elaboration and refinement of methods without placing them in a wider context of public decision-making within societies.

A range of methods used more and more for the integration of the evaluation results of different policy options according to different criteria (or values, as I called them above), is multicriteria analysis (cf. for an internet publication: http://www.dtlr.gov.uk/about/multicriteria/index.htm">http://www.dtlr.gov.uk/about/multicriteria/index.htm">http://www.dtlr.gov.uk/about/multicriteria/index.htm, a good text book is Bouyssou et al. 2000). In many cases, the efficiency and the normative quality of the results are improved by embedding such a process comprising of three steps: identification of the values, evaluation, and aggregation, in a participatory process (Renn 1993, Tacconi 2000, Munda 2003, Wittmer et al. 2003).

References:
* Bouyssou, D. et al. Evaluation and Decision Models: a Critical Perspective. Kluwer ed. Dordrecht: 2000.
* Krebs, A. Ethics of Nature - A Map. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1999.
* Munda, G. "Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation (SMCE): Methodological Foundations and Operational Consequences." European Journal of Operational Research, forthcoming (2003).
* Renn, O. et al. "Public participation in decision making: A three-step procedure." (1993): 189-214.
* Tacconi, L. Biodiversity and Ecological Economics - Participation, Values and Resource Management. London: Earthscan, 2000.
* Wittmer, H., B. Klauer, and F. Rauschmayer. "How to Select Instruments for the Resolution of Environmental Conflicts?" Land Use Policy, submitted (2003).

A contribution by:

Felix Rauschmayer
Department of Economics, Sociology, and Law
UFZ - Centre for Environmental Research Leipzig-Halle