IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/oxford/v28y2012i1p1-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The economic analysis of biodiversity: an assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Dieter Helm
  • Cameron Hepburn

Abstract

Biodiversity is complex, difficult to define, difficult to measure, and often involves international and intergenerational considerations. Biodiversity loss presents significant economic challenges. A great deal of economics is required to understand the issues, but a simple and important observation is that most species and ecosystems are not traded in markets, so prices are often absent and biodiversity is under-provided. Despite the formidable obstacles to high-quality economic analysis, economics has plenty to offer to biodiversity policy. First, economic valuation techniques can be employed to roughly estimate the value of the benefits provided by biodiversity and ecosystems. Second, assessing the ‘optimum’ amount of biodiversity involves recognizing that the conversion of natural capital into manufactured and human capital has so far generated vast amounts of wealth. While there may have been ‘too much biodiversity’ in the past, economic analysis suggests that this is a difficult position to hold now. Third, econometric techniques and carefully designed policy studies can assist in determining what policies are most suited to different contexts to cost-effectively reduce biodiversity loss. Fourth, political economy is helpful because international coordination is often required—ecosystems do not respect national borders and many biodiverse ecosystems are in poorer countries. This paper synthesizes the issues and proposes a research agenda, which includes improving the measurement and accounting of natural capital, improving valuation techniques and theory to provide greater guidance as to the ‘optimum’ biodiversity, and developing our understanding of the merits of different alternatives for government intervention to reduce biodiversity loss. Copyright 2012, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Dieter Helm & Cameron Hepburn, 2012. "The economic analysis of biodiversity: an assessment," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 28(1), pages 1-21, Spring.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:oxford:v:28:y:2012:i:1:p:1-21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/oxrep/grs014
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    2. Boerema, A. & Van Passel, S. & Meire, P., 2018. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Ecosystem Management With Ecosystem Services: From Theory to Practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 207-218.
    3. Charles Palmer & Salvatore Di Falco, 2012. "Biodiversity, poverty, and development," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 28(1), pages 48-68, Spring.
    4. George Atisa, 2020. "Policy adoption, legislative developments, and implementation: the resulting global differences among countries in the management of biological resources," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 141-159, March.
    5. Jan Brus & Jan Deutscher & Aleš Bajer & Petr Kupec & Lucie Olišarová, 2020. "Monetary Assessment of Restored Habitats as a Support Tool for Sustainable Landscape Management in Lowland Cultural Landscapes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-15, February.
    6. Geoffrey Meen, 2016. "Spatial housing economics: A survey," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(10), pages 1987-2003, August.
    7. Spangenberg, Joachim H. & von Haaren, Christina & Settele, Josef, 2014. "The ecosystem service cascade: Further developing the metaphor. Integrating societal processes to accommodate social processes and planning, and the case of bioenergy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 22-32.
    8. Evans, Chris D. & Bonn, Aletta & Holden, Joseph & Reed, Mark S. & Evans, Martin G. & Worrall, Fred & Couwenberg, John & Parnell, Mark, 2014. "Relationships between anthropogenic pressures and ecosystem functions in UK blanket bogs: Linking process understanding to ecosystem service valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 5-19.
    9. Spangenberg, Joachim H. & Settele, Josef, 2016. "Value pluralism and economic valuation – defendable if well done," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 100-109.
    10. David W. Martin, 2019. "Gender Concerns When Noah the Economist Ranks Biodiversity Protection Policies," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-13, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:oxford:v:28:y:2012:i:1:p:1-21. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/oxrep .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.