IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/aesc16/236293.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Are diverse ecosystems more valuable? A conceptual framework of the economic value of biodiversity

Author

Listed:
  • Bartkowski, Bartosz

Abstract

Biodiversity is often believed to be economically valuable, but it is unclear where its value stems from. To date, a number of economic valuation studies targeted biodiversity in highly diverse ways, yet there exists no consistent framework for valuing it. In this paper, a conceptual framework for the economic valuation of biodiversity is presented. By drawing insights from both ecology and economics, the ways through which biodiversity influences human well-being are identified. It is argued that biodiversity’s economic value has four sources: biodiversity contributes to ecosystem functioning (insurance value), is the carrier of future options (option value), provides ‘efficient’ support for migrating species (spill-over value) and influences the aesthetic appreciation of ecosystems (aesthetic value). Being only a property of ecosystems, it does not have value per se, but only contributes to the overall value of an ecosystem. The paper also includes a discussion of the conceptual framework’s fit within the conventional TEV framework, from which the need is derived to expand TEV to better account for biodiversity; a possible extension is offered.

Suggested Citation

  • Bartkowski, Bartosz, 2016. "Are diverse ecosystems more valuable? A conceptual framework of the economic value of biodiversity," 90th Annual Conference, April 4-6, 2016, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 236293, Agricultural Economics Society.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aesc16:236293
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/236293
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:eee:ecoser:v:15:y:2015:i:c:p:11-18 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. William A. Brock & Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2003. "Valuing Biodiversity from an Economic Perspective: A Unified Economic, Ecological, and Genetic Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1597-1614, December.
    3. Bartkowski, Bartosz & Lienhoop, Nele & Hansjürgens, Bernd, 2015. "Capturing the complexity of biodiversity: A critical review of economic valuation studies of biological diversity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1-14.
    4. Burton A. Weisbrod, 1964. "Collective-Consumption Services of Individual-Consumption Goods," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 78(3), pages 471-477.
    5. Jette Jacobsen & John Boiesen & Bo Thorsen & Niels Strange, 2008. "What’s in a name? The use of quantitative measures versus ‘Iconised’ species when valuing biodiversity," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 39(3), pages 247-263, March.
    6. Giles Atkinson & Ian Bateman & Susana Mourato, 2012. "Recent advances in the valuation of ecosystem services and biodiversity," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(1), pages 22-47, Spring.
    7. Meinard, Yves & Grill, Philippe, 2011. "The economic valuation of biodiversity as an abstract good," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(10), pages 1707-1714, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    biodiversity; economic valuation; ecosystem functioning; insurance value; option value; TEV; Agricultural and Food Policy; Environmental Economics and Policy; Q51; Q57;

    JEL classification:

    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • Q57 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Ecological Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ags:aesc16:236293. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/aesukea.html .

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.