Evaluating environmental issue- Valuation as co-ordination in a pluralistic world

Standard valuation of environmental assets and impacts are made as if the determination of the 'proper' values was the key question. The decision-making process is then reduced to an implementation of an objectively determined ranking on sets of possible actions. Whatever the complexity of real world decision-making, valuation concepts and methods are supposed not to be modified. The whole framework changes when valuation is understood as an element in a process of public co-ordination among conflicting actors who hold various concerns. The hypothesis being explored in the paper is that acknowledging complexity and conflicts in the decision-making process calls for a new analytical perspective on valuation itself. Here, valuation is viewed as a support for the search for legitimate agreements among actors. It has to satisfy the requirements of justification processes on the public stage. Standard economic valuation is a prominent framework, but one among others to this regard. A key direction is brought by shaping justification compromises and choosing methodological conventions in line with basic justification benchmarks used by the involved actors.