Social ecology, sustainability, and economics

Ecological Modelling, 1987

. Toward an ecological economics. Ecol. Modelling, 38: 1-7. Integrating ecology and economics is increasingly important as humanity's impact on the natural world increases. Current paradigms in both fields are too narrow (and seem to be getting narrower). This paper introduces and summarizes this special issue of Ecological Modeling devoted to ecological economics. There are eleven papers (including this one) that cover most of the important theoretical issues involved (applied papers are left for a future volume). These issues are: (1) sustainability; (2) inter-and intra-species distribution of wealth; (3) discounting and intergenerational justice; and (4) dealing with non-monetized values, imprecision, and uncertainty. This collection is seen as a hopeful first step toward a true synthesis of ecology and economics that could lead to better management of renewable and non-renewable natural resources and a sustainable future.

Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2001

The Economics of Nature and the Nature of Economics

Like any field of scientific inquiry, ecological economics has evolved along several different fronts. One important element is an understanding of the history of the field, which is characterized by interwoven strands from ecology, physics, the physiocratic and classical schools of economics, and other fields in the social and natural social sciences. Another important area is the relation of neoclassical economics to ecological economics. Part of the impetus behind the creation of the International Society for Ecological Economics was the growing recognition that, by itself, neoclassical economics could not fully explain the sources of depletion and degradation, nor could it provide a reliable compass for future development. A third broad strand of work is the empirical analysis of energy and material flows within and between economic and environmental systems. This work ranges widely, from the construction of sustainability indicators to land use models. This book covers some of the important recent developments in the theory, concepts and empirical applications of ecological economics and sustainable development. It contains contributions from some of the leading scholars in the field of ecological economics. The book is divided into two parts. Part I, The Nature of Economics, includes chapters on the contribution of classical economics to ecological economics, valuation in ecological economics, the role of communication in the discourse on sustainable development, and a classification system for theories and methods in ecological economics. Part II, The Economics of Nature, includes chapters on alternatives to the growth paradigm, case studies of sustainable development and critical reviews of the environmental Kuznets curve, green national accounting, indicators of natural resource scarcity, and alternatives to gross domestic product.

Handbook of Ecological Economics, 2015

1995

2015

Analytical philosophy has had a long but little noted influence on the development of ecological economics. The work of the left Vienna Circle, in particular of Otto Neurath, defended two central claims of ecological economics: first, economics needs to address the various ways in which economic institutions and relations are embedded within the physical world and have ecological preconditions that are a condition of their sustainability; second, reasonable economic and social choices cannot be founded on purely monetary valuations.

Rethinking economics, 2017

2006

Ecological Economics has developed as a "transdisciplinary science," but it has not taken significant steps toward a truly integrated process of evaluating anthropogenic ecological change. The emerging dominance within ecological economics of the movement to monetize "ecological services," when combined with the already wellentrenched dominance of contingent pricing as a means to evaluate impacts on amenities, has created a "monistic" approach to valuation studies. It is argued that this monistic approach to evaluating anthropogenic impacts is inconsistent with a sophisticated conception of ecology as a complex science that rests on shifting metaphors. An alternative, pluralistic and iterative approach to valuation of anthropogenic ecological change is proposed. What do you get if you cross an economist and an ecologist? While genetic technology has (thankfully) not yet allowed for this experiment to be attempted at the level of the individual, over the last 20 years the field of ecological economics has emerged and grown as a result of just this type of cross-fertilization at the disciplinary level. As nurtured through ISEE conferences, other national ISEE meetings, in colleges and agencies, and in the writings in the journal, Ecological Economics, the field is the result of a sustained experiment in integrated ecological and economic understanding of environmental problems and the challenge of sustainable living. Is the post-disciplinary, trans-disciplinary chimera that stands before us a fulfillment of the vision that gave it birth? Or are we feeding a beast that does not serve the purpose for which it was designed? Perhaps it is time to evaluate the direction and standing of the field of ecological economics. A report card, however informal, may be timely because, as I understand the current situation, the trans-disciplinary field of ecological economics faces an important choice, a crossroads that will determine its future shape as a discipline and will

Transformations. 11th biennial Conference of the European Society for Ecological Economics, 2015

Ecological economics essentially grew out of economists working in the environmental field and growing dissatisfied with the way that standard economics saw interactions between nature and societies and ecologists anxious to take human activities (including economic) into account in a much more direct way, within the dynamic of the ecosystems on which they depend. This clearly inscribed the new field of ecological economics within an interdisciplinary and even transdisciplinary perspective. In order to try to provide some thoughts on the evolution of this trend and the relationship between economists and ecologists, we have chosen to focus on two items 1 that are undoubtedly among the achievements of ecological economics, although their mobilization is far from uniform among the authors who make use of them: coevolution and ecosystem services. In order to do so, the itinerary of two authors recognized in the field of ecological economics will be examined: Richard B. Norgaard, whose work on the coevolutionary paradigm is recognized as one of the foundations of ecological economics (Munda, 1997); Robert Costanza, who initiated work on the monetary valuation of ecosystem services 1 For the moment, we would like to use the generic term for the subject. We shall see later that these subjects may be alternatively (and often also simultaneously) used as metaphors, concepts, and instruments of public policy.

Recent years have seen the emergence of an important debate over the ongoing relevance of political ecology as an area of academic enquiry. This state of affairs is undoubtedly related to the multidisciplinary origins of the field, and the intellectual push and pull of its component parts. Some opinions in the debate, for instance, emphasize the importance of preserving the field's early biophysical roots. Here there are fears that a political ecology 'without ecology' risks forsaking a rich methodological history and spawning a crisis of intellectual credibility . Others have urged that the future of the field lies in understanding how shifting politicaleconomic configurations in today's world contribute to ecological as well as political, economic and cultural transformations . Still others, seeking to maintain the more radical edge of the field, have expressed a desire for the emergence of a political ecology capable of not merely understanding, but of influencing and helping to organize, a transition to a more just and sustainable society .