Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Reinforcing the Ecosystem Services Perspective: The Temporal Component

  • Published:
Ecosystems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Founded upon sustainability science, the ecosystem services concept is increasingly defined by an economic valuation approach to natural capital. This latter-day addition risks subsuming the central message of the ecosystem services concept: that humanity is reliant upon the natural world. Three arenas of inappropriate application of the economic valuation approach to ecosystem services are detailed, these are defined as ecological, social-natural, and socioeconomic problems. Each problematic arena suggests the primary shortcoming of the economic valuation approach: it lacks an incorporation of the temporal component. More clearly incorporating the natural conditions and processes which compose and maintain human benefits into the ecosystem services concept will more fully reflect contemporary economics and sustainability science. The framework of Social-ecological Systems (SES) theory provides a broad foundation for the economic valuation of ecosystem services. Emphasizing the importance of human and environmental change, SES theory encapsulates a needed awareness of the dynamic interactions which compose ecosystem services.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Beck U. 1992. Risk society. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd JW, Banzhaf HS. 2005. Services and government accountability: the need for a new way of judging nature’s value. Resources Summer: 16–19.

  • Brundtland G. 1987. Our common future: the world commission on environment and development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callicott JB, Ames RT, Eds. 1989. Nature in Asian traditions of thought: essays in environmental philosophy. Albany, New York: State of New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter SR, Turner M. 2000. Opening the black boxes: ecosystem science and economic valuation. Ecosystems 3(1):1–3.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter SR, Mooney HA, Agard J, Capistrano D, Defries RS, Díaz S, Dietz T and others 2009. Science for managing ecosystem services: beyond the millennium ecosystem assessment. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106(5):1305–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Chan KMA, Guerry AD, Balvanera P, Klain S, Satterfield T, Basurto X, Bostrom A and others 2012. Where are cultural and social in ecosystem services? A framework for constructive engagement. Bioscience 62(8):744–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colyvan M, Linquist S, Grey W, Griffiths PE, Odenbaugh J. 2009. Philosophical issues in ecology: recent trends and future directions. Ecol Soc 14(2):22–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R. 2000. Social goals and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecosystems 3(1):4–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R, Daly HE. 1992. Natural capital and sustainable development. Conserv Biol 6(1):37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R, Arge R, de Groot R, Farberk S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Limburg K and others 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387(May):253–60.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza R, de Groot R, Sutton P, van der Ploeg S, Anderson SJ, Kubiszewski I, Farber S, Turner RK. 2014. Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Glob Environ Change 26:152–58.

  • Cronon W. 1983. Changes in the land: indians, colonists and the ecology of New England. New York, NY: Hill and Wang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronon W. 1991. Nature’s metropolis: Chicago and the Great West. New York, NY: W. W. Norton and Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronon W. 2000. Resisting monoliths and tabulae rasae. Ecol Appl 10(3):673–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cumming GS. 2011. Spatial resilience in social-ecological systems. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cumming GS, Collier J. 2005. Change and identity in complex systems. Ecol Soc 10(1).

  • Cumming GS, Olsson P, Chapin FS, Holling CS. 2012. Resilience, experimentation, and scale mismatches in social-ecological landscapes. Landscape Ecol 28(6):1139–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daily GC. 1997. Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. In: Daily GC, Ed. Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Washington, Cavelo: Island Press. p 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daily GC, Matson PA. 2008. Ecosystem services: from theory to implementation. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105(28):9455–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Daily GC, Söderqvist T, Aniyar S, Arrow K, Dasgupta P, Ehrlich PR, Folke C and others 2000. The value of nature and the nature of value. Science 289:395–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Daily GC, Polasky S, Goldstein J, Kareiva PM, Mooney HA, Pejchar L, Ricketts TH, Salzman J, Shallenberger R. 2009. Ecosystem services in decision making: time to deliver. Front Ecol Environ 7(1):21–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniel TC, Muhar A, Arnberger A, Aznar O, Boyd JW, Chan KMA, Costanza R and others 2012. Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109(23):8812–19.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Darwin C. 1859. The origin of species by means of natural selection, or, the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrlich PR, Ehrlich A. 1981. Extinctions: the causes and consequences of the disappearance of species. New York, NY: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farber SC, Costanza R, Wilson MA. 2002. Economic and ecological concepts for valuing ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 41(3):375–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farley J. 2012. Ecosystem services: the economics debate. EcosystServ 1(1):40–49.

  • Folke C. 2006. The economic perspective: conservation against development versus conservation for development. Conserv Biol 20(3):686–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Forest History Society. 2015. U.S. Forest Service Fire Suppression. http://www.foresthistory.org/ASPNET/Policy/Fire/Suppression/Suppression.aspx.

  • Foster JB. 2000. Marx’s ecology: materialism and nature. New York, NY: Monthly Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster JB. 2002. Ecology against capitalism. New York, NY: Monthly Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Funtowicz S, Ravetz JR. 1994. The worth of a songbird: ecological economics as a post-normal science. Ecol Econ 10:197–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gill SD. 1987. Mother earth: an American story. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golley FB. 1993. A history of the ecosystem concept in ecology: more than the sum of the part. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Baggethun E, Ruiz-Perez M. 2011. Economic valuation and the commodification of ecosystem services. Prog Phys Geogr 35(5):613–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gómez-Baggethun E, de Groot R, Lomas PL, Montes C. 2010. The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: from early notions to markets and payment schemes. Ecol Econ 69(6):1209–18.

  • Goulder LH, Kennedy D. 1997. Valuing ecosystem services: philosophical bases and empirical methods. In: Daily GC, Ed. Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Washington, Cavelo: Island Press. p 23–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gowdy JM, Dollimore DE, Wilson DS, Witt U. 2013. Economic cosmology and the evolutionary challenge. J Econ Behav Organ 90:S11–20.

  • Groffman PM, Baron JS, Blett T, Gold AJ, Goodman I, Gunderson LH, Levinson BM and others 2006. Ecological thresholds: the key to successful environmental management or an important concept with no practical application? Ecosystems 9:1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson LH, Holling CS, Eds. 2002. Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardin G. 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science 162(3859):1243–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hardin G. 1974. Living on a lifeboat. Bioscience 24(10):561–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey D. 1996. Justice, nature and the geography of difference. Cambridge and London: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heal G. 2000. Valuing ecosystem services. Ecosystems 3(1):24–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson G. 2009. Marxist political economy and the environment. In: Castree Noel, Ed. A companion to environmental geography. Chichister: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes JD. 1983. American Indian ecology. El Paso, Texas: Texas Western Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • (IPCC) International Panel on Climate Change. 1988. http://www.ipcc.ch/.

  • Kant I. 1781. Critique of pure reason. Translated by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

  • Kareiva P, Marvier M. 2012. What is conservation science? Bioscience 62(11):962–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koso N, Corbera E. 2010. Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism. Ecol Econ 69(6):1228–36. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.002.

  • Leopold A. 1933. The conservation ethic. J Forest 31(6):634–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin SA. 1998. Ecosystems and the biosphere as complex adaptive systems. Ecosystems 1(5):431–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin SA. 1999. Fragile dominion. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Perseus Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levins R, Lewontin R. 1985. The dialectical biologist. Cambridge and London: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Limburg KE, O’Neill RV, Costanza R, Farber S. 2002. Complex systems and valuation. Ecol Econ 41(3):409–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu J, Dietz T, Carpenter SR, Alberti M, Folke C, Moran E, Pell AN and others 2007. Complexity of coupled human and natural systems. Science 317(5844):1513–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ludwig D. 2000. Limitations of economic valuation of ecosystems. Ecosystems 3(1):31–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maler K, Aniyar S, Jansson A. 2008. Accounting for ecosystem services as a way to understand the requirements for sustainable development. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105(28):9501–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Mann C. 2011. 1493: uncovering the new world columbus created. New York, NY: Vintage Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martinez-Alier J, Munda G, O’Neill J. 1998. Weak comparability of values as a foundation for ecological economics. Ecol Econ 26(3):277–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marx K. 1867 (1977). Capital: a critique of political economy. Translated by Fowkes B. New York, NY: Vintage Books.

  • Masood E, Garwin L. 1998. Audacious bid to value the planet whips up a storm. Nature 395:430. (13/2/2014 http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v395/n6701/full/395430a0.html).

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA): Ecosystems and Human Well-Being, Current States and Trends, Vol. 1. 2005. Washington, DC.

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA): Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: a framework for assessment. 2003. Washington, Cavelo, London.

  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA): Ecosystems and Well-Being: Synthesis. 2005. Washington, DC.

  • Mooney HA, Ehrlich PR. 1997. Ecosystem services: a fragmentary history. In: Daily GC, Ed. Nature’s services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Washington, Cavelo: Island Press, pp 11–22.

  • Muradian R, Rival L. 2012. Between markets and hierarchies: the challenge of governing ecosystem services. Ecosyst Serv 1(1): 93–100.

  • Myrdal G. 1953. The political element in the development of economic theory. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norberg J, Cumming G, Eds. 2008. Complexity theory for a sustainable future. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norgaard RB. 2008. Finding hope in the millennium ecosystem assessment. Conserv Biol 22(4):862–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Norgaard RB. 2010. Ecosystem services: from eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder. Ecol Econ 69(6):1219–27.

  • Ostrom E. 2007. A diagnostic approach for going beyond panaceas. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104(39):15181–7. doi:10.1073/pnas.0702288104.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Parks S, Gowdy J. 2013. What have economists learned about valuing nature? A review essay. Ecosyst Serv 3(March):e1–10.

  • PCAST. Sustaining environmental capital: protecting society and the economy, a report for the President. 2011. Washington, DC.

  • PCAST. Teaming with life: investing in science to understand and use America’s Living Captial. 1998. Vol. 1998. Washington, DC.

  • Peterson MJ, Hall DM, Feldpausch-Parker AM, Peterson TR. 2010. Obscuring ecosystem function with application of the ecosystem services concept. Conserv Biol 24(1):113–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Potschin MB, Haines-Young RH. 2011. Ecosystem services: exploring a geographical perspective. Prog Phys Geogr 35(5):575–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pyne SJ. 1982. Fire in America: a cultural history of wildland and rural fire. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rammel C, van den Bergh JCJM. 2015. Evolutionary policies for sustainable development: adaptive flexibility and risk minimising. Ecol Econ 47:121–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reyers B, Biggs R, Cumming GS, Elmqvist T, Hejnowicz AP, Polasky S. 2013. Getting the measure of ecosystem services: a social-ecological approach. Front Ecol Environ 11(5):268–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes R. 1988. The making of the atomic bomb. New York, NY: Touchstone.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson MM. 2004. The neoliberalization of ecosystem services: wetland mitigation banking and problems in environmental governance. Geoforum 35(3):361–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robertson MM. 2006. The nature that capital can see: science, state, and market in the commodification of ecosystem services. Environ Planning D: Soc Space 55(1994):367–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers KH, Luton R, Biggs H, Biggs R, Blignaut S, Choles AG, Carolyn G. 2013. Fostering complexity thinking in action research for change in social—ecological systems. Ecol Soc 18(2).

  • Rolston H. 1982. Are values in nature subjective or objective? Environ Ethics 4:125–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosen RJ. 2014. How much are the world’s ecosystems worth? The Atlantic. http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/06/how-much-are-the-worlds-ecosystems-worth/372862/.

  • Rousseau JJ. 1754 (1761). A discourse upon the origin and foundation of inequality among mankind. London: R. & J. Dodsley. https://archive.org/details/discourseuponor00rous.

  • Sekercioglu CH. 2010. Ecosystem functions and services. In: Sodhi Navjot S, Ehrlich Paul R, Eds. Conservation biology for all. New York and London: Oxford University Press. p 45–67.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Serres M. 1990. The natural contract. Ann Arbor, Michigan: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solow RM. 1974. The economics of resources or the resources of economics. Am Econ Rev 64(2):1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soule ME. 2013. The faith-based, trickle-down model of conservation 5.0. http://michaelsoule.com/.

  • Tansley AG. 1935. The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms. Ecology 16(3):284–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • TEEB Foundations. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: The Ecological and Economic Foundations. 2010. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: The Ecological and Economic Foundations.

  • TEEB Synthesis. The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: mainstreaming the economics of nature: a synthesis of the approach conclusions and recommendations of TEEB. 2010. Environment. http://www.iges.or.jp/jp/news/topic/pdf/1103teeb/teeb_synthesis_j.pdf.

  • The Econonmist. 2005. Are you being served? 21 (April): 76–78. (13/2/2014 www.economist.com/node/3886849).

  • Tilman D, Knops J, Wedin D, Reich P, Ritchie M, Siemann E. 1997. The influence of functional diversity and composition on ecosystem processes. Science 277(5330):1300–2.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 1972. http://www.unep.org/.

  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) . 2012. Living with Fire.” Fire Management. http://www.fws.gov/fire/living_with_fire/.

  • Vatn A. 2000. The environment as a commodity. Environ Values 9:493–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veblen T. 1900. The preconceptions of economic science. Q J Econ 14(2):240–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voosen P. 2013. Who is conservation for? The chronicle of higher education, November 10. http://chronicle.com/article/Who-Is-Conservation-For-/142853/.

  • Walker B, Gunderson L, Kinzig A, Folke C, Carpenter S, Schultz L. 2006. A handful of heuristics and some propositions for understanding resilience in social-ecological systems. Ecol Soc 11(1).

  • Whitehead AN. 1929. Process and reality: an essay in cosmology. New York, NY: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson MA, Howarth RB. 2002. Discourse-based valuation of ecosystem services: establishing fair outcomes through group deliberation. Ecol Econ 74(2):371–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmer C. 2014. Putting a price tag on nature’s defenses. The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/05/science/earth/putting-a-price-tag-on-natures-defenses.html?

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Professor Graeme S. Cumming. Thanks also to two anonymous reviewers for comments. This research was supported by the South Africa National Research Foundation, a Centre for Excellence Bursary, the James S. McDonnell Foundation, and the University of Minnesota Program in the History of Science, Technology, and Medicine.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Program in the History of Science, Technology, and Medicine, University of Minnesota, 154 Shepard Labs, 100 Union Street SE, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55455, USA

    John M. Heydinger

  2. Percy FitzPatrick Institute, DST/NRF Centre of Excellence, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch, 7701, Cape Town, South Africa

    John M. Heydinger

Authors
  1. John M. Heydinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John M. Heydinger.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Heydinger, J.M. Reinforcing the Ecosystem Services Perspective: The Temporal Component. Ecosystems 19, 661–673 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-016-9959-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-016-9959-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation