Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Economic sustainability and the preservation of environmental assets

Environmental Management volume 14, pages 771–778 (1990)Cite this article

Abstract

The core requirement of sustainability is that current economic activities should not result in an excessive burden on future generations. This criterion is general enough to imply different decision rules for the preservation of environmental assets. Neoclassical economics does not have a sustainability criterion for environmental assets independent of the intertemporal efficiency criterion, which allocates environmental and man-made capital based on projected monetary benefits and costs. This criterion is examined in terms of the feasibility of valuing the benefits of environmental assets, the substitution possibilities between natural and man-made capital, and the ethical grounds for using efficiency as the sole determinant of the allocation of environmental assets. An alternative ecological sustainability criterion is the preservation of safe minimum levels of environmental assets in physical terms rather than the dollar value of a composite of natural and man-made capital. Safe minimum standards for environmental assets constrain the efficiency criterion in order to ensure the sustainability of economic systems. It is argued that the ecological approach to sustainability should limit the economic approach for decisions involving the allocation of environmental assets.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Literature Cited

  • Arbuckle, J. G., G. W. Frick, R. M. Hall, Jr., M. L. Miller, T. F. P. Sullivan, and T. A. Vanderver, Jr. 1983. Environmental law handbook, 7th ed. Government Institutes, Inc., Rockville, Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, H. J., and C. Morse. 1963. Scarcity and growth. John Hopkins Press, Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, R. C. 1978. Endangered species and uncertainty: the economics of a safe minimum standard.American Journal of Agricultural Economics 60:10–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bishop, R. C. 1979. Endangered species, irreversibilities, and uncertainty: a reply.American Journal of Agricultural Economics 61:376–379.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, B. J., M. E. Hanson, D. M. Liverman, R. W. Meredith, Jr. 1987. Global sustainability: toward definition.Environmental Management 11:713–719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, L. R. 1988. State of the world. W.W. Norton, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brundtland Commission (World Commission on Environment and Development). 1987. Our common future. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ciriacy-Wantrup, S. V. 1968. Resource conservation: economics and policies, 3rd ed. University of California Division of Agricultural Science, Berkeley and Los Angeles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, C. W. 1976. Mathematical bioeconomics. John Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costanza, R. and H. Daly. 1987. Toward an ecological economics.Ecological Modelling 38:1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, R. G., D. S. Brookshire, and W. D. Schulze. 1986. Valuing environmental goods: an assessment of the contingent valuation method. Rowman and Allanheld, Totowa, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, H. E. 1984. Alternative strategies for integrating economics and ecology. Pages 19–29.In Integration of economy and ecology—an outlook for the eighties. A. M. Jansson (ed.), Wallenberg Foundation for International Cooperation in Science, Stockholm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dana, S. T., and S. K. Fairfax. 1980. Forest and range policy, 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrlich, P. R. 1989. The limits to substitution: meta-resource depletion and a new economic-ecological paradigm.Ecological Economics 1:9–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, A. C. 1981. Resource and environmental economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, A. C., and J. V. Krutilla. 1974. Valuing long run ecological consequences and irreversibilities.Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 1:96–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, A. C., and J. V. Krutilla. 1975. The economics of natural environments. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodland, R., and G. Ledec. 1987. Neoclassical economics and principles of sustainable development.Ecological Modelling 38:19–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hotelling, H. 1931. The economics of exhaustible resources.Journal of Political Economy 39:137–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hueting, R. 1980. New scarcity and economic growth. North-Holland, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hufschmidt, M., and E. Hyman. 1979. A survey of economic and related approaches to analysis of natural resource and environmental aspects of development. Tycooly International Publishing Limited, Dublin.

    Google Scholar 

  • IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources). 1980. World conservation strategy: living resource conservation for sustainable development. IUCN, Morges, Switzerland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelman, S. 1981. Cost benefit analysis: an ethical critique.Regulation 5:33–40.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Knight, F. 1921. Risk, uncertainty, and profit. Houghton Mifflin, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J. A. 1985. The environment, public health, and human ecology. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomis, J. B., and R. G. Walsh. 1986. Assessing wildlife and environmental values in cost—benefit analysis: state of the art.Journal of Environmental Management 22:125–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markandya, A., and D. Pearce. 1988. Environmental considerations and the choice of the discount rate in developing countries. World Bank Environment Department Working paper No. 3. Washington, D.C.

  • Nordhaus, W., and J. Tobin. 1972. Is growth obsolete? Pages 1–24.In National Bureau of Economic Research, 50th Anniversary Colloquium, Vol 5, Economic Growth. National Bureau of Economic Research, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Page, T. 1977. Conservation and economic efficiency. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, D. 1987. Foundations of an Ecological Economics. Ecological Modelling 38:9–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, D. 1988. Optimal prices for sustainable development. Pages 57–66.In D. Cóllard, D. Pearce, and D. Ulph (eds.), Economics, growth and sustainable environments. Essays in memory of Richard Lecomber. St. Martin's Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rich, B. 1985. The multilateral development banks, environmental policy, and the United States.Ecology Law Quarterly 12:681–745.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sagoff, M. 1982. At the Shrine of Our Lady of Fatima, or why political questions are not all economic.Arizona Legal Review 23:221–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sagoff, M. 1988. Some problems with environmental economics.Environmental Ethics 10:55–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, V. K. 1980. The evaluation of natural resource adequacy: elusive quest or frontier of economic analysis?Land Economics 56:257–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, V. K. 1983. Option value: a conceptual overview.Southern Economic Journal 49:654–668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, V. K., and J. V. Krutilla. 1979. Endangered species, irreversibilities, and uncertainty: a comment. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 61:371–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soderbaum, P. 1986. Economics, ethics and environmental problems.The Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics 1:139–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solow, R. 1974. Intergenerational equity and exhaustible resources.Review of Economic Studies Symposium 41:29–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. E. 1979. A neoclassical analysis of the economics of natural resources. Pages 36–66.In V. Kerry Smith (ed.), Scarcity and growth reconsidered. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tisdell, C. 1988. Sustainable development: differing perspectives of ecologists and economists, and relevance to LDCs.World Development 16:373–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USDA. 1982. Soil Conservation Service in cooperation with Arkansas Soil and Water Conservation Commission. Natural resources inventory. Little Rock, Arkansas.

  • USDA. 1990. Forest Service, Ouachita National Forest. Land and Resource Management Plan. Hot Springs, Arkansas.

    Google Scholar 

  • WRI (World Resources Institute and International Institute for Environment and Development). 1987. World Resources 1987. Basic Books, New York.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics and Finance, University of Central Arkansas, 72032, Conway, Arkansas, USA

    George Foy

Authors
  1. George Foy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Foy, G. Economic sustainability and the preservation of environmental assets. Environmental Management 14, 771–778 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02394171

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02394171

Key words

search

Navigation