Advertisement

Taking Social Responsibility in Using Ecosystem Services Concepts: Ethical Issues of Linking Ecosystems and Human Well-Being

  • Kurt JaxEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

Talking about ecosystem services is to talk about human relationships with nature, and about aspects of nature that humans value. The concept is thus at the interfaces of nature and society as well as of facts and values.

Keywords

Justice Nature conservation Biodiversity Human well-being Values 

References

  1. 1.
    O’Neill J, Holland A, Light A. Environmental values. London: Routledge; 2008.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Attfield R. Environmental ethics: an overview for the twenty-first century. Cambridge: Polity Press; 2014.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Muñoz Escobar M, Voyevoda M, Fühner C, Zehnsdorf A. Potential uses of Elodea nuttallii-harvested biomass. Energy Sustain Soc. 2011;1(1):1–8.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jax K. Ecosystem functioning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sangha KK, Le Brocque A, Costanza R, Cadet-James Y. Application of capability approach to assess the role of ecosystem services in the well-being of Indigenous Australians. Global Ecol Conserv. 2015;4:445–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chan KMA, Guerry AD, Balvanera P, Klain S, Satterfield T, Basurto X, et al. Where are cultural and social in ecosystem services? A framework for constructive engagement. Bioscience. 2012;62(8):744–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Breslow SJ, Sojka B, Barnea R, Basurto X, Carothers C, Charnley S, et al. Conceptualizing and operationalizing human wellbeing for ecosystem assessment and management. Environ Sci Pol. 2016;66:250–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gasper D. Human well-being: concepts and conceptualizations. In: McGillivray M, editor. Human well-being concept and measurement. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan; 2007. p. 23–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    UNEP. Conceptual framework for the intergovernmental science-policy platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services. Decision IPBES-2/4. Report of the second session of the plenary of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. 2014. https://www.ipbes.net/sites/default/files/downloads/Decision%20IPBES_2_4.pdf
  10. 10.
    Borie M, Hulme M. Framing global biodiversity: IPBES between mother earth and ecosystem services. Environ Sci Pol. 2015;54:487–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Díaz S, Demissew S, Joly C, Lonsdale WM, Larigauderie A. A Rosetta Stone for nature’s benefits to people. PLoS Biol. 2015;13(1):e1002040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Washington DC: Island Press; 2005.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jax K, Barton DN, Chan KMA, de Groot R, Doyle U, Eser U, et al. Ecosystem services and ethics. Ecol Econ. 2013;93:260–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chan KMA, Balvanera P, Benessaiah K, Chapman M, Díaz S, Gómez-Baggethun E, et al. Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2016;113(6):1462–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gómez-Baggethun E, Ruiz-Pérez M. Economic valuation and the commodification of ecosystem services. Prog Phys Geogr. 2011;35(5):613–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jax K, Heink U. Searching for the place of biodiversity in the ecosystem services discourse. Biol Conserv. 2015;191:198–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Davidson MD. On the relation between ecosystem services, intrinsic value, existence value and economic valuation. Ecol Econ. 2013;95:171–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    WWF (World Wide Fund for Nature). The growth of soy: impacts and solutions. Gland: WWF International; 2014.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Conservation BiologyHelmholtz Centre for Environmental Research–UFZLeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations