Search

The ecosystem services literature rests on the premise that an increased understanding of ecosystems, ecosystem services and, in particular, the value of ecosystem services will feed to decision-making. Yet, there is little evidence for the assumed demand and applicability of valuation knowledge in real-life policy and decision-making processes, and the use of such knowledge has received little in-depth analytical attention. Motivated by these observations, we have conducted an empirical analysis of ecosystem service value knowledge use. Our analysis of policy actors' experiences and expectations regarding value knowledge in Finland's peatland policy draws on ten interviews with eleven policy actors. Focusing on the usefulness and uses of valuation knowledge, we analyze the ways in which values are framed and value knowledge is expected to influence the rights to use ecosystem services. Our analysis shows that policy actors expect a better understanding of ecosystem service values to support the consideration of benefits. Yet, what they view as crucial knowledge needs aligns with their sectoral or organizational position as well as the interests they represent. Hence, valuation does not provide a solution to distributional debates or conflicts over rights, but it can have an important function as the provider of background knowledge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper explores the role of natural resource accounting and calculations as tools for inducing movement towards ecologically sound policy making. We draw from the theoretical debates in social studies of science and technology (STS) to understand how calculations gain their power in real-world decision-making. Through in-depth case analysis of a local energy production decision in Finland, we study how and under what conditions calculative methods related to environmental valuation affect the rationalities applied in policy decisions. On the basis of our analysis, we claim that new calculative rationalities do not become significant through changing ways of thinking alone. There is a need for shift of calculative framing. This shift requires active promotion by powerful actors and furthermore, new framings need to become embedded in the rules of the game of decision making. Our analysis suggests that the methods of STS can provide a valuable tool for economists’ creation of richer understanding of the dynamics between calculative rationalities and the institutions of decision-making. In-depth case analysis of decision making involving the use of natural resources brings out the multitude of ways in which calculations can take part in or be excluded from the making of natural resource policy. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]