By Joern Fischer
I’d like to recommend the following paper:
With the new IPBES framework and its focus on institutions, a shift towards governance-related issues is already underway in ecosystem services research. The paper recommended here adds an important new dimension, namely that of power relationships. These have, until recently, been largely ignored in ecosystem services research. The present paper makes three tangible suggestions for how power relationships should be more routinely examined in ecosystem service assessments:
1. by analysing how power shapes institutions, and how this in turn, creates winners and losers in terms of the well-being benefits generated by ecosystem services;
2. by investigating more carefully how ecosystem services are co-produced by people. Ecosystem services (especially provisioning services) are generated by combining human labour inputs with natural capital. The type of input can have substantial consequences for human well-being, even if the amount of “service” produced is equal (e.g. child labour vs. subsistence farming vs. industrialised agriculture);
3. by being cognisant of historical trajectories and their influence on shaping institutions and power relationships surrounding them.
Ecosystem services research arose in ecology and branched out into economics. Recent advances in the field (such as this paper) show that the concept is increasingly drawing on insights from other social sciences, too — this will greatly improve the value of the ecosystem services concept.
Reblogged this on a new nature blog and commented:
The issue of power relationships was touched upon in the Earthwatch Natural Capital Debate, which you can see here http://eu.earthwatch.org/events/2016/02/09/earthwatch-debate-does-nature-come-with-a-price-tag-
reblogged on http://www.anewnatureblog.wordpress.com