Integrated assessment of biological invasions

An assessment of the consequences of biological invasions and of the measures taken against must be at the base of each social decision in this field. Three forms of uncertainty can be distinguished that make such a decision difficult to take: (1) factual uncertainty, which encompasses not only risk, but also unknown probabilities of known consequences, and unknown consequences, (2) individual uncertainty, i.e. insecurity about the values to consider, and about the form how to consider them, and (3) social actor uncertainty, i.e. uncertainty about the social actors to consider and how to do it. This paper furnishes axiomatic reflections about the difficulties of assessments integrating these three uncertainties. Using this analytical separation, it restructures two main assessment techniques, and herewith shows the main differences between cost-benefit-analysis and multi-criteria decision aid in supporting public decisions about biological invasions. It is shown that the main difference between cost-benefit-analysis, the classical economic decision support, and multi-criteria decision analysis is less its mono- vs. multi-criteria approach, but its facility to be embedded in a social decision context. With multicriteria decision aid it is more facile to lay open the uncertainties in all three dimensions and to make them an explicit topic for public discourse. Therefore, it seems more suitable as an assessment method for biological invasions. --Biodiversity,Multi-criteria analysis,Uncertainty,Integrated Assessment,Biological Invasion,Cost-benefit analysis

Re-conceptualising sustainable development on the basis of the capability approach: A model and its difficulties

This paper sketches a re-conceptualisation of sustainable development (SD) on the basis of the capability approach (CA). The notion sustainable development was developed as a compromise in a political process and has been re-interpreted (some say: diluted) again and again in the last 20 years. When modelling the notion through the lenses of the capability approach, difficulties occur that are at the core of SD and of CA or that are due to their combination. Our paper shows why it is not that easy to replace needs in the Brundtland definition of SD with capabilities. In our model, the differences between systemic and individual levels become clear and herewith the necessity to include both when dealing with issues of SD. The most salient difficulties relate to the multidimensionality and dynamics on both levels. Confronted to these difficulties, demanding individuals to consciously choose sustainable actions seems to be heroic. We propose two ways to alleviate the cognitive and moral burden on individuals by concentrating on the natural environment and by introducing collective institutions. Both alleviations are far from evident, though; this concerns their justification as well as their operationalization. --capability approach,sustainable development,systemic level,collective institutions,dynamics

Ecosystem effects on well-being: More than just "benefits"? Looking at ecosystem services through the capability approach

Conceptual discussions on the impacts of ecosystem services (ESS) on human well-being have largely been boiled down to limits and applications of their monetisation. Therefore, in practice, the use of the ESS concept has been to a large extent boiled down to payment-for-ecosystem-services schemes. In this paper we argue that the human well-being dimension of the ESS concept has to be revisited since it is more diverse than the widely cited notion of benefits (MA, 2005). To tackle this issue, we examine the ESS concept through the lens of the capability approach, which offers a pluralistic framework for well-being as an alternative to mainstream utilitarian or monetary perspectives. We argue that ESS can effectively be viewed as contributing - in different ways - to people's multidimensional capability sets, i.e. their freedoms to lead a life they have reason to value. Such a view allows us to go beyond currently prevailing utilitarianism in analysing effects of ecosystems on human well-being, thus contributing with a new perspective to the current discourse on the use of the ESS concept. --

Integrated assessment of biological invasions

An assessment of the consequences of biological invasions and of the measures taken against must be at the base of each social decision in this field. Three forms of uncertainty can be distinguished that make such a decision difficult to take: (1) factual uncertainty, which encompasses not only risk, but also unknown probabilities of known consequences, and unknown consequences, (2) individual uncertainty, i.e. insecurity about the values to consider, and about the form how to consider them, and (3) social actor uncertainty, i.e. uncertainty about the social actors to consider and how to do it. This paper furnishes axiomatic reflections about the difficulties of assessments integrating these three uncertainties. Using this analytical separation, it restructures two main assessment techniques, and herewith shows the main differences between cost-benefit-analysis and multi-criteria decision aid in supporting public decisions about biological invasions. It is shown that the main difference between cost-benefit-analysis, the classical economic decision support, and multi-criteria decision analysis is less its mono- vs. multi-criteria approach, but its facility to be embedded in a social decision context. With multicriteria decision aid it is more facile to lay open the uncertainties in all three dimensions and to make them an explicit topic for public discourse. Therefore, it seems more suitable as an assessment method for biological invasions

Economic evaluation of biological invasions: A survey

Invasive species are one of the main reasons for the loss of biodiversity. Therefore, national strategies are developed to deal with biological invasions. Economic evaluation as a tool of policy advice has to take into account three challenges: (1) reflecting ecological knowledge, which is characterised by high uncertainty, (2) taking into account the political framework shaped by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and (3) being methodologically sound, e.g. considering all types of values and avoiding general flaws. In this paper we survey and critically analyse economic studies on biological invasions. We test with an evaluation grid whether the studies meet the challenges. We analysed 23 studies generally and 10 in more detail in order to assess their suitability as a policy advice and their methodical quality. As a result we note three main gaps: (1) current studies mostly have methodological shortcomings compared to their theoretical basis; (2) they do not take into account the politically formulated needs of the CBD; and (3) they hardly reflect the high degree of uncertainty associated with biological invasions. --Biological invasions,economic evaluation,policy advice,Convention on Biological Diversity

Multi-level governance of natural resources: tools and processes for water and biodiversity governance in Europe - a European research and training network

--

Ecosystem effects on well-being: More than just "benefits"? Looking at ecosystem services through the capability approach

Conceptual discussions on the impacts of ecosystem services (ESS) on human well-being have largely been boiled down to limits and applications of their monetisation. Therefore, in practice, the use of the ESS concept has been to a large extent boiled down to payment-for-ecosystem-services schemes. In this paper we argue that the human well-being dimension of the ESS concept has to be revisited since it is more diverse than the widely cited notion of benefits (MA, 2005). To tackle this issue, we examine the ESS concept through the lens of the capability approach, which offers a pluralistic framework for well-being as an alternative to mainstream utilitarian or monetary perspectives. We argue that ESS can effectively be viewed as contributing - in different ways - to people's multidimensional capability sets, i.e. their freedoms to lead a life they have reason to value. Such a view allows us to go beyond currently prevailing utilitarianism in analysing effects of ecosystems on human well-being, thus contributing with a new perspective to the current discourse on the use of the ESS concept

Addressing sufficiency: Including altruistic motives in behavioural models for sustainability transitions

The main motivation for sustainable development, as defined in the Brundtland report, is to care for other humans - for the world's poor and for unborn people. Traditional economic models use the motivation to increase one's own well-being as the main motivation for action. Efficiency-improvements, as the main focus of the economics-based models have largely shown to be ineffective, due to rebound effects etc. We assume that efficiency or consistency improvements can only be effective when accompanied by a more fundamental value shift. A shift including altruistic motivations for behaviour, as they are part of sufficiency strategies for sustainable development. Models that reduce motivations for actions to self-centred ones cannot account for such change. The Capability Approach as an alternative to neo-classical approaches, distinguishes between interests in own well-being and other-regarding interests. Yet it has seldom been applied to address the latter. Tested psychological models that encompass both motivations, on the other hand, have no scope for analysing wider societal effects of policies. This paper therefore integrates psychological knowledge in a capability framework, to be used as a basis for empirical analyses. The developed model should allow the design and assessment of efficiency, consistency, and sufficiency strategies for sustainability transitions

Positive evaluations may be shortlived: On outcomes and processes of a World Bank biodiversity project in a post-communist country

International aid projects in post-communist countries were meant to support the existing systems of environmental protection during the transition period and also to introduce new standards of environmental governance. This paper looks at the role project evaluations can play in fulfilling these goals. While the outcomes of the World Bank project in the Belavezhskaya Pushcha national park in Belarus were evaluated positively after its (delayed) completion, an evaluation using the same criteria 10 years later challenges the long-term effectiveness of the project. Evaluating the implementation process, we see three interlinked reasons for this failure which can be generalized with regard to environmental governance in many post-communist countries even now: the predominance of the natural sciences, an unbalanced representation of the actors, and little knowledge regarding participatory methods. In order to introduce new standards for environmental governance, international aid projects should use ongoing project and, in particular, process evaluation as a tool to support communication between the donor organizations and the implementing agencies on the one hand and between the different actors in the receiving countries on the other

Re-conceptualising sustainable development on the basis of the capability approach: A model and its difficulties

This paper sketches a re-conceptualisation of sustainable development (SD) on the basis of the capability approach (CA). The notion sustainable development was developed as a compromise in a political process and has been re-interpreted (some say: diluted) again and again in the last 20 years. When modelling the notion through the lenses of the capability approach, difficulties occur that are at the core of SD and of CA or that are due to their combination. Our paper shows why it is not that easy to replace needs in the Brundtland definition of SD with capabilities. In our model, the differences between systemic and individual levels become clear and herewith the necessity to include both when dealing with issues of SD. The most salient difficulties relate to the multidimensionality and dynamics on both levels. Confronted to these difficulties, demanding individuals to consciously choose sustainable actions seems to be heroic. We propose two ways to alleviate the cognitive and moral burden on individuals by concentrating on the natural environment and by introducing collective institutions. Both alleviations are far from evident, though; this concerns their justification as well as their operationalization