Clive L. Spash is an ecological economist. He currently holds the Chair of Public Policy and Governance at Vienna University of Economics and Business, appointed in 2010. [1] He is also Editor-in-Chief of the academic journal Environmental Values. [2]
Spash studied economics at the University of Stirling gaining a Bachelor of Arts with Honours. His dissertation was entitled "Sulphur Emission and Deposition in Europe: A Problem of Transfrontier Pollution". He went on to study for a master's degree in interdisciplinary studies at the University of British Columbia with a thesis entitled "Measuring the Tangible Benefits of Environmental Improvement: An Economic Appraisal of Regional Crop Damages due to Ozone. He then completed a Ph.D. with Distinction in Economics at the University of Wyoming in 1993, specialising in Resource and Environmental Economics and Public Finance. His dissertation, "Intergenerational Transfers and Long-Term Environmental Damages: Compensation of Future Generations for Global Climate Change due to the Greenhouse Effect", was awarded the University of Wyoming Outstanding Dissertation in the Social Sciences, 1993. [3]
| Part of a series on |
| Ecological economics |
|---|
 |
Spash was elected vice-president of the European Society for Ecological Economics (ESEE) by the delegates at the inaugural meeting of the society held at Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines, France in 1996. He was elected to a second term by ESEE members at the Society General Meeting in Geneva, Switzerland in 1998. He then served two terms as ESEE President, 2000–2006, elected by postal ballot of the membership. During this time he helped write new democratic constitutions for both the ESEE and ISEE, established the ESEE Newsletter with Ben Davies as editor, set-up the societies committee structure and organised European conferences. [4]
From 1996 until 2001 he was a lecturer at the Department of Land Economy at the University of Cambridge and director of the research institute Cambridge Research for the Environment (CRE). He then moved to the University of Aberdeen where he held the Research Chair in Environmental and Rural Economics and was Head of the Socio-Economic Research Programme (SERP) at the Macaulay Institute of Land Use Research.
In 2006 Spash was appointed as Chief Executive Officers’ Science Leader at the CSIRO , Australia's federal government agency responsible for scientific research. After finishing a critical paper about emissions trading - which had already passed the peer review process - the agency intervened and pushed for substantial changes. [5] The behaviour of CSIRO led to controversial debates within the scientific community and Nature reported extensively on the conflict. [6] [7] In the course of the controversy, Spash left the agency at the end of 2009. [8]
Spash was one of the earliest economists to pay attention to human induced climate change, pioneering an alternative economics of the environment. He followed some aspects of the work of his doctoral supervisor, Ralph C. d’Arge, in exploring its economic and ethical implications with respect to intergenerational equity and justice. [9] [10] He built from this into issues of compensation for harm across generations and ethical limitations of the economic approach. [11] [12] Such topics appeared in his book Greenhouse Economics, [13] which covers the history, science, economics, ethics and public policy relating to climate change. That work was also path-breaking in its highly critical reflections on mainstream economic approaches that use social cost-benefit analysis and of the work of William Nordhaus. [14] [15] [16] [17] In 2018 Nordhaus received the Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences, or the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in memory of Alfred Nobel for this same work, which has since been strongly criticised by others . [18]
Spash’s work has developed in devoting attention to the social economic consequences of a broad range of environmental problems (e.g. acidic deposition, tropospheric or ground level ozone, greenhouse gases, conservation, ecosystem and species protection). His work on the economics of biodiversity was also amongst the first in the field. His work on ethical considerations in economics has included intra- and inter- generational justice as well as non-humans and their treatment in economics. Behavioural concerns have been reflected in a series of articles on social psychology (sociology). He has also importantly incorporated a history of thought and philosophy of science perspective in his reimagining of the ontological and epistemological foundations of economics as a field. This has particularly stressed the incorporation of the social dimension as inextricably linked to ecological economic as a realist science. This approach he terms social ecological economics.
Spash has developed extensive critiques of mainstream economic approaches to the environment. These cover its limited ethical foundations, [19] [20] its failure to address manifest problems with its own methods, [21] problems with preference theory, [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] the social problems of advocating economic growth in macroeconomics, [27] [28] [29] the failings of consumer choice theory, [30] [31] and mainstream economists' general lack of realism [32] . [33]
Spash has worked extensively on ecosystem valuation and was Editor-in-Chief of the journal "Environmental Values" (2006-2021). His early research explored the application of cost-benefit analysis to environmental change and especially air pollution damages. [34] This research moved from work on acidic deposition to tropospheric zone to greenhouse gases and climate change, as evident in his dissertations and thesis. He co-authored an influential textbook on environmental cost-benefit analysis, [35] but his work was increasingly critical of the approach. The approach to intergenerational ethics that is reduced down to a discussion over discount rates is exposed as obscuring the presence of implicit value judgements while claiming objectivity. [36] This approach's fallacious reduction of strong uncertainty (social indeterminacy and ignorance) to weak uncertainty (probabilistic risk) is exposed in his book "Greenhouse Economics". [37]
Spash’s work in the area of environmental cost-benefit analysis (e.g. Hanley and Spash [38] ) developed into the exploration of social psychology and motivations for environmental values. [39] He employed contingent valuation to conduct empirical research in innovative ways that included ethical motives as well as attitudes and norms. [40] [41] [42] [43] [44] At the same time his work revealed fundamental failures of contingent valuation research [45] and its employment for public policy by environmental economists. [46] He moved into exploring the possibilities for alternative deliberative approaches, [47] [48] their combination with monetary valuation, [49] [50] and the implications of deliberation for economic value theory. [51] Spash cited the term deliberative monetary valuation (DMV) to summarise a set of approaches being employed to combine individualistic willingness to pay (WTP) assessments of the valuation of environmental damage and preservation with group approaches and various related methods. He importantly noted that social values are qualitatively distinct from the aggregate of individual values, highlighting an overlooked weakness in results gathered from DMV studies; [52] that findings of DMV research elucidate the complexity of human value systems and preferences, which goes uncaptured by common economic conceptualisations and by the method itself; [53] and that “exclusion and predefinition of values” inherent in commonly practiced DMV methods constrain or prevent the expression of value pluralism. [54] An alternative “discourse based approach” [55] is proposed that address these methodological concerns (see also O'Hara 1996, [56] 2001 [57] ), and this involves reconceptualising DMV 'as a mutual agreement resulting from an interactive process involving the contestation of discourses'. [58]
His climate economics involves realist and ethical critiques of mainstream economics and has targeted the work of David Pearce (economist), William Nordhaus, Richard Tol and others. [59] [60] He has deconstructed the work of Lord David Stern in both his Stern Review [61] [62] and under the New Climate Economy collective. [63] His critiques of the economics of climate change include its intergenerational ethics, [64] [65] its approach to uncertain futures involving ignorance and indeterminacy, [66] and social cost-benefit approaches to decision-making [67] . [68] [69] He has also criticized the mainstream economic approach to policy encapsulated under carbon emission trading, also known as cap-and-trade. [70] His work in this area was censored by the government in Australia but finally released after a Senate vote defeated the government. [71] Carbon trading is seen by Spash as failing both in theory and practice and in compulsory as well as voluntary forms. [72] [73] [74] He has argued the Paris Agreement is a failure to address reality and not a great success on which to build. [75] [76] Spash has concluded in favour of rights-based approaches and regulation rather than utilitarianism and carbon trading. [77] [78]
Spash also linked issues in valuation to ethical positions and refusals to trade-off species and ecosystem loss, and contrasted rights-based ethics with utilitarianism in conservation. [79] [80] He was one of the first economists to work on biodiversity valuation in economics. [81] His work here developed approaches to empirically investigate ethically motivated refusals to trade-off species and ecosystems for money as expressed by the occurrence of lexicographic preferences [82] [83] [84] . [85] This work on biodiversity economics also led to criticism of preference utilitarianism [86] and the spread of mainstream economics into ecology and conservation biology. [87] [88] In the early 1990s Spash designed a survey conducted in Scotland on forestry to explore the valuation of biodiversity and the occurrence of protesting and refusals to make the trade-offs that economists had previously assumed were rational. [89] He developed this further in studies of wetland re-creation in East Anglia [90] and coral reef improvement in Curaçao. [91] Willingness-to-pay responses from contingent valuation were found to be charitable contributions for many respondents, and not trade prices as economists assumed. [92] The work expanded into attitudinal and social norm research using measures from social psychology and questioning various claims made about the results from contingent valuation. [93] Related work questioned prominent environmental attitudinal scales used by social psychologists [94] and aspects of work by Daniel Kahneman on valuation. [95] When "Biodiversity Economics: The Dasgupta Review" appeared in 2021, advocating natural capital, Spash produced critical deconstructions of the report. [96] [97]
Spash’s research in the 2000s became directed towards the development of a paradigm shift to a social ecological economics. [98] [99] [100] He highlighted the need for ecological economics to have firm foundations in philosophy of science and to link ontology to epistemology rather than follow an eclectic pluralism in economics. [101] His key conclusions here support the need for integration of social, ecological and economic knowledge, [102] and combining heterodox schools of thought in a structured methodological pluralism. [103] [104] This is seen as a way forward that emphasises “the structural aspects of economies as emergent from and dependent upon the structure and functioning of both society and ecology“. [105] This conceptualisation rejects reductionist approaches and builds on interdisciplinarity (over mono- or multi-disciplinarity), while incorporating value incommensurability and value pluralism. [106] His research recommends the philosophy of science of critical realism. [107] Spash’s research has highlighted problems arising from the conceptualisation of ecological economics as a simple combination of two disciplines (i.e. ecology and economics) that otherwise remain divorced from each other and unreformed by their interaction. [108] He has developed this critique into an exploration of the divisions within ecological economics, and more generally the environmental movement, by defining three categories: social ecological economists, new environmental pragmatists and new resource economists. [109] [110] [111] [112] His work includes some empirical evidence on these categories. [113] Moving beyond a simple division within the field, the social ecological economics category has become advocated as a new paradigm. [114] Spash sees social ecological economics as the way forward for the field of economics in general. [115] [116]
Environmental economics is a sub-field of economics concerned with environmental issues. It has become a widely studied subject due to growing environmental concerns in the twenty-first century. Environmental economics "undertakes theoretical or empirical studies of the economic effects of national or local environmental policies around the world. ... Particular issues include the costs and benefits of alternative environmental policies to deal with air pollution, water quality, toxic substances, solid waste, and global warming."
In economics, an externality or external cost is an indirect cost or benefit to an uninvolved third party that arises as an effect of another party's activity. Externalities can be considered as unpriced goods involved in either consumer or producer market transactions. Air pollution from motor vehicles is one example. The cost of air pollution to society is not paid by either the producers or users of motorized transport to the rest of society. Water pollution from mills and factories is another example. All consumers are made worse off by pollution but are not compensated by the market for this damage. A positive externality is when an individual's consumption in a market increases the well-being of others, but the individual does not charge the third party for the benefit. The third party is essentially getting a free product. An example of this might be the apartment above a bakery receiving the benefit of enjoyment from smelling fresh pastries every morning. The people who live in the apartment do not compensate the bakery for this benefit.
Human ecology is an interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary study of the relationship between humans and their natural, social, and built environments. The philosophy and study of human ecology has a diffuse history with advancements in ecology, geography, sociology, psychology, anthropology, zoology, epidemiology, public health, and home economics, among others.
Ecological economics, bioeconomics, ecolonomy, eco-economics, or ecol-econ is both a transdisciplinary and an interdisciplinary field of academic research addressing the interdependence and coevolution of human economies and natural ecosystems, both intertemporally and spatially. By treating the economy as a subsystem of Earth's larger ecosystem, and by emphasizing the preservation of natural capital, the field of ecological economics is differentiated from environmental economics, which is the mainstream economic analysis of the environment. One survey of German economists found that ecological and environmental economics are different schools of economic thought, with ecological economists emphasizing strong sustainability and rejecting the proposition that physical (human-made) capital can substitute for natural capital.
A green economy is an economy that aims at reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities, and that aims for sustainable development without degrading the environment. It is closely related with ecological economics, but has a more politically applied focus. The 2011 UNEP Green Economy Report argues "that to be green, an economy must not only be efficient, but also fair. Fairness implies recognizing global and country level equity dimensions, particularly in assuring a Just Transition to an economy that is low-carbon, resource efficient, and socially inclusive."
Ecosystem valuation is an economic process which assigns a value to an ecosystem and/or its ecosystem services. By quantifying, for example, the human welfare benefits of a forest to reduce flooding and erosion while sequestering carbon, providing habitat for endangered species, and absorbing harmful chemicals, such monetization ideally provides a tool for policy-makers and conservationists to evaluate management impacts and compare a cost-benefit analysis of potential policies. However, such valuations are estimates, and involve the inherent quantitative uncertainty and philosophical debate of evaluating a range non-market costs and benefits.
Environmental resource management is the management of the interaction and impact of human societies on the environment. It is not, as the phrase might suggest, the management of the environment itself. Environmental resources management aims to ensure that ecosystem services are protected and maintained for future human generations, and also maintain ecosystem integrity through considering ethical, economic, and scientific (ecological) variables. Environmental resource management tries to identify factors affected by conflicts that rise between meeting needs and protecting resources. It is thus linked to environmental protection, sustainability, integrated landscape management, natural resource management, fisheries management, forest management, and wildlife management, and others.
Ecosystem services are the many and varied benefits to humans provided by the natural environment and healthy ecosystems. Such ecosystems include, for example, agroecosystems, forest ecosystem, grassland ecosystems, and aquatic ecosystems. These ecosystems, functioning in healthy relationships, offer such things as natural pollination of crops, clean air, extreme weather mitigation, and human mental and physical well-being. Collectively, these benefits are becoming known as ecosystem services, and are often integral to the provision of food, the provisioning of clean drinking water, the decomposition of wastes, and the resilience and productivity of food ecosystems.
Post-normal science (PNS) was developed in the 1990s by Silvio Funtowicz and Jerome R. Ravetz. It is a problem-solving strategy appropriate when "facts [are] uncertain, values in dispute, stakes high and decisions urgent", conditions often present in policy-relevant research. In those situations, PNS recommends suspending temporarily the traditional scientific ideal of truth, concentrating on quality as assessed by internal and extended peer communities.
The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change is a 700-page report released for the Government of the United Kingdom on 30 October 2006 by economist Nicholas Stern, chair of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics (LSE) and also chair of the Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy (CCCEP) at Leeds University and LSE. The report discusses the effect of global warming on the world economy. Although not the first economic report on climate change, it is significant as the largest and most widely known and discussed report of its kind.
Ariel Salleh is an Australian sociologist who writes on humanity-nature relations, political ecology, social change movements, and ecofeminism.
Payments for ecosystem services (PES), also known as payments for environmental services, are incentives offered to farmers or landowners in exchange for managing their land to provide some sort of ecological service. They have been defined as "a transparent system for the additional provision of environmental services through conditional payments to voluntary providers". These programmes promote the conservation of natural resources in the marketplace.
Environmental Values started as a quarterly peer-reviewed academic journal closely associated with the ecological economics movement, but also firmly based in applied ethics. Subjects covered are philosophy, economics, politics, sociology, geography, anthropology, ecology, and other disciplines, which relate to the present and future environment of human beings and other species. The journal was established in 1992 and edited by Alan Holland until 2007 when Clive L. Spash became editor-in-chief.
Degrowth or post-growth economics is an academic and social movement critical of the concept of growth in gross domestic product as a measure of human and economic development. Degrowth theory is based on ideas and research from a multitude of disciplines such as economics, economic anthropology, ecological economics, environmental sciences and development studies. It argues that the unitary focus of modern capitalism on growth, in terms of monetary value of aggregate goods and services, causes widespread ecological damage and is not necessary for the further increase of human living standards. Degrowth theory has been met with both academic acclaim and considerable criticism.
Environmental issues are disruptions in the usual function of ecosystems. Further, these issues can be caused by humans or they can be natural. These issues are considered serious when the ecosystem cannot recover in the present situation, and catastrophic if the ecosystem is projected to certainly collapse.
The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) was a study led by Pavan Sukhdev from 2007 to 2011. It is an international initiative to draw attention to the global economic benefits of biodiversity. Its objective is to highlight the growing cost of biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation and to draw together expertise from the fields of science, economics and policy to enable practical actions. TEEB aims to assess, communicate and mainstream the urgency of actions through its five deliverables—D0: science and economic foundations, policy costs and costs of inaction, D1: policy opportunities for national and international policy-makers, D2: decision support for local administrators, D3: business risks, opportunities and metrics and D4: citizen and consumer ownership.
Karachepone N. Ninan is an ecological economist. Dr. Ninan was born in Nairobi, Kenya where he had his early school education. Thereafter he relocated to India where he continued his high school and college education.
Susana Mourato is a professor of environmental economics at the London School of Economics and Political Science. She holds a leader position at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
Economic ethics is the combination of economics and ethics that unites value judgements from both disciplines to predict, analyze, and model economic phenomena. It encompasses the theoretical ethical prerequisites and foundations of economic systems. This particular school of thought dates back to the Greek philosopher Aristotle, whose Nicomachean Ethics describes the connection between objective economic principles and the consideration of justice. The academic literature on economic ethics is extensive, citing authorities such as natural law and religious law as influences on normative rules in economics. The consideration of moral philosophy, or that of a moral economy, is a point of departure in assessing behavioural economic models. The standard creation, application, and beneficiaries of economic models present a complex trilemma when ethics are considered. These ideas, in conjunction with the fundamental assumption of rationality in economics, create the link between economics and ethics.
Environmental conflicts or ecological distribution conflicts (EDCs) are social conflicts caused by environmental degradation or by unequal distribution of environmental resources. The Environmental Justice Atlas documented 3,100 environmental conflicts worldwide as of April 2020 and emphasised that many more conflicts remained undocumented. Parties involved in these conflicts include locally affected communities, states, companies and investors, and social or environmental movements; typically environmental defenders are protecting their homelands from resource extraction or hazardous waste disposal. Resource extraction and hazardous waste activities often create resource scarcities, pollute the environment, and degrade the living space for humans and nature, resulting in conflict. A particular case of environmental conflicts are forestry conflicts, or forest conflicts which "are broadly viewed as struggles of varying intensity between interest groups, over values and issues related to forest policy and the use of forest resources". In the last decades, a growing number of these have been identified globally.
{{citation}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Academics | |
| Other | |
