Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Rethinking biodiversity
View graph of relations

Rethinking biodiversity: from goods and services to “living with”

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Rethinking biodiversity: from goods and services to “living with”. / Turnout, Esther; Waterton, Claire; Neves, Katja et al.
In: Conservation Letters, Vol. 6 , No. 3, 6, 06.2013, p. 154–161.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Turnout, E, Waterton, C, Neves, K & Buizer, M 2013, 'Rethinking biodiversity: from goods and services to “living with”', Conservation Letters, vol. 6 , no. 3, 6, pp. 154–161. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00307.x

APA

Turnout, E., Waterton, C., Neves, K., & Buizer, M. (2013). Rethinking biodiversity: from goods and services to “living with”. Conservation Letters, 6 (3), 154–161. Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00307.x

Vancouver

Turnout E, Waterton C, Neves K, Buizer M. Rethinking biodiversity: from goods and services to “living with”. Conservation Letters. 2013 Jun;6 (3):154–161. 6. Epub 2013 Jan 7. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00307.x

Author

Turnout, Esther ; Waterton, Claire ; Neves, Katja et al. / Rethinking biodiversity : from goods and services to “living with”. In: Conservation Letters. 2013 ; Vol. 6 , No. 3. pp. 154–161.

Bibtex

@article{5cfa184e88984ab6b22c32d37f311f45,
title = "Rethinking biodiversity: from goods and services to “living with”",
abstract = "Since the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity, counting and mapping have come to dominate international debates around biodiversity protection. With the emergence of the Ecosystem Services concept, these counting and mapping efforts are increasingly imbued with an economic logic that argues that to save biodiversity, its goods and services must be given monetary value. This article offers a critical engagement with the Ecosystem Services discourse and the way it translates the diversity of nature into a single measure—a “currency”—to be included in systems of exchange. We argue that this conception of biodiversity is too narrow and potentially detrimental because it reduces biodiversity to a series of quantifiable fragmented parts that become liable to counting, mapping, and utilitarian use, and because it reduces social–natural relations to market transactions. Subsequently, we outline possibilities for conceiving and living with biodiversity that go beyond relations of counting, mapping, and commodification. It is important that biodiversity knowledge organizations, such as the recently sanctioned Intergovernmental science-policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), take these into account. Conserving a diversity of life requires acknowledging a diversity of values, knowledge and framings of biodiversity, and fostering a diversity of social–natural relations.",
keywords = "Ecosystem Services, Biodiversity, IPBES, knowledges",
author = "Esther Turnout and Claire Waterton and Katja Neves and Marleen Buizer",
year = "2013",
month = jun,
doi = "10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00307.x",
language = "English",
volume = "6 ",
pages = "154–161",
journal = "Conservation Letters",
issn = "1755-263X",
publisher = "John Wiley & Sons Inc.",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Rethinking biodiversity

T2 - from goods and services to “living with”

AU - Turnout, Esther

AU - Waterton, Claire

AU - Neves, Katja

AU - Buizer, Marleen

PY - 2013/6

Y1 - 2013/6

N2 - Since the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity, counting and mapping have come to dominate international debates around biodiversity protection. With the emergence of the Ecosystem Services concept, these counting and mapping efforts are increasingly imbued with an economic logic that argues that to save biodiversity, its goods and services must be given monetary value. This article offers a critical engagement with the Ecosystem Services discourse and the way it translates the diversity of nature into a single measure—a “currency”—to be included in systems of exchange. We argue that this conception of biodiversity is too narrow and potentially detrimental because it reduces biodiversity to a series of quantifiable fragmented parts that become liable to counting, mapping, and utilitarian use, and because it reduces social–natural relations to market transactions. Subsequently, we outline possibilities for conceiving and living with biodiversity that go beyond relations of counting, mapping, and commodification. It is important that biodiversity knowledge organizations, such as the recently sanctioned Intergovernmental science-policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), take these into account. Conserving a diversity of life requires acknowledging a diversity of values, knowledge and framings of biodiversity, and fostering a diversity of social–natural relations.

AB - Since the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity, counting and mapping have come to dominate international debates around biodiversity protection. With the emergence of the Ecosystem Services concept, these counting and mapping efforts are increasingly imbued with an economic logic that argues that to save biodiversity, its goods and services must be given monetary value. This article offers a critical engagement with the Ecosystem Services discourse and the way it translates the diversity of nature into a single measure—a “currency”—to be included in systems of exchange. We argue that this conception of biodiversity is too narrow and potentially detrimental because it reduces biodiversity to a series of quantifiable fragmented parts that become liable to counting, mapping, and utilitarian use, and because it reduces social–natural relations to market transactions. Subsequently, we outline possibilities for conceiving and living with biodiversity that go beyond relations of counting, mapping, and commodification. It is important that biodiversity knowledge organizations, such as the recently sanctioned Intergovernmental science-policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), take these into account. Conserving a diversity of life requires acknowledging a diversity of values, knowledge and framings of biodiversity, and fostering a diversity of social–natural relations.

KW - Ecosystem Services

KW - Biodiversity

KW - IPBES

KW - knowledges

U2 - 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00307.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00307.x

M3 - Journal article

VL - 6

SP - 154

EP - 161

JO - Conservation Letters

JF - Conservation Letters

SN - 1755-263X

IS - 3

M1 - 6

ER -