What Are Ecosystem Services - Example

COMMODIFICATION OF NATURE AND SUSTAUNABLE DEVELOPMENT Introduction Nature commodification is a term used in the description of ways in which natural processes and entities are exchanged freely in the market, as well as the implications associated with the processes. In the expansion processes of capitalism it terms of depth and breadth, many things previously thought as external to the system have been internalized (Stern 2006, 23). This includes all the processes and entities regarded as natural. In actual sense, the concept of nature is hard to give a specific definition, this is because, many layers of significance are often associated with it. In this case, the human and other external environments are considered part. On the other hand, the idea of commodification of processes and entities is often treated and considered a “special case,” depending on the biophysical materiality, which plays an important role in shaping and conditioning the trajectories of the commodification process. If there can be the need for us as human being to take stock of the way we interact with our natural environment, then it is imperative that we take time to focus on the fundamental basics that bring about the concept of nature (Stern 2006, 37). In the recent past, changing perspectives on nature management and conservation have emerged; in fact, environmental conservationists have had to remind themselves persistently about the need for management and conservation of nature, as well as the particular approaches that can be adopted for the process effectively. The sustainable development discourse This discourse is said to have emerged in the 1980s; in its approach, the discourse accommodates thoughts of economic growth, free market systems and business interests among individuals and groups of people (Spash 2008, 261). In this case, the concept did not seem to terrorize the power structures characteristic of the modern time industrial societies. Renowned research groups and the United Nations articulated many ideas that emerged during the 1980s about strategies in world conservation. In this approach, management and conservation of nature was described as the administration of the human use over the biosphere, which is the thin covering on the planet that plays the role of life sustenance. In this perspective, the sustenance approaches were thought to bring about sustainable advantages to the present and future generations. In addition, it was to maintain its potential of achieving the needs and ambitions of future generations. According to the approach proposed by in the World Conservation Strategy, the issue of development had the main aim of achieving the human goals by making use of the biosphere. On the other hand, the process of conservation had the objective of meeting those similar goals and objectives but at the same time, making sure that the biosphere use did not go on indefinitely. Later, early environmentalists used the subject “sustainability” to describe the concept of equilibrium in systems. In their view, they proclaimed that the process of exponential growth was no longer sustainable. This arose from the fact that the particular growth did not have the ability to last forever, since the planet itself was finite, with certain limits placed on the growth process. Nonetheless, “sustainable development” was making efforts to ensure that the process of economic growth, was limitless, and the technological changes was vita in making it “sustainable.” During this time, the process of sustainable development was clearly focused on changing the protests and conflicts through consensus. This was to be achieved by emphasizing that the environmental and economic goals and objectives were directly related and compatible. For many stakeholders and other people part of this development, the issue of sustainable development provided a perfect opportunity for them to conquer the earlier differences and conflicts that had been witnessed. In addition, sustainable development strategies were to create and enhance the process of working together towards achievement of common goals, instead of engaging in unending confrontations about the need to encourage or discourage the process of economic growth. Instead of being branded as villains, industry and technology were to offer solution to most of the problems that arose on the environment. Assumptions of sustainable development In the process of achieving the goals of environmental management and conservation, sustainable development approaches established some assumptions that were considered vital. First, the process held that economic growth and environmental protection were important and compatible processes; in this case, modern capitalism is regarded as compatible with process of environmental protection, management and conservation. The second assumption created was that the needs of the environment have to be conserved and managed because of their utilitarian value. This was in contrast to the previous held notion of protecting the environmental because of its perceived intrinsic value. In this perspective, environmental protection is a system of different resources that call for careful attention and care. Thirdly, scientific progress and advancements in technology can provide important solutions to most of the problems within the environment, which includes the prospective biophysical restrictions of population and economic growth. According to this perspective, the processes of radical political and social changes are not necessary because the alternative solutions and approaches fronted by technology and science are reliable and efficient. The last important assumption that was held for the process of sustainable development regarded the social and economic welfare of the people. In this assumption, poverty is cited as major as the chief contributor to the decline of the environment especially in the developing countries. For this reason, addressing it was an urgent and important activity, for it to be achieved, free trade and reliable systems of economic growth were to be put in place, instead of raising questions and distributing issues as well as various affluent lifestyles. Commodification of nature The process commodification of nature describes the expansion and growth experienced in market trade especially to areas that were previously unmarketed (Redford & Adams 2009, 786). The process comprises of the operation and conceptual treatment that is given to products and services as important objects that are destined for trading. The process is important in the description of modification of different relationships that had previously been unaffected by commerce, into successful and meaningful commercial relationships. It is important to note that commodification that is characteristic of various services in the ecosystems describes the insertion of new functions for ecosystems into the pricing systems, as well as market relations. Nature commodification takes place in four distinct stages that sometimes overlap in time and space; in addition, they are not always concomitant. The first stage involves of economic framing for the service functions of ecosystems; these services are said to have began early in the 1960s. The second stage often happens when the utility value of the ecosystems services are expressed in monetary terms or are priced. The third stage of the commodification process comprises of appropriation of services related to the particular ecosystems. This process takes various forms like formalization of different property rights over certain services provides by the ecosystems, as well as the land providing such services. The process also involves privatization processes whereby ecosystems that had been considered in the public regime are privatized. Commercialization is the last stage in the commodification process, here; the process involves the establishment of institutions and other structures vital in the offering of ecosystem services. These institutions and structures are also necessary in the facilitation of exchange and sale across the markets. However, amidst all these development one question of great concern across all discussions in whether commodification is the right strategy in achieving sustainable development. Is commodification of nature a solution to sustainable development? The question of whether commodification has to be regarded an essential strategy towards sustainable development continues to raise various arguments by scholars on the ecological and economic platforms. Various researches have been carried to ascertain the weight of the matter, most of which have raised various criticisms over the commodification of nature (Pagiola 2008, 715). Some of the major criticism raised over this process has emphasized that some things cannot be put up for commercial purposes. In this process, a great need arises for drawing a clear line that demarcates the frontier to use in the commodification of nature, this will be essential in identifying things that can be commercialized and those that should not. It is believed that since the idea of commercialization arose, many materials elements that belong to nature have been sold while some contributions have been against this process in totality. The major issue in this case is the exact place where to establish the restrictions for the commodification in respect to wildlife and other related ecosystems. For instance, protest responses that have been brought on board over contingent valuation examinations have been viewed as being in opposition to strategies in monetizing the value of ecological systems and framing of services of ecosystems as commodities. The other line of criticism for commodification of nature has claimed that the process is a complexity blinder and mystifier. The evidence for this criticism is shown in the masking of various processes considered as critical in the provision of various ecosystem services. These processes are often at the back of homogeneous monetary figures, thus leading to a change in the symbolic value into various quantifiable objective relationships. In a different observation, Peterson et al. (2010) explained the process of commodification of nature makes it difficult to understand the significance of biodiversity and other factors associated with abiotic elements that were essential in the functions of ecosystems. In the same line of thought, Kosoy & Corbera (2010, 31) made an argument that the process of commodification of nature puts a mask on the complexity of ecological systems, their values, as well as power that underlies the environmental trade. The third line of criticism is associated with the manner in which things not produced by human activities are treated and referred to in terms of commodities. This includes things lime land and labor, which is often included as tradable factors when it comes to commercialization of commodities of nature. This process of commodification of nature presents many serious problems especially at the commercialization level. The first arises from the way various items are naturally interrelated in various ways. Conclusion From the foregone discussion, it is evident that commodification of nature is so far not the best alternative as far as sustainable development is concerned. In the process of commodifying various elements in ecosystems, various challenges and problems have occurred, which cannot be solved effectively under the present models used in the process. Commodification of nature can lead to various operational challenges especially when handling the many challenges arising from the interlinked services and systems of ecosystems in nature. For this reason, various research activities are still being conducted to evaluate and assess other reliable processes by which nature can be managed and conserved effectively without bringing conflicts in the way people are to benefit from their conservation efforts. Various approaches that have been adopted in the latest ecosystem services have emphasized on the need create various discrete and service units that are clearly defined as far as accounting systems in economics are concerned (Boyd & Banzhaf 2007, 617). However, it is important to realize that the process of compartmentalizing services of ecosystems into units disregards the notion that functions in different ecosystems are highly interlinked and cannot be separated for purposes of commodification (Vatn, 2000, 495). Bibliography Boyd J & Banzhaf S. 2007. What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecological Economics. Vol 63, No 1: 616–626. Kosoy N & Corbera E (2010) Payments for ecosystem services as commodity fetishism. Ecological Economics. Vol 6, No 6: 28–36. Pagiola S. 2008. Payments for environmental services in Costa Rica. Ecological Economics. Vol 65, No 25: 712–724 Peterson M, J, et al. 2010. Obscuring ecosystem function with application of the ecosystem services concept. Conservation Biology. Vol 24, No. 12: 113–119. Redford K, H & Adams W, M. 2009. Payment for ecosystem services and the challenge of saving nature. Conservation Biology. Vol 23, No 11: 785–787. Spash C. 2008. How much is that ecosystem in the window? The one with the bio-diverse trail. Environmental Values. Vol 17, No 23: 259–284. Stern N. 2006. Stern Review of the Economics of Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Vatn A. 2000. The environment as a commodity. Environmental Values. Vol 9, No 3: 493–509. Read More