• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Should a Price Be Put on the Goods and Services Provided by the World's Ecosystems?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Should a Price Be Put on the Goods and Services Provided by the World's Ecosystems? The issue within these opposing arguments is on the externalities the environment is facing and the issue of whether or not a priced should be put on the goods and services provided by the world's ecosystems is focused upon. According to these two arguments, undisturbed ecosystems do many things that benefit us. However the initial argument argues that if we do not have economic values for free services from nature, we are likely to exploit the ecosystems that provide those services, while the following argument ensures that using the pricing approach to value nature's services is inadequate as it misleadingly suggests that only economic values matter. ...read more.

Middle

The argument uses significant examples that portrays this notion, such as forest fires in Indonesia and the disappearance of honeybee colonies in U.S. as "free services" that are provided by nature and consumed by the human economy, "services that have immense economic value but are largely unrecognized and uncounted until they have been lost." (Abramovitz, 5) Furthermore, it presents the issue at hand from different perspectives of consumers and producers, which highlights its effectiveness. "Many of these services (nature's free services) are indispensable to the people who exploit them, yet are not counted as real benefits, or as a part of GNP."(Abramovitz, 5) There is also efficient structure within the argument in which Abramovitz initially starts with immense detailed evidence portraying how "free services" are being taken for granted. ...read more.

Conclusion

De Leo, argues that, while cost-benefit analysis is an essential part of decision-making, we should also implement other ways of management that do not primarily depend on economic assessments but are clearly expressed and "transparent." (Gatto and De Leo, 16) The argument also suggests that there are dangers in assigning monetary value to such services, as it highlights the notion that the environment is simply a product to be exploited. Values should be put on nature's "free services", but it is often hard to do so, which is more logical since it accepts the fact that a value should be put on nature's services, but it is often hard to do so. Since this argument divides these costs into four major categories, "ingenious techniques for the monetary valuation of environmental goods and services", it poses strong, logical points that are not reflected in the first argument. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Philosophy section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Philosophy essays

  1. Ensayo de teoria de conocimiento

    Por cada segundo que pasamos aprendiendo historia, m�s historia se est� creando. Otro campo de conocimiento y quiz� el m�s controvertido, la �tica, ya que cada cultura tiene su �tica y al menos que todos nos unamos como persona, nunca llegaremos a alcanzar un conocimiento completo de la �tica humana.

  2. Should the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Be Opened to Oil Drilling?

    The argument also provides evidence that efficient use of refuge oil using the efficiency options available in 1989 "could save today the equivalent of 54 "refuges - but at a sixth of the cost."

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work