作者: Matthias Schröter , Emma H. van der Zanden , Alexander P.E. van Oudenhoven , Roy P. Remme , Rudolf S. Serna-Chavez
DOI: 10.1111/CONL.12091
关键词: Anthropocentrism 、 Sociology 、 Philosophy of science 、 Ecosystem services 、 Normative 、 Boundary object 、 Environmental ethics 、 Ecology 、 Commodification of nature 、 Vagueness 、 Valuation (finance)
摘要: We describe and reflect on seven recurring critiques of the concept ecosystem services respective counter-arguments. First, is criticized for being anthropocentric, whereas others argue that it goes beyond instrumental values. Second, some promotes an exploitative human-nature relationship, state reconnects society to ecosystems, emphasizing humanity's dependence nature. Third, concerns exist may conflict with biodiversity conservation objectives, emphasize complementarity. Fourth, questioned because its supposed focus economic valuation, science includes many Fifth, promoting commodification nature, point out most are not connected market-based instruments. Sixth, vagueness definitions classifications stated be a weakness, enhances transdisciplinary collaboration. Seventh, criticize normative nature concept, implying all outcomes processes desirable. The indeed typical but should problematic when acknowledged. By disentangling contrasting different arguments we hope contribute more structured debate between opponents proponents concept.