Abstract
Since the mid-1990s, the concept of ecosystem services has become increasingly popular in academic circles and among decision-makers. Because of its inclusive character, this concept has given rise to different interpretations in economics. Since its inception, it has been associated with the development of market-based instruments (MBIs) in conservation policies. From this perspective, the sustainable provision of ecosystem services is hindered by market failures (e.g., public good attributes, externalities) and prices that do not capture the full value of the natural assets. MBIs are therefore recommended. According to their promoters, they provide powerful incentives to conserve the environment while at the same time offering new sources of income to support rural livelihoods. Our paper contends that different economic narratives, and associated representations of the market failure at stake with the provision of ecosystem services, may support different policy instruments that are all coined as MBIs. As an illustration, we analyze the economic discourse underlying payments for ecosystem services and eco-labels, and we underline the variety of institutional forms to which they give rise in order to emphasize the differences between discourse and practice.
Highlights
Since the mid-1990s, the concept of ecosystem services (ES) has become increasingly popular in academic circles as well as among decision-makers [1]
Since its inception, the notion of ES has been associated with the development of market instruments in conservation policies
The sustainable provision of ES is hindered by market failures and prices that do not capture the full value of the natural assets
Summary
Since the mid-1990s, the concept of ecosystem services (ES) has become increasingly popular in academic circles as well as among decision-makers [1]. Beyond conjuring up images of a nature bent toward human welfare, this concept is still open to multiple interpretations in ecology as well as in social sciences [6,7,8] The risk of this cross-disciplinary notion being turned into a hackneyed phrase, supporting neoliberal discourse and the re-labeling of public policy provisions as market-based instruments (MBIs), is often highlighted [9]. We focus on mechanisms that are the most obviously associated with given economic representations of ES: payments for ecosystem services (Section 3) and eco-certification schemes (Section 4). This is followed by a discussion of the innovative nature of payments for ecosystem services (PES) and eco-labels as instruments for the provision of ecosystem services. We show the gap between the legitimizing narratives supporting these policy instruments and the real-life institutional arrangements in which they are embodied
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
