The pitfalls of plural valuation

Sander Jacobs, Eszter Kelemen, Patrick O'Farrell, Adrian Martin, Marije Schaafsma, Nicolas Dendoncker, Ram Pandit, Tuyeni H. Mwampamba, Ignacio Palomo, Antonio J. Castro, Mariaelena A. Huambachano, Anna Filyushkina, Haripriya Gunimeda

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

This paper critically examines the current political context in which valuation studies of nature are undertaken. It challenges the belief that somehow, more and technically better valuation will drive the societal change toward more just and sustainable futures. Instead, we argue that current and proposed valuation practices risk to continue to overrepresent the values of those who hold power and dominate the valuation space, and to perpetuate the discrimination of the views and values of nondominant stakeholders. In tackling this politically sensitive issue, we define a political typology of valuations, making explicit the roles of power and discrimination. This is done to provide valuation professionals and other actors with a simple framework to determine if valuation actions and activities are constructive, inclusive, resolve injustices and enable systemic change, or rather entrench the status quo or aggravate existing injustices. The objective is to buttress actors in their decisions to support, accept, improve, oppose, or reject such valuations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number101345
JournalCurrent Opinion in Environmental Sustainability
Volume64
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2023

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Environmental Science(all)
  • Social Sciences(all)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The pitfalls of plural valuation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this