Hostname: page-component-669899f699-chc8l Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-27T22:41:50.910Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What is lost through no net loss

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 September 2019

John O’Neill Open the ORCID record for John O’Neill [Opens in a new window]
John O’Neill*
Affiliation:
Philosophy, School of Social Sciences, Humanities Bridgeford Street Building, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
*
Email: john.f.o’[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

No net loss approaches to environmental policy claim that policy should maintain aggregate levels of natural capital. Substitutability between natural assets allows losses in some assets to be compensated for by gains in others while maintaining overall levels of natural capital. This paper argues that significant goods that matter to people’s well-being will be lost through a policy of no net loss. The concepts of natural capital and ecosystem services that underpin the no net loss approach to environmental policy cannot capture important dimensions of value that are central to human well-being.

Keywords

de rede dictooffsetsnatural capitalecosystem services
Type
Article
Information
Economics & Philosophy , Volume 36 , Issue 2 , July 2020 , pp. 287 - 306
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anderson, E. 1993. Value in Ethics and Economics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Aristotle 1985. Nicomachean Ethics. Transl. by T. Irwin. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.Google Scholar
Attfield, R. 1987. A Theory of Value and Obligation. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Ayres, R.U. and Kneese, A.V. 1969. Production, consumption, and externalities. American Economic Review 59, 282–297.Google Scholar
Mahalia, Bava 1994. Letter from a tribal village. Lokayan Bulletin. 11. 2/3, Sept–Dec.Google Scholar
Beckerman, W. 1994. ‘Sustainable development’: is it a useful concept? Environmental Values 3, 191–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckerman, W. 1999. Sustainable development and our obligations to future generations. In Fairness and Futurity: Essays on Environmental Sustainability and Social Justice, ed. Dobson, A., 71–92. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brand-Correa, L. and Steinberger, J. 2017. A framework for decoupling human need satisfaction from energy use. Ecological Economics 141, 43–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brink, D. 1989. Moral Realism and the Foundations of Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Business and Biodiversity Offsets Programme (BBOP) 2012. Resource Paper: No Net Loss and Loss‐Gain Calculations in Biodiversity Offsets. Washington, DC: BBOP. <‐https://bbop.foresttrends.org/guidelines/Resource_Paper_NNL.pdf>..>Google Scholar
Carver, L. and Sullivan, S. 2017. How economic contexts shape calculations of yield in biodiversity offsetting. Conservation Biology 31, 1053–1065.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chan, K., Balvanera, P., Benessaiah, K., Chapman, M., Díaz, S., Gómez-Baggethun, E., Gould, R.K., Hannahs, N., Jax, K., Klain, S.C., Luck, G., Martín-López, B., Muraca, B., Norton, B., Ott, K., Pascual, U., Satterfield, S., Tadaki, M., Taggart, J. and Turner, N.J. 2016. Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. PNAS 113, 1462–1465.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Daly, H.E. 1995. On Wilfred Beckerman’s critique of sustainable development. Environmental Values 4, 49–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Defra 2011. Biodiversity 2020: A Strategy for England’s Wildlife and Ecosystem Services. <https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/69446/pb13583-biodiversity-strategy-2020-111111.pdf>..>Google Scholar
Defra 2012. Biodiversity Offsetting Pilots: Technical Paper: The Metric for the Biodiversity Offsetting Pilot in England. <https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/69531/pb13745-bio-technical-paper.pdf>..>Google Scholar
Defra 2013. Biodiversity Offsetting in England Green Paper. <https://consult.defra.gov.uk/biodiversity/biodiversity_offsetting/supporting_documents/20130903Biodiversity%20offsetting%20green%20paper.pdf>..>Google Scholar
Diaz, S.et al. 2015. The IPBES Conceptual Framework – connecting nature and people. Environmental Sustainability 14, 1–16.Google Scholar
Dobson, A. 1996. Environmental sustainabilities: an analysis and a typology’ Environmental Politics 5, 401–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
European Commission 2011. Our life insurance, our natural capital: an EU biodiversity strategy to 2020. Communication From the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the Economic and Social Committee, and the Committee of the Regions. COM (2011) 244 final. <http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:0244:FIN:EN:PDF>..>Google Scholar
FAO 1997. The State of the World’s Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. Rome: Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations.Google Scholar
Goldie, P. 2010. Love for a reason. Emotion Review 2, 61–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodin, R. 1992. Green Political Theory. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Grau, C. 2010. Love and history. Southern Journal of Philosophy 48, 246–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hare, C. 2007. Voices from another world: must we respect the interests of people who do not, and will never, exist? Ethics 117, 498–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helm, D. 2014. Taking natural capital seriously. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 30, 109–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
High Speed Two (HS2) Limited 2015. HS2 London – West Midlands: No Net Loss in Biodiversity Calculation. <https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/490928/No_net_loss_in_biodiversity_calculation_-_methodology_and_results_v2.pdf>..>Google Scholar
Holland, A. 1997. Substitutability: or, why strong sustainability is weak and absurdly strong sustainability is not absurd. In Valuing Nature, ed. Foster, J., 119–134. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jacobs, M. 1995. Sustainable development, capital substitution and economic humility: a response to Beckerman. Environmental Values 4, 57–68.Google Scholar
James, S. 2016. Ecosystem services and the value of places. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 19, 101–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, I. 1948. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals. Transl. by H. Paton. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Kiesecker, J., Copeland, H., Pocewicz, A., Nibbelink, N., McKenney, B., Dahlke, J., Holloran, M. and Stroud, D. 2009. A framework for implementing biodiversity offsets. Bioscience 59, 77–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kill, J. and Franchi, G. 2016. Rio Tinto’s Biodiversity Offset in Madagascar. World Rainforest Movement and Re-Common. <https://www.wrm.org.uy/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/RioTintoBiodivOffsetMadagascar_report_EN_web.pdf>..>Google Scholar
Kolodny, N. 2003. Love as valuing a relationship. Philosophical Review 112, 135–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraut, R. 1986. Love De Re. Midwest Studies in Philosophy X, 413–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraut, R. 2012. Against Absolute Goodness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madsen, B., Carroll, N., Kandy, D. and Bennett, G.. 2011. Update: State of Biodiversity Markets. Washington, DC: Forest Trends. <https://www.forest-trends.org/wp-content/uploads/imported/2011-update_state-of-biodiversity-markets_1-27-12_web-pdf.pdf>.Google Scholar
Millgram, E. 2004. Kantian crystallization. Ethics 114, 511–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, G.E. 1903. Principia Ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
O’Neill, J. 1992. The varieties of intrinsic value. The Monist 75, 119–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Neill, J. 1993. Ecology, Policy and Politics: Human Well-Being and the Natural World. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
O’Neill, J. 2001. Meta-ethics. In Blackwell Companion to Environmental Philosophy, ed. Jamieson, D., 163–176. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Neill, J. 2015. Sustainability. In The Routledge Handbook of Global Ethics, ed. Moellendorf, D. and Widdows, H., 401–415. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
O’Neill, J. 2017 a. Pluralism and incommensurability. In Routledge Handbook of Ecological Economics, ed. Spash, C., 227–236. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Neill, J. 2017 b. Life Beyond Capital. Centre for the Understanding of Sustainable Prosperity. <https://www.cusp.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/Life-beyond-capital-online.pdf>..>Google Scholar
O’Neill, J., Holland, A. and Light, A. 2008. Environmental Values. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pascual, U., Balvanera, P., Díaz, S.et al. 2017. Valuing nature’s contributions to people: the IPBES approach. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 26–27, 7–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raz, J. 1986. The Morality of Freedom. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Regan, T. 1988. The Case for Animal Rights. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Seagle, C. 2012. Inverting the impacts: mining, conservation and sustainability claims near the Rio Tinto/QMM ilmenite mine in Southeast Madagascar. Journal of Peasant Studies 39, 447–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, P. 1986. All animals are equal. In Applied Ethics, ed. Singer, P., 215–228. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, M. 1995. The Moral Problem. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Soble, A. 1990. The Structure of Love. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevenson, R.L. 1911. Lay Morals and Other Papers. London: Chatto and Windus.Google Scholar
Sullivan, S. 2013. After the green rush? Biodiversity offsets, uranium power and the calculus of casualties in greening growth. Human Geography 6, 80–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, P. 1986. Respect for Nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Temkin, L. 2003 a. Personal versus impersonal principles: reconsidering the slogan. Theoria 69, 20–30.Google Scholar
Temkin, L. 2003 b. Egalitarianism defended. Ethics 113, 764–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Temkin, L. 2012. Rethinking the Good: Moral Ideals and the Nature of Practical Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
TEEB 2010. The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature: A Synthesis of the Approach, Conclusions and Recommendations of TEEB. <https://www.teebweb.org/wp-content/uploads/Study%20and%20Reports/Reports/Synthesis%20report/TEEB%20Synthesis%20Report%202010.pdf>..>Google Scholar
UNEP 2011. Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication. <https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/18966/Green_EconomyReport_Final_Dec2011_UNEP.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y>..>Google Scholar
Velleman, D. 1999. Love as a moral emotion. Ethics 109, 338–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Velleman, D. 2008. Beyond price. Ethics 118, 191–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiggins, D. 1980. Deliberation and practical reason. In Essays on Aristotle’s Ethics, ed. Rorty, A.O., 221–240. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Wiggins, D. 1998. The claims of need. In Needs, Values, Truth (3rd edn), 1–58. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Wiggins, D. 2006. An idea we cannot do without. In The Philosophy of Need, ed. Reader, S., 25–50. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, B. 1976 [1981]. Persons, character and morality. In Moral Luck: Philosophical Papers, 1973–1980, 1–19. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Yeats, W.B. 1950. The Collected Poems of W. B. Yeats. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar