The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Rethinking biodiversity: from goods and services to “living with”
Open accessAbstract
Since the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity, counting and mapping have come to dominate international debates around biodiversity protection. With the emergence of the Ecosystem Services concept, these counting and mapping efforts are increasingly imbued with an economic logic that argues that to save biodiversity, its goods and services must be given monetary value. This article offers a critical engagement with the Ecosystem Services discourse and the way it translates the diversity of nature into a single measure—a “currency”—to be included in systems of exchange. We argue that this conception of biodiversity is too narrow and potentially detrimental because it reduces biodiversity to a series of quantifiable fragmented parts that become liable to counting, mapping, and utilitarian use, and because it reduces social–natural relations to market transactions. Subsequently, we outline possibilities for conceiving and living with biodiversity that go beyond relations of counting, mapping, and commodification. It is important that biodiversity knowledge organizations, such as the recently sanctioned Intergovernmental science‐policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), take these into account. Conserving a diversity of life requires acknowledging a diversity of values, knowledge and framings of biodiversity, and fostering a diversity of social–natural relations.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Dismantling the Divide Between Indigenous and Scientific Knowledge
Agrawal, A. (1995) · Development and Change · doi:10.1111/j.1467-7660.1995.tb00560.x · Cited by 2,189
Cited by
Socio‐economic impact classification of alien taxa (SEICAT)
Bacher, S., Blackburn, T. M., Essl, F., Genovesi, P., Heikkilä, J., Jeschke, J. M., Jones, G., Keller, R., Kenis, M., Kueffer, C., et al. (2018) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12844 · Cited by 378
Bridging knowledge systems to enhance governance of environmental commons: A typology of settings
Rathwell, K. J., Armitage, D., & Berkes, F. (2015) · International Journal of the Commons · doi:10.18352/ijc.584 · Cited by 154
Governing ecosystem services: national and local lessons from policy appraisal and implementation
Verburg, R., Selnes, T., & Verweij, P. (2016) · Ecosystem Services · doi:10.1016/j.ecoser.2016.03.006 · Cited by 47
DIVERSIDAD BIOCULTURAL: INNOVANDO EN INVESTIGACIÓN PARA LA CONSERVACIÓN
Nemogá, G. R. (2016) · Acta Biológica Colombiana · doi:10.15446/abc.v21n1supl.50920 · Cited by 27
Metadata
- Authors
- Turnhout, E., Waterton, C., Neves, K., & Buizer, M.
- Venue
- Conservation Letters
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-01-07
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 154-161
- ISSN
- 1755-263X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2144457452
- Cited by
- 260
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.