|
|  |
|
in-cites,
August 2004
http://www.in-cites.com/papers/DrRobertCostanza.html
|
|
|
|
An
interview with:
Dr. Robert Costanza |
|
|
|
|
Why do you think
your paper is highly cited?
The paper was a global synthesis of information about how
important natural ecosystems are to supporting human welfare. It was
unique in that it not only asserted that ecosystems are
important, but quantified how important they are in units
(dollars) that were easy to compare with other things that support
human welfare. The paper acknowledged the many difficulties,
limitations, and controversies surrounding such an exercise, but
concluded that solving these problems would lead to even larger
values. It also came up with a number—$33 trillion/year—as the
estimated total annual contribution of ecosystems to human welfare.
Since this number was significantly larger than global GNP and was
obviously still an underestimate, it led to the inescapable
conclusion that ecosystems are much more important to human welfare
than had been previously assumed, and that they therefore deserved
much more attention. A main goal of the paper was to encourage
further discussion and research, and the high citation rate
indicates that it has done just that.
What are the circumstances which led you to your work?
|
“In the next 10 years I expect the concepts of ecosystem services and natural capital to become core concepts in how we think about and manage humanity's relationship with the rest of nature.”
|
|
I had long been interested in integrating ecology and economics.
I had received a Pew Scholarship in
Conservation and the Environment from 1993-1996, and the Pew
Foundation arranged annual meetings of the Pew Scholars. The idea
for the study emerged at such a meeting in New Hampshire in October
1995. The paper itself was the
result of a workshop held at the National Center for Ecological
Analysis and Synthesis
(NCEAS) in Santa Barbara, California. NCEAS
is an NSF-funded center devoted to encouraging synthesis of
ecological and other data toward the goal of creating new knowledge
and better management. The workshop brought together the 13
co-authors of the paper from a range of natural and social science
disciplines. The co-authors met during the
week of June 17–21, 1996, to do the major parts of the synthesis
activities, which were then followed up with six months of intense
work to finalize the results.
Would you describe the significance of this work for your
field?
The paper has influenced several fields in slightly different
ways. The environment/ecology field has embraced the concept of
ecosystem services as a way to effectively make the link between
ecosystem functioning and human welfare. The Millennium Ecosystem
Assessment is just one of several initiatives that have been
organized around this concept. This field has also been more open to
alternative methods of valuation of ecosystem services, but there is
a significant subset that is skeptical of any attempt to value
ecosystem services. The field of economics has been on the whole
less positive, largely for the wrong methodological reasons. I think
they feel (wrongly) that if ecosystems are really as important as
the paper shows, then what they have been studying all these years
is less important. The field of ecological economics has been
guardedly supportive, wishing to both acknowledge the importance of
ecosystems and to emphasize the limitations of the study’s
methods. In all cases, however, the paper has stimulated significant
discussion of these issues and that has been a positive factor.
Where has this research gone since the publication of your
paper? Where do you see it going 10 years from now?
There has been an explosion of research on this topic. A random
sample includes: (1) a follow-up working group at NCEAS produced a
special issue of Ecological Economics delving into many of
the questions that the original paper raised; (2) the National
Science Foundation now lists ecosystem services and their valuation
as a core item on the environmental research agenda; (3) the ISI Web
of Science now lists over 300 papers when one enters the term
"ecosystem services" in the topic search field; (4) we
have recently contracted with the state of New Jersey to assemble
the "Natural Capital Accounts" for the state.
In the next 10 years I expect the concepts of ecosystem services
and natural capital to become core concepts in how we think about
and manage humanity’s relationship with the rest of nature.
What lessons would you draw from your work to share with the
next generation of researchers?
Analysis and synthesis are two sides of the same coin, but
science has underutilized synthesis as a way to convert data into
usable knowledge. We must learn to better balance the skills of
analysis and synthesis in order to be truly effective scientists. We
also need to transcend disciplinary boundaries and integrate our
knowledge in order to address the most important problems facing
humanity today.
Dr. Robert Costanza
University of Vermont
Burlington, VT, USA
|
|
|
in-cites, August 2004
http://www.in-cites.com/papers/DrRobertCostanza.html
|
|
cites
:
