Economy-Ecology Interaction: Do Neoclassical Environmental Economics and Ecological Economic Thought Complement Each Other?

Year 2021, Volume: 6 Issue: 2, 356 - 370, 27.08.2021

Selin Zengin Taşdemir

https://doi.org/10.30784/epfad.896292

Abstract

In this study, it is aimed to review the methods of conceptualizing the relationship between economy and environment of two contemporary economic approaches - Neoclassical Environmental Economics and Ecological Economics. Within the discipline of economics, there is an open debate about environmental problems between the neoclassical environmental economics and the rapidly developing ecological economics school. Also, the environmental economy and the ecological economy share the common aim of understanding the human-economy environment interaction in order to make economies sustainable. To achieve this aim, these two perspectives use different types of analytical frameworks and are opposed to each other on many fundamental theoretical and methodological issues. While environmental economics advances in neoclassical analytical approach, ecological economics seeks solutions to economic problems by adopting 'diversified approaches' that widen the gap between the two economic thought. In this framework, it is tried to be evaluated whether ecological economy represents a different and alternative idea to neoclassical environmental economy. The study emphasizes the divergence between the two perspectives and investigates whether there is complementarity between these two perspectives regarding the relationship between economy and environment.

Keywords

Ecological Economics, Environmental Economics, Economic History

Ekonomi-Ekoloji Etkileşimi: Neoklasik Çevre İktisadı İle Ekolojik İktisadi Düşünce Birbirini Tamamlıyor Mu?

Abstract

Bu çalışmada, iki çağdaş ekonomik yaklaşımın -Neoklasik Çevre İktisadı ve Ekolojik İktisat- teorilerinin ekonomi ve çevre ilişkisini kavramsallaştırma yöntemlerinin gözden geçirilmesi amaçlanmakta ve iki iktisadi akımın ana temalarına kısa bir bakış sağlamaktadır. Ekonomi disiplini içinde, neoklasik çevre ekonomisi ile hızla gelişen ekolojik ekonomi okulu arasında çevre sorunları ile ilgili açık bir tartışma bulunmaktadır. Aynı zamanda, çevre ekonomisi ve ekolojik ekonomi, ekonomileri sürdürülebilir kılabilmek için insan-ekonomi çevre etkileşimini anlamaya yönelik ortak hedefi paylaşmaktadır. Bu hedefe ulaşmak için, bu iki perspektif farklı türlerde analitik çerçeve kullanmakta ve birçok temel teorik ve metodolojik konuda birbirine zıt durumdadır. Çevre ekonomisi, neoklasik analitik yaklaşım içinde ilerlerken, ekolojik ekonomi, ikisi arasındaki boşluğu genişleten 'çeşitlendirilmiş bir yaklaşımları' benimseyerek ekonomik sorunlara çözüm aramaktadır. Bu çerçevede, ekolojik ekonominin neoklasik çevre ekonomisine farklı ve alternatif bir düşünceyi temsil edip etmediğini değerlendirilmeye çalışılmaktadır. Çalışmada, iki bakış açısı arasındaki ayrışma vurgulanmakta ve bu iki bakış açısı arasında ekonomi ve çevre ilişkisine dair tamamlayıcılık olup olmadığını araştırılmaktadır.

Keywords

Ekolojik İktisat, Çevre Ekonomisi, İktisat Tarihi

References

• Adaman, F. and Özkaynak, B. (2002). The economics-environment relationship: Neoclassical, institutional, and Marxist approaches. Studies in Political Economy, 69(1), 109-135. https://doi.org/10.1080/19187033.2002.11675182
• Camerer, C. F., Loewenstein, G. and Rabin, M. (2004). Advances in behavioral economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Costanza, R. (1991). Ecological economics: A research agenda. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 2(2), 335-357. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0954-349X(05)80007-4
• Costanza, R., Cumberland, J. H., Daly, H., Goodland, R., Norgaard, R. B., Kubiszewski, I., & Franco, C. (2014). An introduction to ecological economics. USA: CRC Press.
• Costanza, R. and Daly, H. E. (1992). Natural capital and sustainable development. Conservation Biology, 6(1), 37-46. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1992.610037.x
• Costanza, R., d'Arge, R., De Groot, R., Farber, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., ... & Van Den Belt, M. (1997). The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387(6630), 253-260. Retrieved from https://www.nature.com/
• Crocker, T. D. (2002). A short history of environmental and resource economics. In J. van den Bergh (Ed.), Handbook of environmental and resource economics (pp. 32-45). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.
• Cropper, M. L. and Oates, W. E. (1992). Environmental economics: A survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 30(2), 675-740. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org
• Daly, H. E. (1991). Elements of environmental macroeconomics. In R. Costanza (Ed.), Ecological Economics: The science and management of sustainability (pp. 32-46). New York: Colombia University Press.
• Daly, H. E. (1992). Allocation, distribution, and scale: Towards an economics that is efficient, just, and sustainable. Ecological Economics, 6(3), 185-193. https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(92)90024-M
• Daly, H. E. and Townsend, K. N. (1992). Valuing the earth: Economics, ecology, ethics. Cambridge: MIT Press.
• Domencich, T. A. and McFadden, D. (1975). Urban travel demand-a behavioral analysis. Retrieved from https://trid.trb.org/
• Folke, C., Holling, C. S. and Perrings, C. (1996). Biological diversity, ecosystems, and the human scale. Ecological Applications, 6(4), 1018-1024. https://doi.org/10.2307/2269584
• Franco, M. P. (2018). Searching for a scientific paradigm in ecological economics: The history of ecological economic thought, 1880s–1930s. Ecological Economics, 153, 195-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.07.022
• Hardin, G. 1968. The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162(1968), 11-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/19390450903037302
• Goldstein, D. (2002). Theoretical perspectives on strategic environmental management. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 12(5), 495-524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-002-0128-6
• Gómez-Baggethun, E., De Groot, R., Lomas, P. L. and Montes, C. (2010). The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes. Ecological Economics, 69(6), 1209-1218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.007
• Gowdy, J. and Erickson, J. (2005). Ecological economics at a crossroads. Ecological Economics, 53(1), 17-20. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.01.010
• Gowdy, J. and O'Hara, S. (1997). Weak sustainability and viable technologies. Ecological Economics, 22(3), 239-247. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(97)00093-1
• Howarth, R. B. (1992). Intergenerational justice and the chain of obligation. Environmental Values, 1(2), 133-140. doi:10.3197/096327192776680124
• Hubacek, K. and Van den Bergh, J. C. (2006). Changing concepts of ‘land’in economic theory: From single to multi-disciplinary approaches. Ecological Economics, 56(1), 5-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.03.033
• Klaassen, G. A. and Opschoor, J. B. (1991). Economics of sustainability or the sustainability of economics: Different paradigms. Ecological Economics, 4(2), 93-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(91)90024-9
• Klauer, B. (2000). Ecosystem prices: Activity analysis applied to ecosystems. Ecological Economics, 33(3), 473-486. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00164-0
• Kula, E. (1997). History of environmental economic thought. UK: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203436110
• Lazear, E. P. (2000). Economic imperialism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115(1), 99-146. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355300554683
• Lele, S. M. (1991). Sustainable development: A critical review. World Development, 19, 607–621. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(91)90197-P
• Martinez-Alier, J. (2014). The environmentalism of the poor. Geoforum, 54, 239-241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2013.04.019
• Martinez-Alier, J., Munda, G. and O'Neill, J. (1998). Weak comparability of values as a foundation for ecological economics. Ecological Economics, 26(3), 277-286. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(97)00120-1
• Munda, G. (1997). Environmental economics, ecological economics, and the concept of sustainable development. Environmental Values, 6(2), 213-233. https://doi.org/10.3197/096327197776679158
• Munier, N. (2006). Economic growth and sustainable development: Could multicriteria analysis be used to solve this dichotomy?. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 8(3), 425-443. doi:10.1007/s10668-005-8505-6
• Norgaard, R. B. (1985). Environmental economics: An evolutionary critique and a plea for pluralism. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 12(4), 382-394. https://doi.org/10.1016/0095-0696(85)90007-5
• O’Connor, M. (2006). The “Four Spheres” framework for sustainability. Ecological Complexity, 3(4), 285-292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecocom.2007.02.002
• Pearce, D. W. and Turner, R. K. (1990). Economics of natural resources and the environment. Maryland: JHU Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/1242904
• Proops, J. L. R. (1999). Integration and communication between environmental economics and other disciplines. In Jeron C. J. M and van den Bergh (Eds.), Handbook of environmental and resource economics. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781843768586
• Proops, J. L. and Safonov, P. (2004). Modelling in ecological economics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Røpke, I. (2005). Trends in the development of ecological economics from the late 1980s to the early 2000s. Ecological Economics, 55(2), 262-290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.10.010
• Sagoff, M. (2008). On the economic value of ecosystem services. Environmental Values, 17(2), 239-257. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/
• Sahu, N. C. and Nayak, B. (1994). Niche diversification in environmental/ecological economics. Ecological Economics, 11(1), 9-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(94)90045-0
• Schumpeter, J. A. (1954). History of economic analysis. UK: Routledge.
• Siebenhüner, B. (2000). Homo sustinens - towards a new conception of humans for the science of sustainability. Ecological Economics, 32(1), 15-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00111-1
• Simon, H. A. (1986). Rationality in psychology and economics. Journal of Business, 59(4), 209-224. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/
• Smith, V. K. (1993). Nonmarket valuation of environmental resources: An interpretive appraisal. Land Economics, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.2307/3146275
• Söllner, F. (1997). A reexamination of the role of thermodynamics for environmental economics. Ecological Economics, 22(3), 175-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(97)00078-5
• Spash, C. (1999). The development of environmental thinking in economics. Environmental Values, 8(4), 413-435. https://doi.org/10.3197/096327199129341897
• Turner, R. K. (2002). Environmental and ecological economics perspectives. In J. van den Bergh (Ed.), Handbook of environmental and resource economics (pp. 1001-1033). Cheltanham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.
• Van den Bergh, J. C. (2001). Ecological economics: Themes, approaches, and differences with environmental economics. Regional Environmental Change, 2(1), 13-23. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/
• Van den Bergh, J. C. and Gowdy, J. M. (2000). Evolutionary theories in environmental and resource economics: Approaches and applications. Environmental and Resource Economics, 17(1), 37-57. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/
• Venkatachalam, L. (2007). Environmental economics and ecological economics: Where they can converge? Ecological Economics, 61(2-3), 550-558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.05.01
• Verhoef, E. T. and Nijkamp, P. (2002). Externalities in urban sustainability: Environmental versus localization-type agglomeration externalities in a general spatial equilibrium model of a single-sector monocentric industrial city. Ecological Economics, 40(2), 157-179. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(01)00253-1