wise use of mires and peatlands - Peatland Ecology Research Group

VALUES AND CONFLICTS: WHERE DIFFERENT VALUES MEET117guarantee for stability. Many species, particularlyrare ones, are probably even “useless” forecosystem functioning (cf. review in Gorke1999). The loss of others will in general not ruinan ecosystem, because ecosystems are, contraryto what is often suggested, not “wheel-works”but “networks”. They do not collapse, theysimply adjust (During & Joosten 1992, Hargrove1987), because they normally contain a complexof mutually substitutable negative-feed-backmechanisms (cf. Ivanov 1981, Joosten 1993).There is, however, insufficient knowledge ofinterdependence to judge which concrete speciesare and will be redundant in this respect(Lovejoy1988, cf. Naeem 1998). Furthermore,“useless” species play a role in shaping theevolutionary template of other species (cf. Brownet al. 2001). Therefore it is wise to preserve thewhole taxonomic and ecosystem biodiversitypool (see also Naeem 1998).In terms of the global biosphere, westerncivilisation and the functioning of regionallandscapes some mires were and are inessential.Because there are so many mires, the likelihoodthat the destruction of the next mire will producea disaster is low. Each destruction, however, willincrease the chance that a positive feed-backmechanism which ultimately disastrousconsequences is initiated (cf. Joosten 1993,Couwenberg & Joosten 1999). That thisprobability is initially low and the effects areinitially limited encourages the notion that theabsence of disaster so far is evidence that disasterwill never come (Norton 1987, cf. Ehrlich &Ehrlich 1981: “The Rivet Poppers”). The limiteddirect effect may lead to a destruction of themajority of mires and peatlands, especially inareas where a seeming abundance leads to thefalse conception that an endless resource isavailable (Joosten 1997, 1999).If we accept the central assumption that everyspecies and ecosystem may have great but nonquantifiablevalue, species and ecosystems shouldbe saved as long as the costs of doing so aretolerably low. In the face of high costs societymight choose a small risk of serious negativeconsequences (Norton 1987).Because there is much we do not know, and muchmore that we do not understand, we should notirreversibly destroy extensive areas of the world’sremaining mires and peatlands. At the same timewe can not exclude mankind from all the benefitsof developing mires and peatlands.75The attribution of monetary value to entities orservices which are not normally seen to have afinancial or commercial value.76Grönemann & Hampicke 1997.77This is not only a problem in the valuation ofregulation functions of nature, but also in valuingsimilar indirect “means” such as infrastructure,time-saving in traffic, security against floods etc.(Grönemann & Hampicke 1997).78Vatn & Bromley 1993.79See footnote 29 and §3.1. Also, transformationvalues can not be valued because their impact onpeople’s preferences is unpredictable and variesfrom person to person (Brennan 1992).80Brennan 1992.81Cf. Goetz 1997, who shows that from a privateeconomic perspective a farmer should use hisagricultural peatland intensively, which would leadto rapid and complete loss of the peat soil. Seealso Van Vuuren & Roy 1993.82Hardin 1968.83Hanley et al. 1998, Hodge & McNally 2000.84A hectare of Malaysian tropical forest may be“worth” US$3000 on the basis of its soilprotecting,gene maintaining, and possiblemedicinal properties (Pearce 1993). But that cashis “virtual” because these services are not ownedby anyone in particular. The same Malaysianhectare is worth US$ 300 – 500 “cash in thebank” when the timber is felled and sold on theJapanese market. The two sets of dollar valuesare simply not the same (O’Riordan & Voisey1998).85This failure does not arise from the functioningof markets, but from the fact that the marketsare not there at all. They are “missing markets”(Pearce & Moran 1994).86Note that all these failures can occursimultaneously: they are not mutually exclusive(Pearce & Moran 1994).87See for reviews Pearce & Moran 1994, Georgiouet al. 1997, O’Neill 1997, Pimentel et al. 1997,Hampicke 2000b, and http://management.canberra.edu.au/~gkb/benefit.html.88Cf. Barbier, 1994, Gren et al. 1995, Söderqvist etal. 2000 and the special issue of EcologicalEconomics 35 : “The values of wetlands:landscape and institutional perspectives.”89Cf. the global gross national product being US$18trillion per year (Costanza et al. 1997).90See, however, Pearce 1998.91Original data recalculated to year 2000 US$ usingthe US consumer price index: http://stats.bls.gov/cpihome.htm. Other currencies are recalculatedin US$ using the exchange rates of July 2001.Attention: The data may contain double countingin the aggregate values (cf. Turner et al. 1998).92Thibodeau & Ostro 1981.93Costanza et al. 1997.94Costanza et al. 1997.95Costanza et al. 1997.96Gren et al. 1995.97Costanza et al. 1997.98Costanza et al. 1997.99Farber 1996.100Han et al. 2000.101Costanza et al. 1997.102Costanza et al. 1997.103Thibodeau & Ostro 1981.104Costanza et al. 1997.105Costanza et al. 1997.106Thibodeau & Ostro 1981.107Gren et al. 1995.108Costanza et al. 1989.109Bergstrom et al. 1990.11077 visitor days ha -1 y -1 (http://www.pantm.co.uk/reports/purbeck/CombinedChapters.pdf) at $4.50