Abstract
The services of ecological systems and the natural capital stocks that produce them are critical to the functioning of the Earth's life-support system. They contribute to human welfare, both directly and indirectly, and therefore represent part of the total economic value of the planet. We have estimated the current economic value of 17 ecosystem services for 16 biomes, based on published studies and a few original calculations. For the entire biosphere, the value (most of which is outside the market) is estimated to be in the range of US$16-54 trillion (1012) per year, with an average of US$33 trillion per year. Because of the nature of the uncertainties, this must be considered a minimum estimate. Global gross national product total is around US$18 trillion per year.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Relevant articles
Open Access articles citing this article.
-
Process analysis and mitigation strategies for wetland degradation caused by increasing agricultural water demand: an ecology–economy nexus perspective
Ecological Processes Open Access 04 September 2023
-
What matters most? Assessment of within-canopy factors influencing the needle microbiome of the model conifer, Pinus radiata
Environmental Microbiome Open Access 30 May 2023
-
Assessing the application of the revised Remane Model to fish species in a fluvially dominated cool-temperate southern African coastal system
Scientific Reports Open Access 08 May 2023
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Rent or buy this article
Prices vary by article type
from$1.95
to$39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
1. de Groot, R. S. Environmental functions as a unifying concept for ecology and economics. Environmentalist?, 105-109 (1987). 2. Turner, R. K. Economics, Growth and Sustainable Environments (eds Collard, D. et al.) (Macmillan, London, 1988). 3. Turner, R. K. Economics of wetland management. Ambio 20, 59-63 {1991). 4. de Groot, R. S. Functions of Nature: Evaluation of Nature in Environmental Planning, Management, and Decision Making (Wolters-Noordhoff, Groningen, 1992). 5. Daily, G. (ed.) Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems (Island, Washington DC, 1997). 6. Turner, R. K. & Pearce, D. in Economics and Ecology: New Frontiers and Sustainable Development (ed. Barbier, E. D.) 177-194 (Chapman and Hall, London, 1993). 7. Costanza, R. 8c Daly, H. E. Natural capital and Sustainable development. Conserv. Biol. 6, 37-46 (1992). 8. Bingham, G. et al. Issues in ecosystem valuation: improving information for decision making. Ecol. Econ. 14,73-90(1995). 9. Mitchell, R. C. & Carson, R. T. Using Surveys to Value Public Goods: the Contingent Valuation Method (Resources for the Future, Washington DC, 1989). 10. Costanza, R., Farber, S. C. & Maxwell, J. Valuation and management of wetlands ecosystems. Ecol. Econ. 1,335-361 (1989). 11. Dixon, J. A. & Sherman, P. B. Economics of Protected Areas (Island, Washington DC, 1990). 12. Barde, J.-P. & Pearce, D. W. Valuing the Environment: Six Case Studies (Earthscan, London, 1991). 13. Aylward, B. A. & Barbier, E. B. Valuing environmental functions in developing countries. Biodiv. Cons. 1,34(1992). 14. Pearce, D. Economic Values and the Natural World (Earthscan, London, 1993). 15. Goulder, L. H. & Kennedy, D. in Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems (ed. Daily, G.) 23-48 (Island, Washington DC, 1997). 16. Costanza, R. & Folke, C. in Nature's Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems (ed. Daily, G.) 49-70 (Island, Washington DC, 1997). 17. Matthews, E. Global vegetation and land-use: new high-resolution data bases for climate studies. /. Clim. Appl. Meteorol 22, 474-487 (1983). 18. Deevey, E. S. Mineral cycles. Sci. Am. 223, 148-158 (1970). 19. Ehrlich, R., Ehrlich, A. H. & Holdren, J. P. Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment (W.H. Freeman, San Francisco, 1977). 20. Ryther, J. H. Photosynthesis and fish production in the sea. Science 166, 72-76 (1969). 21. United Nations Environmental Programme First Assessment Report, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (United Nations, New York, 1990). 22. Whittaker, R. H. & Likens, G. E. in Primary Production of the Biosphere (eds Lieth, H. & Whittaker, R. H.) 305-328 (Springer, New York, 1975). 23. Bailey, R. G. Ecosystem Geography (Springer, New York, 1996). 24. Houde, E. D. & Rutherford, E. S. Recent trends in estuarine fisheries: predictions of fish production and yield. Estuaries 16, 161-176 (1993). 25. Pauly, D. & Christensen, V. Primary production required to sustain global fisheries. Nature 374, 255-257(1995). 26. Costanza, R. & Neil, C. in Energy and Ecological Modeling (eds Mitsch, W. J., Bosserman, R. W. & Klopatek, J. M.) 745-755 (Elsevier, New York, 1981). 27. Costanza, R. & Hannon, B. M. in Network Analysis of Marine Ecosystems: Methods and Applications (eds Wulff, E, Field, J. G. & Mann, K. H.) 90-115 (Springer, Heidelberg, 1989). 28. Alexander, A., List, J., Margolis, M. & d'Arge, R. Alternative methods of valuing global ecosystem services. Ecol. Econ. (submitted). 29. Costanza, R., Wainger, L., Folke, C. & Maler, K.-G. Modeling complex ecological economic systems: toward an evolutionary, dynamic understanding of people and nature. BioScience43,545-555 (1993). 30. Bockstael, N. et al. Ecological economic modeling and valuation of ecosystems. Ecol. Econ. 14, 143-159(1995). 31. Daly, H. E. & Cobb, J. For the Common Good: Redirecting the Economy Towards Community, the Environment, and a Sustainable Future (Beacon, Boston, 1989). 32. Cobb, C. & Cobb, J. The Green National Product: a Proposed Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare (Univ. Press of America, New York, 1994). 33. Max-Neef, M. Economic growth and quality of life: a threshold hypothesis. Ecol. Econ. 15, 115-118 (1995).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Electronic Supplementary Material
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Costanza, R., d'Arge, R., de Groot, R. et al. The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387, 253–260 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1038/387253a0
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/387253a0
This article is cited by
-
What matters most? Assessment of within-canopy factors influencing the needle microbiome of the model conifer, Pinus radiata
Environmental Microbiome (2023)
-
Natural world heritage conservation and tourism: a review
Heritage Science (2023)
-
Process analysis and mitigation strategies for wetland degradation caused by increasing agricultural water demand: an ecology–economy nexus perspective
Ecological Processes (2023)
-
Assessing the application of the revised Remane Model to fish species in a fluvially dominated cool-temperate southern African coastal system
Scientific Reports (2023)
-
Linking plant and vertebrate species to Nature’s Contributions to People in the Swiss Alps
Scientific Reports (2023)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.