The concept of ‘natural capital’ is gaining traction internationally as recognition grows of the central role of the natural environment in sustaining economic and social well-being. It is therefore encouraging to see the first signs of a ‘natural capital approach’ to decision making being accepted within government policy processes and the private sector. However, there are multiple different understandings of this ‘approach’, many of which misuse or omit key features of its foundations in natural science and economics. To address this, we present a framework for natural capital analysis and decision making that links ecological and economic perspectives.
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $8.67 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
Guerry, A. D. et al. Natural capital and ecosystem services informing decisions: from promise to practice. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 7348–7355 (2015).
Abson, D. J. et al. Ecosystem services as a boundary object for sustainability. Ecol. Econ. 103, 29–37 (2014).
Pan, Y. & Vira, B. Exploring natural capital using bibliometrics and social media data. Ecol. Soc. 24, 5 (2019).
West, P. C. et al. Trading carbon for food: global comparison of carbon stocks vs. crop yields on agricultural land. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 19645–19648 (2010).
Binner, A. & Day, B. How property markets determine welfare outcomes: an equilibrium sorting model analysis of local environmental interventions. Environ. Resour. Econ. 69, 733–761 (2018).
DeFries, R. & Nagendra, H. Ecosystem management as a wicked problem. Science 356, 265–270 (2017).
Goodstein, E. S. & Polasky, S. Economics and the Environment (Wiley, 2017).
Bright, G., Connors, E. & Grice, J. Measuring natural capital: towards accounts for the UK and a basis for improved decision-making. Oxf. Rev. Econ. Policy 35, 88–108 (2019).
Arrow, K. J., Dasgupta, P., Goulder, L. H., Mumford, K. J. & Oleson, K. Sustainability and the measurement of wealth. Environ. Dev. Econ. 17, 317–353 (2012).
Arrow, K. J., Dasgupta, P., Goulder, L. H., Mumford, K. J. & Oleson, K. Sustainability and the measurement of wealth: further reflections. Environ. Dev. Econ. 18, 504–516 (2013).
Dasgupta, P. & Maler, K.-G. Net national product, wealth, and social well-being. Environ. Dev. Econ. 5, 69–93 (2000).
Dasgupta, P. Human Well-being and the Natural Environment (Oxford Univ. Press, 2001).
Fenichel, E. P., Abbott, J. K. & Do Yun, S. in Handbook of Environmental Economics Vol. 4 Handbooks in Economics (eds Dasgupta, P. et al.) 85–142 (Elsevier Science Bv, 2018).
Do Yun, S., Hutniczak, B., Abbott, J. K. & Fenichel, E. P. Ecosystem-based management and the wealth of ecosystems. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 6539–6544 (2017).
Fenichel, E. P. et al. Measuring the value of groundwater and other forms of natural capital. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 2382–2387 (2016).
Lange, G.-M., Wodon, Q. & Carey, K. The Changing Wealth of Nations 2018: Building a Sustainable Future (The World Bank, 2018).
Inclusive Wealth Report (United Nations Environment Programme, 2018).
Keenan, J. M. A climate intelligence arms race in financial markets. Science 365, 1240–1243 (2019).
H.M. Government The Green Book: Central Government Guidance on Appraisal and Evaluation (OGL Press, 2018).
Mace, G. M. The ecology of natural capital accounting. Oxf. Rev. Econ. Policy 35, 54–67 (2019).
Mace, G. M., Hails, R. S., Cryle, P., Harlow, J. & Clarke, S. J. Towards a risk register for natural capital. J. Appl. Econ. 52, 641–653 (2015).
The State of Natural Capital: Restoring our Natural Assets (Natural Capital Committee, 2014).
Brown, C. et al. Measuring Ecosystem Services: Guidance on Developing Ecosystem Service Indicators (UNEP-WCMC, 2014).
Cardinale, B. J. et al. Biodiversity loss and its impact on humanity. Nature 486, 59–67 (2012).
Oliver, T. H. et al. Biodiversity and resilience of ecosystem functions. Trends Ecol. Evol. 30, 673–684 (2015).
van der Plas, F. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning in naturally assembled communities. Biol. Rev. 94, 1220–1245 (2019).
Hausmann, A., Slotow, R., Burns, J. K. & Di Minin, E. The ecosystem service of sense of place: benefits for human well-being and biodiversity conservation. Environ. Conserv. 43, 117–127 (2016).
Pascual, U. et al. in The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (ed. Kumar, P.) 183–256 (Routledge, 2010).
Mace, G. M., Norris, K. & Fitter, A. H. Biodiversity and ecosystem services: a multilayered relationship. Trends Ecol. Evol. 27, 19–26 (2012).
Schröter, M. et al. National ecosystem assessments in Europe: a review. BioScience 66, 813–828 (2016).
Bateman, I. J., Mace, G. M., Fezzi, C., Atkinson, G. & Turner, K. Economic analysis for ecosystem service assessments. Environ. Resour. Econ. 48, 177–218 (2011).
Silvertown, J. Have ecosystem services been oversold? Trends Ecol. Evol. 30, 641–648 (2015).
Kremen, C. & Ostfeld, R. S. A call to ecologists: measuring, analyzing, and managing ecosystem services. Front. Ecol. Environ. 3, 540–548 (2005).
Folke, C. et al. Regime shifts, resilience, and biodiversity in ecosystem management. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 35, 557–581 (2004).
Nelson, E. et al. Modeling multiple ecosystem services, biodiversity conservation, commodity production, and tradeoffs at landscape scales. Front. Ecol. Environ. 7, 4–11 (2009).
Champ, P. A., Boyle, K. & Brown, T. C. A Primer on Non-market Valuation 2nd edn, Vol. 15 (Springer, 2017).
Freeman III, A. M., Herriges, J. A. & Kling, C. L. The Measurement of Environmental and Resource Values: Theory and Methods (Routledge, 2014).
Day, B. H. Natural Environment Valuation Online (NEVO) tool (Land, Environment, Economics and Policy (LEEP) Institute, University of Exeter Business School, 2019).
Enabling a Natural Capital Approach (ENCA), Guidance for Policy and Decision Makers to Help Them Consider the Value of a Natural Capital Approach (H.M. Government, 2020).
Hanley, N. & Perrings, C. The economic value of biodiversity. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 11, 355–375 (2019).
Potts, S. G. et al. Global pollinator declines: trends, impacts and drivers. Trends Ecol. Evol. 25, 345–353 (2010).
Balmford, A. et al. Walk on the wild side: estimating the global magnitude of visits to protected areas. PLoS Biol. 13, e1002074 (2015).
Balmford, A. et al. Economic reasons for conserving wild nature. Science 297, 950–953 (2002).
Bateman, I. J. et al. Bringing ecosystem services into economic decision-making: land use in the United Kingdom. Science 341, 45–50 (2013).
Rosling, H. Factfulness (Flammarion, 2019).
Hartwick, J. M. Intergenerational equity and investing of rents from exhaustible resources. Am. Econ. Rev 67, 972–974 (1977).
Our Common Future - Brundtland Report (UN, 1987).
Neumayer, E. Human development and sustainability. J. Hum. Dev. Capab. 13, 561–579 (2012).
Cohen, F., Hepburn, C. J. & Teytelboym, A. Is natural capital really substitutable? Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 44, 425–448 (2019).
Fitter, A. H. Are ecosystem services replaceable by technology? Environ. Resour. Econ. 55, 513–524 (2013).
Ritchie, P. D. L. et al. Shifts in national land use and food production in Great Britain after a climate tipping point. Nat. Food 1, 76–83 (2020).
Suding, K. N. & Hobbs, R. J. Threshold models in restoration and conservation: a developing framework. Trends Ecol. Evol. 24, 271–279 (2009).
Moshiri, S. & Aliyev, K. Rebound effect of efficiency improvement in passenger cars on gasoline consumption in Canada. Ecol. Econ. 131, 330–341 (2017).
Polasky, S., Lewis, D. J., Plantinga, A. J. & Nelson, E. Implementing the optimal provision of ecosystem services. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 6248–6253 (2014).
Choondassery, Y. Rights-based approach: the hub of sustainable development. Discourse Commun. Sustain. Educ. 8, 17–23 (2017).
Bullock, J. M., Aronson, J., Newton, A. C., Pywell, R. F. & Rey-Benayas, J. M. Restoration of ecosystem services and biodiversity: conflicts and opportunities. Trends Ecol. Evol. 26, 541–549 (2011).
Raudsepp-Hearne, C., Peterson, G. D. & Bennett, E. M. Ecosystem service bundles for analyzing tradeoffs in diverse landscapes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 5242–5247 (2010).
Gordon, L. J., Peterson, G. D. & Bennett, E. M. Agricultural modifications of hydrological flows create ecological surprises. Trends Ecol. Evol. 23, 211–219 (2008).
Pascual, U. et al. Off-stage ecosystem service burdens: a blind spot for global sustainability. Environ. Res. Lett. 12, 075001 (2017).
Manning, P. et al. Redefining ecosystem multifunctionality. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, 427–436 (2018).
Allan, E. et al. Land use intensification alters ecosystem multifunctionality via loss of biodiversity and changes to functional composition. Ecol. Lett. 18, 834–843 (2015).
Lamb, A. et al. The potential for land sparing to offset greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 488–492 (2016).
Lefcheck, J. S. et al. Biodiversity enhances ecosystem multifunctionality across trophic levels and habitats. Nat. Commun. 6, 6936 (2015).
Exploring the Potential of ENCORE as a Tool for Planetary Health: Characterising the Relationships Between Economic Sectors, Natural Systems and Human Health and Wellbeing (UNEP-WCMC, 2019).
Nesshöver, C. et al. The science, policy and practice of nature-based solutions: an interdisciplinary perspective. Sci. Total Environ. 579, 1215–1227 (2017).
Dakos, V. et al. Ecosystem tipping points in an evolving world. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3, 355–362 (2019).
Environmental Net Gain: Measurement, Delivery and Application (CIWEM, 2018).
Eftec The Economic Case for Investment in Natural Capital in England, Final Report to the Natural Capital Committee (Defra, 2015).
The State of Natural Capital: Protecting and Improving Natural Capital for Prosperity and Wellbeing (Natural Capital Committee, 2015).
We are grateful for comments from participants at the ‘Workshop on discounting and the social cost of carbon’, University of Gothenburg, Sweden, 13 May 2019 and the Rockefeller Foundation Economic Council on Planetary Health Workshop ‘Natural Capital: Policy and Practical Applications for Planetary Health’, Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford, 2 May 2019 and the UK Natural Capital Committee and its Secretariat in Defra. The opinions expressed are those of the authors alone and not of any public or private sector body with which they are associated. I.J.B. acknowledges support from the NERC SWEEP programme (Project code: NE/P011217/1) and the Turing-HSBC-ONS Economic Data Science Awards 2018, and G.M.M. acknowledges the Sustainable and Healthy Food Systems (SHEFS) programme supported by the Wellcome Trust’s ‘Our Planet, Our Health’ programme (grant no. 205200/Z/16/Z).
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Bateman, I.J., Mace, G.M. The natural capital framework for sustainably efficient and equitable decision making. Nat Sustain (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-0552-3