The Importance of Ecological Economics to Wildlife Conservation an Introduction, by Brian Czech

2 SPECIAL COVERAGE

The importance of ecological economics to wildlife conservation An Introduction, by Brian Czech

he Wildlife Society's Local Governance Working Group is of niche breadth and competitive exclusion, growth of the honored to host the new millennium's first special section human economy (the synthesis of population size and per- of the Wildlife Society Bulletin."The Importance of capita consumption) proceeds at the expense of wildlife in Ecological Economics to Wildlife Conservation" is largely the aggregate. Claims to non-consumptive economic Tthe product of a symposium held at the 1998 TWS confer- growth do not withstand our fundamental training in ence in Buffalo, New York. The symposium was well trophic ecology. The economy of nature holds many attended and generated an extraordinary amount of discus- lessons for macroeconomics; we should take the initiative sion, at times quite heated. This prompted several of the in providing them. Fortunately, the new transdiscipline of presenters to compose the papers which, along with other ecological economics welcomes us. invited papers, comprise this special section. Ecological economics is not to be confused with envi- Many wildlife professionals view economic growth as ronmental economics. Ecological economics is a funda- the greatest challenge to wildlife conservation. Indeed, mentally alternative approach to mainstream or neoclassi- this premise was the starting point from which the cal economics, whereas environmental economics is an Working Group based its decision to focus on local gover- application of neoclassical theory to environmental issues. nance, which plays a major supporting role for economic In the history of academia, neoclassical economics has growth. On the other hand, many wildlife professionals produced the policies most problematic to wildlife conser- are not convinced that economic growth is problematic; vation, and Charlie Hall's paper illustrates some of the some even view economic growth and wildlife conserva- most important reasons why. At the top of the list is the tion as mutually reinforcing. The appeal of such a view neoclassical theory of economic growth, which asserts that can be strong, given the power of win-win politics. In the due to the substitutability of resources and perpetually vast majority of cases, however, wildlife professionals on increasing efficiency, there is no practical limit to econom- both sides of the argument have limited macroeconomic ic growth. This theory is at odds with our concept of car- understanding. As a result, many of us are reluctant to rying capacity. express our opinions on economic growth and some of the John Gowdy's paper provides an introduction to the opinions that do get expressed are simplistic or otherwise terms and concepts used in ecological economics. Gowdy conceived poorly. continues with a comparative analysis of "weak sustain- The wildlife profession's paucity of macroeconomic ability" and "strong sustainability." This analysis illus- expertise and total lack of involvement in macroeconomic trates some of the key distinctions between ecological and policy is disturbing. What if economic growth truly is the neoclassical economics. While sustainability is an issue greatest challenge to wildlife conservation? Then it could that ecological economics will be wrestling with for some be argued that our profession, lacking macroeconomic time, ecological economics clearly provides a vision that knowledge and involvement, is tantamount to an exercise is more consistent with the principles of wildlife ecology in futility. (and the goal of wildlife conservation) than the neoclassi- In the first paper in this special section, I develop the cal vision of sustainability. logic for identifying economic growth as the limiting fac- The paper by Jon Erickson focuses on concepts in neo- tor for wildlife in the aggregate. Based on the principles classical and ecological economics that are particularly

Author’s address: United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Refuges, 4401 North Fairfax Dr. –MS670, Arlington, VA 22203, USA.

Wildlife Society Bulletin 2000, 28(1):2–3 Peer refereed Special Coverage • Introduction 3

relevant to the conservation of species. Erickson shows The opinions presented in this special section are not how policies derived from neoclassical economics tend to entirely compatible. All of the authors are concerned with reflect an overconfidence in the ability of markets to pro- wildlife conservation, but they vary considerably, for tect entities valued by the public, including wildlife example, in the extent to which they "buy" the market species. Ecological complexity and uncertainty tend to model of resource allocation. Basically, our authors fall undermine assumptions upon which the neoclassical along a spectrum, with one endpoint representing an model of the market is built. Erickson's concluding argu- adherence to neoclassical economics and the other repre- ment for "well-defined limits to sub- stitution, minimum stocks of natural ...my strongest hope is that the wildlife profession will capital, and preservation of ecosystem function" is a challenge to the develop a keen interest in...economic growth theory. wildlife profession to assist in defin- How could we not be interested in a process that com- ing these limits, stocks, and func- petitively excludes what we are charged to conserve? tions. Despite the weaknesses of the neoclassical model of the market, and partly because of senting the rejection thereof. Readers who have their the influence of neoclassical economics on public policy, interest in ecological economics piqued are encouraged to we live in a society where many of our choices find their continue with Valuing the Earthby Daly and Townsend only expression in the marketplace. The state of the (1993, MIT Press), A Survey of Ecological Economicsby wildlife market is summarized by Curtis Freese. The mar- Krishan et al. (1995, Island Press), or my own Shoveling ketable value of many wildlife species has never been Fuel for a Runaway Train(Fall 2000, University of greater. The state of the wildlife market is at once encour- California Press). The first 2 are edited volumes of classic aging and alarming from a historical perspective. As works in ecological economics. The third contains a cri- Freese aptly notes, "Commercial markets and natural tique of neoclassical economic growth theory from a ecosystems are uneasy partners." While the current mar- wildlife ecology perspective, an overview of ecological ket serves to illustrate the great value attributed to wildlife, economics, and a proposal for a steady-state revolution great value provides economic incentive for exploitation that entails class identification based upon expenditure. and for "milking" wildlife from not-so-wild settings. As a Certified Wildlife Biologist who believes that eco- There are many ways to address the impact of market nomic growth has become the limiting factor for wildlife failure on wildlife conservation. One is by managing in the aggregate, my strongest hope is that the wildlife wildlife and regulating wildlife consumption and habitat profession will develop a keen interest in macroeconom- destruction independently of the market. Another is to fix ics, especially economic growth theory. How could we the market mechanism to the extent possible. Yet another not be interested in a process that competitively excludes is to devise proxy markets for decision-making purposes. what we are charged to conserve? I am confident that we John Loomis explores techniques pursuant to the latter will rise to the occasion, because with our interest in and alternative, with a focus (via case study) on contingent knowledge about the economy of nature, we should gravi- valuation. Ascertaining values of nonmarketed ecosystem tate naturally toward ecological economics. Our resulting resources falls at the nexus of neoclassical and ecological interest will manifest itself academically, managerially, economics. and even politically. In the decades ahead, I believe we Our special section concludes with an ecologically eco- will be prominent contributors to economic policy dis- nomic assessment of ecotourism by Jack Isaacs. course.—Brian Czech,Special Associate Editor and Local Ecotourism is one of the economic sectors sometimes tout- Governance Working Group Chairman ed as having potential for reconciling the goals of economic growth and wildlife conservation. In many respects, ecotourism is less harmful to wildlife than other economic sectors. Isaacs' analysis suggests, however, that even from a neoclassical perspective, the net effect of ecotourism on wildlife conservation is unlikely to be positive unless the scale of the ecotourism sector is constrained by nonmarket forces. This brings our special section full circle, with economic growth casting a pall on the future of wildlife conservation.