The pitfalls of plural valuation

This paper critically examines the current political context in which valuation studies of nature are undertaken. It challenges the belief that somehow, more and technically better valuation will drive the societal change toward more just and sustainable futures. Instead, we argue that current and proposed valuation practices risk to continue to overrepresent the values of those who hold power and dominate the valuation space, and to perpetuate the discrimination of the views and values of nondominant stakeholders. In tackling this politically sensitive issue, we define a political typology of valuations, making explicit the roles of power and discrimination. This is done to provide valuation professionals and other actors with a simple framework to determine if valuation actions and activities are constructive, inclusive, resolve injustices and enable systemic change, or rather entrench the status quo or aggravate existing injustices. The objective is to buttress actors in their decisions to support, accept, improve, oppose, or reject such valuations.

Automated summary

This paper critically examines the current political context in which valuation studies of nature are undertaken and challenges the belief that better valuation practices will lead to more just and sustainable futures. It argues that current practices risk overrepresenting the values of those in power and perpetuating the discrimination of nondominant stakeholders. The paper proposes a political typology of valuations to help professionals determine if valuation actions are constructive and enable systemic change.