IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v69y2010i8p1610-1616.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Applying methodological pluralism to wildlife and the economy

Author

Listed:
  • Niraj, Shekhar K.
  • Dayal, Vikram
  • Krausman, Paul R.

Abstract

Methodological pluralism is important when we study complex systems. We aim to show that methodological pluralism yields additional insight by applying it to a specific question: how are the economy and wildlife related in developed and developing countries? We identify three possible ingredients of methodological pluralism: (1) using both qualitative and quantitative information; (2) tapping the potential of history to illuminate slow-moving variables; and (3) explicitly synthesizing either individually or in groups, by thinking about the corresponding system. We illustrate with examples.

Suggested Citation

  • Niraj, Shekhar K. & Dayal, Vikram & Krausman, Paul R., 2010. "Applying methodological pluralism to wildlife and the economy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(8), pages 1610-1616, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:69:y:2010:i:8:p:1610-1616
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921-8009(10)00150-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zografos, Christos & Howarth, Richard B. (ed.), 2008. "Deliberative Ecological Economics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195696974.
    2. Gual, Miguel A. & Norgaard, Richard B., 2010. "Bridging ecological and social systems coevolution: A review and proposal," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 707-717, February.
    3. Norgaard, Richard B., 1989. "The case for methodological pluralism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 37-57, February.
    4. Czech, Brian & Krausman, Paul & Devers, Patrick, 2000. "Economic associations among causes of species endangerment in the United States," MPRA Paper 2306, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Solow, Robert M, 1985. "Economic History and Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 328-331, May.
    6. World Bank, 2006. "World Development Indicators 2006," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 8151.
    7. Norgaard, Richard B., 2004. "Learning and knowing collectively," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 231-241, June.
    8. World Bank, 2007. "World Development Indicators 2007," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 8150.
    9. Robert E. Lucas Jr., 2003. "Macroeconomic Priorities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 1-14, March.
    10. Thomas H. Stevens & Jaime Echeverria & Ronald J. Glass & Tim Hager & Thomas A. More, 1991. "Measuring the Existence Value of Wildlife: What Do CVM Estimates Really Show?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 67(4), pages 390-400.
    11. Geoffrey Jones & Tarun Khanna, 2006. "Bringing history (back) into international business," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 37(4), pages 453-468, July.
    12. Swanson, Timothy M, 1994. "The Economics of Extinction Revisited and Revised: A Generalised Framework for the Analysis of the Problems of Endangered Species and Biodiversity Losses," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 46(0), pages 800-821, Supplemen.
    13. Timothy M. Swanson, 1994. "The Economics of Extinction Revisited and Revised," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: The International Regulation of Extinction, chapter 3, pages 45-76, Palgrave Macmillan.
    14. Skonhoft, Anders, 1998. "Resource utilization, property rights and welfare--Wildlife and the local people," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 67-80, July.
    15. Roger Koenker & Kevin F. Hallock, 2001. "Quantile Regression," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 143-156, Fall.
    16. Manner, Mikko & Gowdy, John, 2010. "The evolution of social and moral behavior: Evolutionary insights for public policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 753-761, February.
    17. Dayal, Vikram, 2006. "A microeconometric analysis of household extraction of forest biomass goods in Ranthambhore National Park, India," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 145-163, June.
    18. Richard Damania & Randy Stringer & K. Ullas Karanth & Brad Stith, 2003. "The Economics of Protecting Tiger Populations: Linking Household Behavior to Poaching and Prey Depletion," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(2), pages 198-216.
    19. Dinda, Soumyananda, 2004. "Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis: A Survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 431-455, August.
    20. Shultz, Steven & Pinazzo, Jorge & Cifuentes, Miguel, 1998. "Opportunities and limitations of contingent valuation surveys to determine national park entrance fees: evidence from Costa Rica," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(1), pages 131-149, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Strunz, Sebastian & Klauer, Bernd & Ring, Irene & Schiller, Johannes, 2014. "Between Scylla and Charybdis: On the place of economic methods and concepts within ecological economics," UFZ Discussion Papers 26/2014, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ), Division of Social Sciences (ÖKUS).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Astrid Zabel & Karen Pittel & Göran Bostedt & Stefanie Engel, 2011. "Comparing Conventional and New Policy Approaches for Carnivore Conservation: Theoretical Results and Application to Tiger Conservation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 48(2), pages 287-301, February.
    2. Birgit Bednar-Friedl & Edwin Muchapondwa & Precious Zikhali & Samson Mukanjari, 2012. "Evaluating the Prospects of Benefit Sharing Schemes in Protecting Mountain Gorillas in Central Africa," Working Papers 321, Economic Research Southern Africa.
    3. Foudi, Sébastien, 2012. "The role of farmers' property rights in soil ecosystem services conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 90-96.
    4. Drechsler, Martin & Grimm, Volker & Mysiak, Jaroslav & Watzold, Frank, 2007. "Differences and similarities between ecological and economic models for biodiversity conservation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 232-241, April.
    5. Alexander, Robert R., 2000. "Modelling species extinction: the case for non-consumptive values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 259-269, November.
    6. Smulders, Sjak & van Soest, Daan & Withagen, Cees, 2004. "International trade, species diversity, and habitat conservation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 891-910, September.
    7. Marggraf, R., 2001. "Wie effizient ist die Integration von naturschutzbezogenen Handelsbeschränkungen in die Regeln der WTO?," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 37.
    8. Del Corso, Jean-Pierre & Kephaliacos, Charilaos & Plumecocq, Gaël, 2015. "Legitimizing farmers' new knowledge, learning and practices through communicative action: Application of an agro-environmental policy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 86-96.
    9. Stern, David I., 1997. "Limits to substitution and irreversibility in production and consumption: A neoclassical interpretation of ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 197-215, June.
    10. van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2008. "Optimal diversity: Increasing returns versus recombinant innovation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(3-4), pages 565-580, December.
    11. Barbier, Edward B. & Bulte, Erwin H., 2004. "Introduction to the symposium on trade, renewable resources and biodiversity," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 883-890, September.
    12. Eppink, Florian V. & van den Bergh, Jeroen C.J.M., 2007. "Ecological theories and indicators in economic models of biodiversity loss and conservation: A critical review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 284-293, March.
    13. Bryan K. Ritchie, 2010. "Systemic Vulnerability and Sustainable Economic Growth," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13731.
    14. Ozturk, Ilhan & Acaravci, Ali, 2010. "CO2 emissions, energy consumption and economic growth in Turkey," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(9), pages 3220-3225, December.
    15. Leroux, Anke D. & Creedy, John, 2007. "Optimal land conversion and growth with uncertain biodiversity costs," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 542-549, March.
    16. Luca Marchiori & Ingmar Schumacher, 2011. "When nature rebels: international migration, climate change, and inequality," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 24(2), pages 569-600, April.
    17. Erwin Bulte & Edward Barbier, 2005. "Trade and Renewable Resources in a Second Best World: An Overview," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 30(4), pages 423-463, April.
    18. Lora, Eduardo, 2005. "Should Latin America Fear China?," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 4367, Inter-American Development Bank.
    19. Alexander, Robert R. & Shields, David W., 1999. "Bioeconomic Modelling Of Endangered Species Conservation," Discussion Papers in Natural Resource and Environmental Economics 23692, Massey University, Centre for Applied Economics and Policy Studies.
    20. Farrell, Katharine N., 2011. "Framing the Valuation of Ecosystem Services: A Theoretical Discussion of the Challenges and Opportunities Associated with Articulating Values that Reflect the Economic Contributions of Ecological Phen," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114362, European Association of Agricultural Economists.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:69:y:2010:i:8:p:1610-1616. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.