Differences with conventional economic theory
La economía ecológica (EE) tiene un enfoque distinto al racionalismo (útil hasta cierto punto) y analítico enfoque de la economía convencional (la economía separada de la biología, separadas de la física...), pues considera a la economía como un subconjunto de la sociedad y ésta de la biosfera. Este cambio de visión tiene profundas implicaciones. Así la EE incorpora conocimientos de diferentes ciencias incluyendo la ecología ya que estudia los flujos de materia y energía de la vida sobre la Tierra, y la economía está incluida en este sistema. Se estudia la economía como un objeto natural y social. Una descripción extensa de las diferencias según Aguilera Klink, aquí:[1].
A la cabeza de las críticas a la actual teoría económica por los economistas ecológicos se encuentra su aproximación a las interacciones entre la naturaleza y la sociedad. La sustituibilidad de los recursos agotables: Los análisis desde el punto de vista de la economía convencional minusvaloran el capital natural, en el sentido de que es tratado como un factor de producción intercambiable o sustituible por trabajo y tecnología (capital humano).
Desde la economía ecológica se argumenta que el capital humano y el capital manufacturado son complementarios al capital natural, y no intercambiables, ya que el capital humano y el capital fabricado derivan inevitablemente del capital natural de una u otra forma. La economía ecológica estudia de qué manera el crecimiento económico está relacionado con el aumento en la explotación de insumos materiales y energéticos.
Los economistas ecológicos afirman que una gran parte de lo importante en el bienestar humano no es analizable desde un punto de vista estrictamente económico, sugiriendo la transdisciplinariedad de las ciencias sociales y naturales como un medio para abordar el estudio del bienestar económico y su dependencia de los servicios que proporciona la naturaleza.
En la EE se discute sobre indicadores de sostenibilidad, la validez de la curva ambiental de Kuznets"), la paradoja de Jevons, el efecto rebote de las estrategias de suficiencia, la hipótesis de la desmaterialización de la economía, huella ecológica, inputs directos y ocultos de materiales [2], tamaño de la economía y límites al crecimiento económico [3], la medida del bienestar, estado estacionario, ecologismo de los pobres (activismo de personas amenazadas por la destrucción de recursos y servicios ambientales que necesitan para vivir), ecología política[4], los trabajos no remunerados, distribución justa de la renta (la distribución precede a la producción), sostenibilidad fuerte") frente a sostenibilidad débil, deuda ecológica, coevolución de sistemas ecológicos y económicos, biodiversidad, limitaciones de la tasa de descuento, relación de los derechos de propiedad y la gestión de recursos naturales, instrumentos de política ambiental, la justicia ambiental, y el metabolismo social entre otros temas. La economía ecológica critica también la contabilidad macroeconómica, proponiendo en cambio un conjunto de indicadores físicos y sociales, además de los monetarios.
Preocupación por su modularidad disciplinaria: Un aspecto relacionado con la relativa debilidad política e institucional de la EE es el riesgo de subordinación a la economía ambiental y de los recursos naturales, como propuso abiertamente David Pearce en la conferencia inaugural de la ESEE en 1996 y que fue muy criticado. .
Differences between ecological economics and environmental economics and the economics of natural resources.
Environmental Economics and Natural Resource Economics are subdisciplines of economics focused on the optimal allocation of resources and pollution. But, according to the EE, they ignore issues such as the functioning of ecosystems and the environmental burdens on society.
Environmental economics refers to the way in which waste is disposed and the resulting quality of the atmosphere, hydrosphere, biosphere and pedosphere as waste receptors. Furthermore, environmental economics (EA) is related to environmental pollution and conservation of ecosystems and biodiversity.
Natural resource economics (NRE), on the other hand, is defined as the study of the way in which society allocates scarce natural resources, in monetary terms with respect to purposes also measured in money (prices), such as fish reserves, tree plantations, fresh water and oil, which according to conventional economics are inexhaustible or substitutable.
Thus, the EE research program differs in that its concept of ecological sustainability is different from that of the EA-ERN's economic sustainability. Includes system dynamics and the threshold effect versus equilibrium fixation in neoclassical economics. The ERN focuses on a resource in isolation from its ecosystem. And market prices do not indicate whether a system is pushing the limits of its ability to recover. Surprisingly, in the ISEE magazine there are more articles from the perspective of the EA-ERN than from the EE.[10].
On the other hand, in EE the functioning of economies and the management of resources and waste are analyzed directly through concepts and methods taken from Physics (thermodynamics would explain why we cannot use the same piece of coal over and over again to light a fire or the heat of the sea to propel ships),[25][26] biology (knowledge of the ecosystems that provide us with vital sustenance, resources or receive waste), geology (mineral deposits are rarities of the Earth's crust, which are generated and destroyed over and over again),[27] anthropology and sociology (analysis of energy balances and other societies and institutions), Industrial Ecology")[28] (ecology as a framework and model for industry) and also, in a subsidiary and limited way, in monetary terms.[29] Examples: , [7].
The sharp difference between EE, EA and ERN is mainly conceptual; in practice the authors and theories overlap and interrelate[29] as can be seen by some articles published in the journal Ecological Economics. For example, the February 2008 issue, in which you can find articles related to the EA (), with the ERN () and more specific to the EE ().[30].
Monetary Valuation Versus Value Incommensurability
However, for the EA-ERN, in the case of the introduction of taxes on pollution (the Coasian negotiation is discussed below), the key lies in the possibility of obtaining in monetary terms (economic valuation) the external marginal cost function through techniques such as contingent valuation. [8], travel cost method and others. Monetary valuation is considered a reflection of individual preferences, "what people want" is what they are willing to pay. And market prices are the guide. Formally, the marginal benefit must be equal to the marginal cost of providing that benefit.[31] For this, calculus is used, so the problem must be reduced to mathematical optimization, be it maximization or minimization.
What is foreign, according to the EE, to the complexity of the majority of the problems that it seeks to address in which there are no prices, markets, property, those affected may not yet exist, may be unaware of it, or may be very numerous; the effects are unknown or complex, for example the crisis of animal migrations [9] Furthermore, what a person is willing to pay depends on their income (the poor suffer greater environmental damage than the rich) and the neoclassical theory fails because it states that the predisposition to pay (equivalent variation in income) to avoid damage (for example incineration of waste near your home) must be similar to the willingness to accept compensation (compensatory variation in income). But in reality this does not happen.[29].
In any case, the optimum obtained does not have to be assimilated by the ecosystems or accepted by society; it could only be approximated, with serious uncertainties and enormous complexity in most cases, using earth sciences. What is the cost curve in the case of nuclear waste? Or Chernobyl? On cost benefit analysis (CBA) [10]Archived on July 28, 2013 at the Wayback Machine.
These are, according to the EE, debatable approaches: In 1991, the chief economist of the World Bank was the center of a controversy when an internal memorandum on the export of waste to Third World countries was leaked (Let them eat pollution, The economist). tenth of that of a Westerner, a difference that increased in a later review [11]. It is an example of environmental distributive conflicts"), one of the topics covered by political ecology that relates it to EE since the type of use of environmental resources and sinks depends on power relations and income distribution.
Different valuation languages
Development of multi-criteria evaluation methods") developed by G Munda (1970)[12] that admit a weak comparability of values"), different from the strong comparability of the cost-benefit analysis, based on a participatory process of all the agents involved in a problem or investment project, as tools to contribute to decision-making in accordance with the so-called deliberative democracy in a context of multiple values or criteria.
The monetary (pecuniary) values that economists assign to negative externalities or environmental services are the fruit of political decisions, the distribution of property, money and power.[33].
The EE does not abandon the use of monetary elements, but relativizes them: they lose their position of privilege and exclusivity within a new vision, since there are many types of markets according to the institutional rules that regulate them.[32].
Ecological economists participate in the discussion of the relevance of procedures to attribute monetary values to environmental services and damages and the correctness of macroeconomic accounting, but their main axis is the development of physical indices of (un)sustainability. The most frequently used environmental impact indices are the ecological footprint index (Wachernagel and Rees, 1996), human appropriation of net primary production (Vitousek, 1986), material input per unit of service (Wuppertal Institute), material flow indicators (Wuppertal Institute and Faculty for Interdisciplinary Studies), agricultural water footprint and virtual water (UNESCO-Institute for water education), energy balances of economic activities and integrated analysis multiscalar aspect of social metabolism (Giampietro 2003).