Valuing nature

In recent years, it has been argued-increasingly-by government and business that we ought to conceptualise the natural world as 'natural capital': that we ought to think of nature as a kind of 'capital', just like machinery or money are classed as 'capital'. We live in a capitalist society: but then (so it is said) we risk not 'counting' nature adequately if we don't count _it_ as capital, too. The idea is that if we do conceive of nature in this way, it is possible to secure a 'rigorous', market-based method of putting the value of nature at the heart of decision-making, whether at the level of government, private enterprise or the individual.
Our aim in this research network is to think through the assumptions behind the characterisation of nature as a form of capital. In particular, we propose to address an issue that appears to underpin the concept of natural capital: how we conceptualise the _value_ of nature. We will explore the extent to which the monetary analysis of nature's value, with its apparent emphasis on the substitutability of 'pieces' of nature for other such 'pieces' (so called 'biodiversity-offsetting', for example), can accommodate: (A) the specificity of particular places and habitats; and (B) the complex interdependence of these places, habitats and ecosystems, considered as necessary parts of a functioning whole, a whole (ultimately, our planetary home) that needs to be kept resilient. To what extent, in other words, can _economic_ analysis capture the actual dynamics of ecological systems? Do quantitative analyses of natural value alienate key stakeholders, who relate to and interact with nature in non-quantitative ways? Does it make sense to think of a forest as essentially money waiting to be harvested; or as a special or even sacred place? What resources does the philosophical tradition offer that should help us conceptualise nature in a more holistic way? To what extent does the idea of nature providing what are increasingly now called "cultural ecosystem services"-such as forms of non-material, spiritual fulfilment-mitigate worries about utilitarian or reductive tendencies in the natural capital approach? How exactly ought we to understand our aesthetic and religious and leisure-ly experiences of nature as valuable in relation to human health and well-being; just how exactly can nature nourish us? For example, is my experience of the beauty of a landscape a _cause_ of my well-being or an irreducible _component_ of it? Is the idea of "cultural ecosystem services" in conflict with the notion of nature having "intrinsic value"? Should we be troubled that talk of 'natural resources' or 'ecosystem services' stresses what nature has done for us, but doesn't encourage us directly to ask what service we should be providing to nature?
Our bringing together interested parties from across the spectrum -- including politicians, artists, and interested members of the public -- will help clarify what is at stake when we address these urgent issues and questions. We aim for what we come up with therefore to impact the way that governments and bureaucrats compute and decide these questions of how to 'count' nature. We intend to introduce a Cambridgeshire-focused perspective into the project by examining the question of the value and application of the concept of natural capital in relation to one particular site: the East Anglian Fens. This will, we believe, concentrate minds; and enable what can seem abstract questions to be seen in their concrete reality. What is/are the value(s) of Fen-lands?
The research-network will begin by bringing together interested parties (mostly from the east-of-England region), and we intend for it to end by producing new policy-proposals for how to think the value of nature. The results of the network will be made directly available to the public at an Exhibition, in a panel-discussion and an open conference, and online - as well as in the local, regional and national media.

The questions our project will address have the utmost contemporary relevance. E.g. Currently there's an ongoing review of the effectiveness of the EU Birds & Habitats Directives, with the Commission report expected in 2016. The concept of natural capital will play a major role within this review and so it is very important-and urgent-to gain greater clarity about potential arguments for and against this approach. Likewise, the idea of "payment for ecosystem services" is already a tool used by governments in their approach to biodiversity protection and thus of immediate national and local concern.
In this context, we intend our project objectives to be realised in part by means of the following impacts:
>The one-day conference/networking event at ARU, on the ethics and politics of PES and Biodiversity Offsetting, in the last 6 months of the project, will be given focus by a 'case study' approach with a really practical focus: on thinking about how the value of nature in southern Cambridgeshire / the East Anglian Fens ought to be conceptualised. It will aim to draw in members of the public, local businesses, and representatives of local and national politics. It's proceedings will be recorded and made publicly-available via:
>A permanent archive from the research network, linked to and sustained by the Anglia Ruskin Global Sustainability Institute (GSI) website, providing a base for follow-up projects. This archive will include a blog, which will be used to provide a virtual medium for dialogue between the network participants before, during and after the workshop and conference. This web-presence will prominently include the 'map of salient terms' described elsewhere in this bid: our aspiration is for this to be of wide use 'in the field'.
>An exhibition, open to all, hosted by the Ruskin Gallery, ARU, on the East Anglian Fens. This will take place toward the project's end and will include a wide range of visual, aural and written media, specifically on the Fens, with the purpose of encouraging further reflection on the idea of natural capital and ecosystem services. It will include the ARU Sustainability Art Prize and additionally an open call to artists: both on the theme of 'Unquantifiable nature?'; it will also include a major commissioned sound/video-art work on broadly the same theme; and a Panel discussion, wherein some of the core research-network participants will have their ideas showcased in interaction with a wider public.
To generalise from the above: we seek to:
>Feed directly into public policy by offering new theoretical and methodological perspectives on the monetary valuation of nature. (We have already secured a commitment from Molly Scott Cato, MEP, to take part in this aspect of the project.) >Create multi-stakeholder networks that have the potential to generate new, interdisciplinary solutions to biodiversity conservation.
>Develop the University of East Anglia and Anglia Ruskin University as together forming a major international hub for research and collaboration in the area of the (pure and) applied philosophy of sustainability, and so showcase eastern-England UK-based researchers at the forefront of debate in a crucial area of public and political concern.
>Further understanding within Cambs of the issues surrounding sites of local interest.
Finally:
>Key members of the network will discuss the research etc. on radio, in newspapers and on television throughout the duration of the project (as well as on the basis of the opportunities that the Exhibition will provide): some of the core team (incl. Read, Jones, Anderson, and Kenner) already have extensive experience in so doing, and in particular extensive and current contacts in the local media, both print and broadcast, in both Norfolk and Cambridgeshire, and to a significant extent also nationally: N.B. We already _have_ an expression of potential interest from Radio 3's 'Freethinking' programme in our ideas.