Demonstrating the values-based WeValue InSitu approach to capture hidden intangible benefits of ecosystem services in Nigeria

Abstract

The valuation of the benefits to humans of ecosystem services (ESs) provided by nature has become increasingly important. A current challenge is the measurement of the range of benefits which are not traded in the marketplace and are generally considered intangible, with further challenges to even classify them formally, e.g., as cultural ecosystem services (CESs). Previous studies have emphasized a related challenge: the strong need for engagement of not just experts but ’ordinary people’. Approaches using participatory approaches and less formal communication pathways to draw out local CES values have been reported. However, critical reflections of those studies reported significant differences in understanding between ’outsider researchers’ and ’locals’, calling validity deeply into question. Even deliberative approaches backfired by significantly modifying local social constructs during elicitation. In this study, we demonstrate a fundamentally different kind of approach, developed from the bottom–up sustainability indicator development process called WeValue InSitu. It focuses not on improving deeper top–down ‘engagement’ of a specific topic, but instead on improving local articulation of existing envelopes of in situ human shared values, naturally integrated. The WeValue InSitu output is a framework of separate but interlinked concise Statements of local shared values. Some of these Statements may refer to values concerning ecosystems, but situated amongst others. Here, we analyze the outputs from 23 convenience groups in three sites in Nigeria and investigate the shared values found empirically against existing economics-based MEA classifications. The findings include hybrid values which span existing CES sub-categories and even across into market-based categories. This opens a discussion as to whether future ES valuation frameworks might evolve more usefully with foundations built on empirically derived typologies of human values, rather than bolt-on modifications to financially based economics concepts. It also raises questions about the validity of current valuations made which cannot capture empirically found human values.