Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.

Accepted Paper:

Natural Capital tools and devices – reinforcing or weakening logics of assetisation?  
Kerry Waylen (James Hutton Institute) José Antonio Ballesteros Figueroa (Monterrey Institute of Technology and Higher Education - Santa Fe)

Send message to Authors

Short abstract:

We explore two initiatives to embed ‘Natural Capital’ in public and private sector decisions, where techno-economic logics are already well-embedded. Both initiatives reflect concerns about assetization but we speculate they may also help open up to other ways of relating to and working with nature.

Long abstract:

Here we explore alternative articulations of ‘Natural Capital’ and analyse their likely consequences for reinforcing or disrupting assetization. We do this by highlighting two examples, the ‘Natural Capital Protocol (NCP)’, and ‘Enabling a Natural Capital Approach (ENCA)’. These two examples derive from and are targeted at different institutional contexts - respectively the private and public sector - but both of which are already significantly dominated by economic logics.

Both initiatives, through their terminology and through their practices, encourage a view of the environment as an asset for human actors, providing a variety of goods and services. They clearly align with assetization in and as a governing practice. However, the initiatives also seek to broaden the set of concerns and considerations considered relevant and legitimate in decision-making. In particular, the NCP seeks to shift the set of issues considered within their scope, and avoid reductionist approaches to complexity. ENCA more overtly conforms with existing dominant institutional logics; but may perhaps may help ‘open up’ to other concepts and practices in the longer-term.

Work with these initiatives is unfolding, so further research is required to appraise their uptake and consequences; not only in terms of specific decisions (i.e. in how they promote nature and people’s multiple relationships within it), but also how individuals and institutions involved may be affected. This raises questions about the merits of incremental versus more disruptive approaches to achieve change for sustainability, given the techno-economic institutional logics that already dominate much professional decision-making in the Global North.

Traditional Open Panel P004
Assetization as techno-economic lock-in
  Session 1 Tuesday 16 July, 2024, -