Incommensurability and property rights in the natural environment

Bibliographic Data

ID4892804
AuthorsBilly Christmas (0000-0002-2793-3236, Manchester Centre for Political Theory (MANCEPT), The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK, corresponding author)
Year2017
Volume26
Issue3
Pages502-520
Publication date2017-05-04
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueEnvironmental Politics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0964-4016 • E-ISSN: 1743-8934
PublisherInforma UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/09644016.2016.1256959
OpenAlexW2553392194
LanguageEN
Citations received4
References cited26

Cost–benefit analysis has been criticised on the grounds that it cannot compute the value of environmental goods whose value constitutively defies monetary valuation. Two forms of incommensurability make monetary valuation problematic: constitutive incommensurability and quantitative incommensurability. These pose a threat only to shadow pricing, and not the formation of prices in an actual market. Where property rights to environmental goods are appropriately assigned, the prices that form reflect the actual uses persons put them to, given their value commitments. In a real market, the formation of prices does not depend upon the assignment of cardinal values via monetary valuation; rather, the formation of prices is a side effect of the way in which environmental goods are used. A property right gives one the right to reject terms of exchange one deems inappropriate. Where sale of an environmental good is deemed inappropriate, it is kept out of the cash nexus. Incommensurability therefore precludes cost–benefit analysis, but not markets in environmental goods where property rights are appropriately allocated

Economics · Market value · Microeconomics · Property rights · Shadow price · Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics · Economic and Environmental Valuation · Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies · Finance

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access