The integration of the ecosystem services approach into Norwegian environmental policy? Discourse analysis of the different narratives that shaped the process of incorporation for this concept in Norwegian environmental policy.

Abstract

Norway has a particular social context and history, and this has had a notable impact on thought and policy. Indeed, it is the country where the deep ecology philosophy, the sustainable development approach and the freedom they have in enjoying nature through “allemannsretten” were developed (the latter being the right to enjoy and camp in every wild area in the country). In this context, this master thesis looks at what are the narratives that attempted to put the Ecosystem Service (ES) approach in Norwegian national policy and which discourses have been instrumental in this process. The ES approach looks both at the economic valuation of nature in different ways and the different forms of value we -as humans- get from nature such as value for the services it provides. The discourse analysis approach set out by Hajer (1995) has been used in combination with thematic analysis as set out by Braun & Clarke (2006) which the aim of contribution on new knowledge on the impact of framing in the development of the environmental policy process. In this setting, it was found that while in Norway different forms of valuation of ES exist, most of them commodify nature but in unexpected ways. There has been remarkably little debate around the way nature is categorized in such a context; is it just another commodity that can be valued in terms of money? One of the key narratives for the setting on the agenda of the ES approach is looking at it as just another way to make sure welfare is maximized from an anthropocentric perspective. What is remarkable in Norway is the overall reluctance for monetary valuation, especially compared to neighbouring countries within this same ‘Nordic Model’ context where countries share a set of cultural values. In Norway, ethical arguments are put in opposition to monetary valuation and the ES approach is viewed by many as being a communication tool to ‘reveal’ the value of nature has to us. Some proponents argue for it is a key strategy for more effective environmental management, as the ES approach allows for taking a broader approach by doing area management -to protect ecosystems-, rather than focusing narrowly on a single species. This raises the question of the relevance of moral reasons in nature conservation and whether it can come at odds with the effectiveness of nature conservation. The absence of discourse coalitions in this debate is also notable (as in Hajers discourse analysis terms, 1995). However, some storylines shaped by Miljødirektoratet (the Norwegian Environmental Agency) and other proponents have been shared and developed. Through them, they managed to a certain extent to successfully impose their rhetorics concerning the ES approach. Therewith, the ES approach gained momentum in Norway after 2011 until today. However, the Norwegian environmental policy notably entirely excludes monetary valuation while this latter form of valuation has gained momentum in other European countries. Several explanations for this have emerged. The strongest point raised in this thesis is the absence of monetary valuation as it is a key narrative underpinning the integration of the ES approach in Norwegian environmental strategy, indeed it has important implications. One of them being that the ES approach is often not taken in an economic analysis which is a commonly used decision-making tool for deciding on large industrial projects or projects involving public money. This means that values of ES would be more open to interpretation and limits its use in practice. Another explanation to the reluctance to monetary valuation is that some might fear that the value of ES would be very high, making some projects not happen. Others argue that putting a monetary value on ecosystem services gives an idea of the value of a particular ecosystem services but does not show a complete picture -such as the exclusion of its intrinsic value-, and others argue that the knowledge from biology does not allow to determine the value of ecosystem service at all, or only to a limited extent. Therewith the limited integration of the ES approach in Norwegian environmental policy is due to cultural but mostly political and economic considerations, the reasons for which will become clear throughout this text.

Norway has a particular social context and history, and this has had a notable impact on thought and policy. Indeed, it is the country where the deep ecology philosophy, the sustainable development approach and the freedom they have in enjoying nature through “allemannsretten” were developed (the latter being the right to enjoy and camp in every wild area in the country). In this context, this master thesis looks at what are the narratives that attempted to put the Ecosystem Service (ES) approach in Norwegian national policy and which discourses have been instrumental in this process. The ES approach looks both at the economic valuation of nature in different ways and the different forms of value we -as humans- get from nature such as value for the services it provides. The discourse analysis approach set out by Hajer (1995) has been used in combination with thematic analysis as set out by Braun & Clarke (2006) which the aim of contribution on new knowledge on the impact of framing in the development of the environmental policy process. In this setting, it was found that while in Norway different forms of valuation of ES exist, most of them commodify nature but in unexpected ways. There has been remarkably little debate around the way nature is categorized in such a context; is it just another commodity that can be valued in terms of money? One of the key narratives for the setting on the agenda of the ES approach is looking at it as just another way to make sure welfare is maximized from an anthropocentric perspective. What is remarkable in Norway is the overall reluctance for monetary valuation, especially compared to neighbouring countries within this same ‘Nordic Model’ context where countries share a set of cultural values. In Norway, ethical arguments are put in opposition to monetary valuation and the ES approach is viewed by many as being a communication tool to ‘reveal’ the value of nature has to us. Some proponents argue for it is a key strategy for more effective environmental management, as the ES approach allows for taking a broader approach by doing area management -to protect ecosystems-, rather than focusing narrowly on a single species. This raises the question of the relevance of moral reasons in nature conservation and whether it can come at odds with the effectiveness of nature conservation. The absence of discourse coalitions in this debate is also notable (as in Hajers discourse analysis terms, 1995). However, some storylines shaped by Miljødirektoratet (the Norwegian Environmental Agency) and other proponents have been shared and developed. Through them, they managed to a certain extent to successfully impose their rhetorics concerning the ES approach. Therewith, the ES approach gained momentum in Norway after 2011 until today. However, the Norwegian environmental policy notably entirely excludes monetary valuation while this latter form of valuation has gained momentum in other European countries. Several explanations for this have emerged. The strongest point raised in this thesis is the absence of monetary valuation as it is a key narrative underpinning the integration of the ES approach in Norwegian environmental strategy, indeed it has important implications. One of them being that the ES approach is often not taken in an economic analysis which is a commonly used decision-making tool for deciding on large industrial projects or projects involving public money. This means that values of ES would be more open to interpretation and limits its use in practice. Another explanation to the reluctance to monetary valuation is that some might fear that the value of ES would be very high, making some projects not happen. Others argue that putting a monetary value on ecosystem services gives an idea of the value of a particular ecosystem services but does not show a complete picture -such as the exclusion of its intrinsic value-, and others argue that the knowledge from biology does not allow to determine the value of ecosystem service at all, or only to a limited extent. Therewith the limited integration of the ES approach in Norwegian environmental policy is due to cultural but mostly political and economic considerations, the reasons for which will become clear throughout this text.