Biologists Shift from Pricing Nature to Tackling Root Causes

When celebrity conservationists stood together at the 2012 Earth Summit to argue for putting price tags on nature, even Jane Goodall felt uneasy about it. The legendary primatologist admitted it was "shocking" to value forests and reefs in dollars, though she understood why conservationists hoped it would work.

The strategy seemed logical at the time. If biologists could translate coral reefs and tropical forests into financial terms, maybe corporate executives and financial markets would finally listen. The approach, called "ecosystem services," swept through conservation circles as a pragmatic solution to plummeting wildlife populations.

More than a decade later, the verdict is clear: it didn't work. Wildlife numbers continued falling, and the hoped-for corporate awakening never fully materialized. Governments and businesses never fully embraced the concept, leaving conservationists to wonder what went wrong.

Environmental scientist Daniel Suarez at Middlebury College in Vermont chronicles this rise and fall in his new book, Biologists Unite. His research reveals how many biologists felt ambivalent about reducing nature to monetary value, even as they championed the approach. They were speaking a language that didn't reflect their true values, hoping the translation would save what they loved.

Now those same biologists are changing course. Instead of trying to make nature fit into existing economic systems, they're tackling the root causes of environmental destruction head-on. This shift represents a more confrontational but potentially more effective approach to conservation.

Why This Inspires

This story shows the courage it takes to admit when a strategy isn't working and pivot to something bolder. For over a decade, conservationists tried to work within the system, speaking the language of profit and loss. Walking away from that compromise to address deeper systemic issues takes genuine bravery.

The new approach acknowledges what many biologists felt all along: nature's value can't be captured in spreadsheets. By confronting the fundamental drivers of environmental destruction rather than trying to make destruction economically inconvenient, conservationists are finally acting on their core principles instead of pragmatic compromises.

The shift shows that sometimes the radical path is simply being honest about what actually needs to change.