Eleventh Global Studies Conference

Abstract

The “valuation” of ecosystem processes has been a strong point of contention between economists and ecologists. On the one hand, to insist on the strong commensurability of “nature-value” is to argue that there is a single measurable value-property that nature possesses which can be measured by humans, e.g. monetary valuation. It assumes a socially-neutral exchange value as a standard unit for the marginal use value of nature; thus, assuming that commensurability in exchange is the same as commensurability in value, while downplaying the ecological interdependencies between land, air, water, human-energies, etc. (Costanza et al. 2015; Funtowicz and Ravetz 1994; Martinez-Alier 2002; O’Neill, 1993). On the other hand, to insist on a weak comparability (incommensurability) of values is to argue for “value-pluralism.” This involves valuing nature for its physical, social, and/or intrinsic values based on ethical, cultural, technical/physical, and sometimes metaphysical or priceless aspects (Vatn, 2000; Martinez-Alier et al, 1998; Harvey 1996; O’Neill 1993). It therefore becomes possible for a practical comparability of different forms of value without ordering them into hierarchies. At the macro-level, international global trade works within the domain of valuing one set of resources (natural or otherwise) in exchange for another set. This occurs through the structuring of natural ecological system via human social organization of production resulting in a global division of labour through which the inputs of human-technology labour are inserted into production activities and various forms of throughput/output are released (Bunker, 1985; Hornborg, 1998a, 199b: Emmanuel, 1972; Perez-Rincon, 2008). This research therefore analyses two forms of “valuation languages” in fossil-fuel extraction activities, by comparing the economic theory of “value-chain analysis” (see Gereffi et. Al, 1994; Gereffi and Fernandez-Stark, 2011; Hendersen, 2002; Bridge, 2008) to that of “ecologically unequal exchange (EUE) theory” (see Horborg, 1998a; Hornborg and Martinez-Alier, 2016). Both theories, motivated by World-systems Analysis (Hopkins and Wallerstein, 1977) will be used to analyse how they valuate labour inputs as well as economic and physical outputs of an ecologically destructive but economically “profitable” production process such as fossil fuel extraction. The case study is the Western Region of Ghana, focusing on the period of fossil fuel discovery (2007) to the year 2017. The research methodology involves social-metabolism analysis on embodied land inputted in the oil production process (using institutional data), including impact on crop yield, embodied labour analysis, comparing wage-levels and labour hours invested in the oil production process between local workers and expatriates, analysis of fossil fuel revenues obtained by the case study region (through oil funds received from national government as well as corporate social responsibility projects undertaken by oil firms), review of existing studies on pollution outputs of oil production in the extraction region, discourse analysis of key expert interviews with government agencies, oil firms, environmental NGOs, and livelihood NGOs in the case study region, document analysis (government, firm and NGO publications), and policy analysis on: trade, foreign-aid tied to oil-extraction, labour agreements, environmental protection, and resistance to extraction.