ACCOUNTING FOR BIODIVERSITY : Periphery Urbanization, Environmental Conflict, and Spatial Inequality in Monetizing the Value of Nature

Abstract

In terms of mainstream sustainability economics, market‐led initiatives aimed at biodiversity restoration represent a productive, morally conscientious choice. Under this view, efforts in areas such as biodiversity offsetting, net gain, or finance are considered effective tools for preventing or managing environmental degradation. In this article I problematize such optimistic, largely economistic claims by taking readers to specific urban locations where these tools are being deployed or proposed. My case studies of Bristol and Copenhagen illustrate that such tools, under the realities of rent gap‐driven urbanization processes, selectively render certain ecologies and places fungible, thereby advancing inequality by disproportionately burdening lower‐income and peripheral communities. At the same time, we may equally witness how compelling counterarguments are made by local residents and environmental activists in response, particularly regarding the impact of land development on water quality and urban stormwater management. Thereby I show how cities are not just sites on and in which these tools act; they mediate debates over the value of nature and biodiversity, and whose conception of value counts. In this article I therefore make a case for why an ‘urban lens’ is essential in contemporary analyses of biodiversity tools, governance, and their politics.