Our Environment - Mining and the Environment: From Ore to Metal - page 325

Option values are derived from preserving the option to use in the future ecosystem
goods and services that may not be used at present, either by oneself (option value) or
by others/heirs (bequest value). Provisioning, regulating, and cultural services may all
form part of option value to the extent that they are not used now but may be used in the
future.
Non-use values (sometimes called passive use values) refer to the enjoyment people may
experience simply by knowing that a resource exists even if they themselves never expect
to use that resource (termed existence value). Non-use values reflect the intrinsic signifi-
cance of ecosystems, e.g. cultural, aesthetic, heritage, existence, or bequest values. Non-use
values are important to people even when the resource is not directly or indirectly used.
A good example is the campaign to raise money for Black Rhino protection in Southern
Africa. People donate money to save the species although they may only see it in topics or
on television ( www.blackrhino.org ).
Option values cut across both use and non-use values alike. A mining project could
destroy a unique habitat that has high potential tourism and ecological service functions
(use values) that can be passed on to future generations (non-use values). A decision not
to approve the project could be based on the option values at risk. By not proceeding with
the mine, society maintains the option of generating other use and non-use values in the
future.
Values represented by use value in the left-hand side of Figure 7.6 are more easily
derived and tangible. Direct use values in particular are also fairly easy to estimate. Society
understands the value of mining. Moving towards the right-hand side of Figure 7.6 , values
become more difficult to grasp and measure. How do we put a dollar value on existence
value? In spite of these difficulties, valuation of a mining project, at least in theory, should
strive for total economic value, including exploitation of ore body and associated loss of
ecological values. In the environmental assessment process, we have to settle for a partial
measure of economic value.
Denying approval to mine may conserve the environment and the goods and services
which nature provides, but also precludes the benefits that would have been provided. As
any anti-mining activist will argue, this can be offset by the many indirect use values that
are derived from conserving this area. However maintaining the existing environment
through protected areas or through some other mechanisms, also requires expenditure of
resources, and there are often many competing claims on these resources. Devoting more
effort to nature conservation may mean having fewer resources to address other pressing
needs, such as improving education, health, or infrastructure. Accordingly, to assess the
consequences of different courses of action, it is not enough to know that ecosystems are
valuable; we also need to know how valuable they are, valuable to whom, and how values
are affected by different forms of exploitation and management.
In assessing these issues of use and non-use, it is also important to assess all potential
uses and their relative costs and benefits. To deny mining in the interests of conservation
would be pointless if, for example, the values being conserved were subsequently destroyed
by another land use such as forestry or agriculture. In developing countries, there is always
a high risk of such a situation as most governments in these countries lack the capacity to
enforce conservation initiatives.

Denying approval to mine may
conserve the environment
and the goods and services
which nature provides, but also
precludes the benefi ts that would
have been provided.

To deny mining in the interests of
conservation would be pointless
if, for example, the values being
conserved were subsequently
destroyed by another land use
such as forestry or agriculture.

Market Failures in Measuring Economic Values

Why do economic decisions
tend to favour mining rather than
conservation of ecosystems?

If ecosystem values are as real as the economic value of a newly discovered ore body, why
do economic decisions tend to favour mining rather than conservation of ecosystems? Partly,