The "Valuation of natural resources” such as land has been a strong point of contention in the economic and ecological sciences, influencing land management. The concept of incommensurability (weak comparability) of values argues for “value-pluralism” (O’Neill, 1993); it espouses nature’s physical, social and intrinsic values based on ethical, cultural, technical/physical, metaphysical aspects (Funtowicz & Ravetz 1994; Martinez-Alier 2002). As a foundation of ecological economics (Martinez-Alier, 1998), weak comparability enables a comparability of different forms of value without ordering them into hierarchies. This is in apposition to strong commensurability concepts which argues for a single measurable monetary value-property embedded in natural resources.
This research borrows weak comparability concepts for the analysis of Planning regimes. It posits such regimes as ‘value-legitimization institutions’ that embody specific theories and praxis to de/legitimize the socio-cultural, ecological and economic notion of the use and valuation of land (Fainstein, 2010). For instance, positivist planning theory espouses transaction cost reduction and self-regulation approach to negotiating land-use decisions (Poulton 1991a, 1991b, 1997; Alexander, 2001); Rational comprehensive planning denotes the expert role of the planner under assumptions of technical neutrality while Communicative rationality advocates for open debate on the political, economic and non-economic values of land and its uses (Alexander, 1984; Davidoff, 1965/2012; Checkoway, 1994). Planning in practice, especially in Africa is however undertaken under ‘negotiated imposition’ characterized by multi-actor aid-financed developmentalism (Ward, 2012), thus “muddling through” different actors and values at various spatial scales (Lindblom, 1959; Etzioni, 1967).
This research therefore adopts a pluralist approach to onshore land management in the offshore Petro-chemical extraction region of Western Ghana within the period 2007-2017. It focuses on the regional land-use planning regime (land ownership, land use and environmental regulatory agencies) as actors that de/legitimize the values and notions of the use and valuation of land through their discourses (framings), policy and practice in the siting of the Petro-industrial activities.
Key questions concentrate on (i) valuation languages of land used in the Petro-Industrial region; (ii) legitimization of certain valuations of land use (and its technics) over others through planning discourse, policy and practice after resource discovery; (iii) the reshaping of planning practices through such legitimization processes after resource discovery. Research methods include exploratory and semi-structured interviews, land-use data analysis, as well as discourse, document and policy analysis.
Preliminary findings show that planning decision-making is characterized by elite-capture at the national-parastatal level and by actors contracted by the Petro-chemical industry, hence sidelining regional planning regimes and routinising community participation as ends in themselves. Specifically, the regional planning regime has seen its competences limited to administrative and ‘tame problems’ of land transactions and use. Land has therefore been further pushed into a spectrum of economic valuation; as banked and speculated product (economic) and as potential community equity (socio-economic). Land is also conceived as potential store of (environmental) capital to offset carbon from resource extraction activities and house waste recycling facilities. Additionally, communities' adaptive uses of land (e.g. for informal economic activities) is being out-competed and delegitimized by more ‘efficient’ and ‘formal’ land-uses.
Key words: valuation, land, planning, fossil-fuel, commensurability
3c. Ecosystem services (definition, measurement, multi-criteria valuation)
