Conservation biologists and environmental economists popularized ecosystem services as a governance concept in the 1990s. The concept, it was hoped, would valorize biodiversity conservation to place it on a level playing field with the economic concerns of the world's finance ministers and private sector. Has this valorization promise been realized within the international community? We examine this question by interrogating a constructed dataset of 272 international activities undertaken by international actors (e.g. non-governmental organizations, inter-governmental organizations, and other international organizations) that invoke or use the ecosystem services concept. We find that ecosystem service practice is dominated by capacity-building not the valuation of nature. This suggests that the international community is not extensively using the concept to value nature in order to inform governance decisions. We posit that budget and management pressures facing international organizations along with priorities of countries help explain the dominance of capacity-building. But we also suggest that a deeper understanding of the concept of ecosystem services – particularly its implied programme of action – is necessary to account for its unfulfilled promise to date. We close with implications from this study for broader work on global environmental governance.

中文翻译：

---

作为国际治理概念的生态系统服务比较财富

保护生物学家和环境经济学家在 1990 年代将生态系统服务作为一种治理概念普及。人们希望这一概念能够使生物多样性保护发挥作用，使其与世界各国财政部长和私营部门的经济关切处于公平竞争的环境中。这种增值承诺在国际社会中实现了吗？我们通过询问由调用或使用生态系统服务概念的国际参与者（例如非政府组织、政府间组织和其他国际组织）开展的 272 项国际活动的构建数据集来研究这个问题。我们发现生态系统服务实践以能力建设为主，而不是对自然的评价。这表明国际社会并未广泛使用这一概念来评估自然，以便为治理决策提供信息。我们认为，国际组织面临的预算和管理压力以及国家的优先事项有助于解释能力建设的主导地位。但我们也建议对生态系统服务的概念——尤其是其隐含的行动计划——进行更深入的理解，以解释其迄今为止未能兑现的承诺。最后，我们总结了这项研究对全球环境治理更广泛工作的影响。但我们也建议对生态系统服务的概念——尤其是其隐含的行动计划——进行更深入的理解，以解释其迄今为止未能兑现的承诺。最后，我们总结了这项研究对全球环境治理更广泛工作的影响。但我们也建议对生态系统服务的概念——尤其是其隐含的行动计划——进行更深入的理解，以解释其迄今为止未能兑现的承诺。最后，我们总结了这项研究对全球环境治理更广泛工作的影响。