The concept of 'ecosystem services' has gained prominence in environmental policy, yet its economic valuation remains contentious. Proponents argue that assigning monetary values to services like pollination or water purification incentivizes conservation by making their loss visible in cost-benefit analyses. Critics, however, contend that such valuation is inherently reductive, as it overlooks non-material cultural and spiritual values that resist quantification. Moreover, market-based mechanisms, such as carbon trading, may commodify nature, potentially leading to 'green grabbing' where powerful actors exploit these frameworks for profit. Despite these debates, a pragmatic middle ground suggests using valuation as a communicative tool rather than a definitive metric, encouraging dialogue between scientists, policymakers, and local communities to foster more holistic stewardship of natural resources.
❓ What is the author's main argument regarding the economic valuation of ecosystem services?
A. A) It is an ineffective approach that should be abandoned in favor of strict regulation.
B. B) It should be used cautiously as a means to facilitate broader discussion, not as an absolute measure.
C. C) It is universally beneficial and should be the primary basis for all environmental policies.
D. D) It is only relevant for cultural services, which cannot be quantified.
✅ 正确答案
B) It should be used cautiously as a means to facilitate broader discussion, not as an absolute measure.
IELTS Reading Tips
Skim the questions first, underline keywords, then locate in the passage
Watch for paraphrasing; correct answers are often reworded
Be wary of absolute statements (all, always, never) — usually wrong
Pay attention to content after transition words (however, but, yet)
Manage time: about 20 minutes per passage; skip difficult questions first