Arguing Ecosystem Values with Paraconsistent Logics

TL;DR

This paper introduces a paraconsistent logic-based argumentation framework for valuing ecosystem services, allowing for inconsistent arguments and producing preference orderings over land-use practices.

Contribution

It develops a novel logical framework that handles inconsistencies in ecosystem valuation arguments, advancing decision-making models in environmental economics.

Findings

Framework accommodates valid inconsistencies in arguments.

Produces preference orderings over land-use practices.

Supports decision-making in ecosystem valuation.

Abstract

The valuation of ecosystem services prompts dialogical settings where non-trivially inconsistent arguments are often invoked. Here, I propose an approach to the valuation of ecosystem services circumscribed to a logic-based argumentation framework that caters for valid inconsistencies. This framework accounts for preference formation processes underpinned by a paraconsistent model of logical entailment. The value of an ecosystem service is produced in the form of an ordering over competing land-use practices, as per the arguments surviving semantical probing.