The Value of a Whale: On the Illusions of Green Capitalism

by Adrienne Buller

Public understanding of, and outcry over, the dire state of the climate and environment is greater than ever before. Parties across the political spectrum claim to be climate leaders, and overt denial is on the way out. Yet when it comes to slowing the course of the climate and nature crises, despite a growing number of pledges, policies and summits, little ever seems to change. Nature is being destroyed at an unprecedented rate. We remain on course for a catastrophic 3 DegreesC of warming. What's holding us back?

In this searing and insightful critique, Adrienne Buller examines the fatal biases that have shaped the response of our governing institutions to climate and environmental breakdown, and asks: are the 'solutions' being proposed really solutions? Tracing the intricate connections between financial power, economic injustice and ecological crisis, she exposes the myopic economism and market-centric thinking presently undermining a future where all life can flourish. The book examines what is wrong with mainstream climate and environmental governance, from carbon pricing and offset markets to 'green growth', the commodification of nature and the growing influence of the finance industry on environmental policy. In doing so, it exposes the self-defeating logic of a response to these challenges based on creating new opportunities for profit, and a refusal to grapple with the inequalities and injustices that have created them. Both honest and optimistic, The Value of a Whale asks us - in the face of crisis - what we really value.

Genres: Nonfiction, Economics, Environment, Politics, Ecology, Climate Change, Sustainability

350 pages, Paperback

First published July 26, 2022

About the author

Adrienne Buller is a senior research fellow at Common Wealth. Her work focuses on the relationships between the finance and the climate crisis.

Reviews

[Sarah Clement · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am really quite surprised by the good reviews, but I need to be self-reflective about this: maybe this is new information for many people, and if this book gets to those people, then there are benefits. The book covers very well-travelled territory: traditional economic metrics don't capture the true value of the environment, and the methods for capturing the value of important environment values, losses, and gains are thus de-valued under capitalism and its measures. In reading the book, I found myself shocked that these ideas were presented as new and revolutionary. People have been writing about this for many decades. Many alternative approaches have been offered. But I kept reading. We have information about carbon pricing and offsetting and their problems as they do not challenge existing structures or development patterns and are prone to perverse incentives and questionable outcomes. This is also well worn territory, covered for several decades, which is fine because there are always new ways of looking at things but this book doesn't offer new perspectives or solutions. The revolutionary idea that global targets are undermined "because money" is, I hope not surprising for any readers (there is literally a "follow the money" section that could have been pulled directly from a Naomi Klein book and a big about greenwashing in investment that is so commonplace that it is covered in Forbes.) The idea that green capitalism is not the solution has been around since solutions were proposed. We had entire publications devoted to the idea that you cannot buy your way to a better world, and the issues with monetizing nature emerged from the very beginning of the concept. Just because it mentions things like Trump doesn't make it new, so I did feel a bit surprised that so little new evidence, ideas, and so few new solutions were provided. I don't want to give the impression that this is a bad book. It definitely isn't. I am just not sure why it was commissioned in a world when there are more unique contributions that could be made. Ultimately, I think maybe this is a book for people who are new to the environmental dimensions of economic thought. The author is very young and I appreciate her passionate and enthusiastic approach, but I wonder if the book would have been better if it explicitly acknowledged the fact that these are quite old ideas and then explained the fresh perspective that was needed. As is, this is a well written even if not original rehashing of why capitalism (even if green) and its metrics and "solutions" fail to account for both the value of and the damage to the environment, and in this failure do not address the root of environmental issues.

[Saba Houmani · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was so unpleasant but I can’t fault the author because she did what she had to do! Every word of that was so necessary idk. Exactly what it says on the can. Let’s all grow up and read this book. I don’t want to imagine the math teacher I’d be if I never read this book :/

[Tedmarriott · Rating 5 out of 5]

@Bill Gates

[Rob Harvey · Rating 4 out of 5]

Quite a hard book to read if you don't have a background in economics, but worth it if you want to understand why green capitalism isn't the answer to the climate crisis.

[Allison · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book did a great job going in depth on popular (or previously popular) green capitalist ideas: carbon offsetting, carbon trading, the carbon price, and ESG. As someone who works in climate tech, I'm coming away armed with much more background on why these solutions are distractions from actual, direct investment in known solutions and building community resilience.

One thing this book doesn't cover (understandable, there's so much that could be discussed) is the more positive facets of green capitalism. It was nice to have read John Doerr's Speed and Scale as well, which includes many specific examples of people/companies helping massively scale known solutions. If I had only read this book as a primer on green capitalism, I may have come away feeling hopeless/cynical. Take this book as a starting point to figure out the red herrings of the climate space, and then refocus your attention on building what actually matters, what has material impact!

I need to turn all my highlights in the physical book into notes + part of an essay soon, but this is what's on my mind now.

[Thijs · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5 stars

Powerful book about the distractions and futile attempts at tackling climate change. The author gives insights into the world of economy and finance I didn't have before. The book tackles some complex economic concepts, so if you're not a grounded or versed in economics some parts may get kinda tough.

Although she says so in the beginning, it can get hard to read all of this without any perspective. There are no offered alternatives in this book, there is no clear option B. This can be disheartening, but this book has given me a new way of seeing things that allows me to wonder whether something will actually make climate impact.

Very very very interesting book for anyone learning the political and economic machinations of the climate crisis.

[Ali · Rating 3 out of 5]

writing 10/10 takeshi would love this

bit technical at parts, esp chap.3 - flew over my silly head

got the impression this was meant to be an accessible layman read - wasnt really, primarily due to writing style. lots of flair in the writing but in this case does take away from the clarity of points and arguments when the technical detail (which is the most important part of the book imo) is kinda foreign to me

some takeaways:
- asset managers are assholes
- be super skeptical and critical of celebrated political "achievements" eg the debt suspension by g20 back in 2020
- finance cannot be reformed to be a transformative force for good - finance framework will always put money first, no matter the presentation eg ESG investing
- there is no real separation between private (firms/corporations) and public (gov) powers. follow the money

[Hugo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Convincing but depressing, would have liked to know about some of the new perspectives on climate change policy that have the potential to be more successful

[Mehtap exotiquetv · Rating 3 out of 5]

Kann grüner Kapitalismus funktionieren?
Kleiner Spoiler? So wie es momentan umgesetzt wird, nein. Denn schaut man im Detail in die „Projekte“, die umweltfreundlich sein sollen, dann erkennt man, dass es sich eher um Greenwashing handelt als effektive Maßnahmen, die den CO2 Ausstoß reduzieren. Auch ist die Autorin der Meinung, dass Maßnahmen, die auf Effekte abzielen, die die Folgen von CO2 minimieren sollen, nicht effektiv genug sein sollen.
Das Buch ist sehr realistisch aber auch von der Sichtweise sehr negativ.

[Yvo Hunink · Rating 4 out of 5]

After I have professionally been guided towards the world of carbon markets by a bunch of corporates, and doing my research in what this market entails, this book by Buller came up as a welcome critique to the ideology that so many companies and governments are appearing to follow. Using capitalism to drive ecological conservation and restoration.

The book has left me with a bitter taste and a feeling of near defeat. How can it be that the majority of our climate efforts are based in such activities that not only fail to deliver results, but also have such negative impact. Especially considering Buller's age, it is quite impressive how she has captured immensely complex systems and concepts, from the worlds of asset management, emission trading systems and inter-country debt becoming privatized as well.. A bleak vision for the future of a world governed by institutions that eventually just want to make money.

The gap that the book left for me, although transparently mentioned by Buller as being out of scope, is what else can we do. If we are on the pathway of market driven conservation and restoration and there seems to be no other solution on the horizon, can we not only just try to improve those market driven forces until we see some impact being made and drive all money towards those projects. Although I see the negative externalities in privatization of public goods throughout society, I also have to think back about the book of Hans Rosling, Factfulness, that actually showed that the introduction of capitalism has lifted millions out of poverty. Buller has left me no other option than to keep hoping for improvements in the status quo, since no alternative seems to be available to have impact at scale.

Another critique is that the language used, especially for non-native English speakers, is at times full of words that require a second or two to realize what is being meant. This does not help the readability or the effective communication of the content.

[Charlie Steel · Rating 5 out of 5]

“The state of warming in which we now live is the cumulative history of industrial capitalism”

Wow. This was a serious eye opener.
I think it’s pretty obvious to everyone right now that preventing ecological crisis is very much not working.
But I did not realise how shallow and just insane the current proposals for protecting the environment actually are (maybe I just hadn’t done enough research).
I think this might be my favourite non-fiction book. It’s written in a way that is both extremely informative while also being mostly easy to read, with many follow up sections devoted to ensuring the reader understands what is being argued. It also managed to interest me in finance, something that I never thought would happen.
While I understood the grand majority of arguments, I don’t think I’m smart enough (or brave enough) to summarise the main points here. All I will say is that this book is a revelatory guide to how the global north and private finance is currently failing to achieve ecological preservation, instead continuing to practice neo-colonial forms of coercion and extraction in the global south (all the while exploiting their own populations), and yet managing to convince western populations that they are doing all they can to protect the planet. What’s more, it effectively demonstrates how only a comprehensive and radical restructuring of the worlds economic systems and social relations is the only way to not only prevent environmental destruction, but also ensure a just, equal and prosperous world (outside of the scales of material wealth and consumption).
An essential must read.

[valentejas · Rating 3 out of 5]

3,5 stars

Finally I finish this book!!!

Ok this book is very good - I am so impressed by the author’s capacity to gather all this information presented in such a clear way. The book is all about the troubles of green capitalism (think market-based solutions to climate/nature crises like carbon credits, etc.) which is a topic that I am very much interested in, and it was very very insightful and confirmed all my (bad) feelings about the topic.

Butttt, at some point she goes super deep and technical into financial mechanisms and she kinda lost me a bit cause I ain’t no economist! Although was still interesting to see how much BULLSHIT there is in that world.

So yeah, the book generally brought some new light for me into the topic, but - as tends to happen with these kind of books - it was a bit too long for the point she was trying to make.

And yes folks green capitalism will lead us nowhere but to extinction! Any solution that does not entail major restructuring of our social and economic systems is a false! and! distracting! solution! And that’s that! 🤠

Besos

[Charlotte · Rating 4 out of 5]

Super interesting and a bit shocking

[iina · Rating 4 out of 5]

A great and comprehensive read about why we can’t in fact solve the climate crisis with market-based solutions. Quite laborious for me to get through as I have zero background in economics and the text is rather dense, but I’m glad I made it through!

Thank you to the publisher (Manchester University Press) for sending me a review copy of this book.

[Jarrod Cottrill · Rating 2 out of 5]

not enough whale facts. very dense subject matter that I can only pretend to understand. more a me thing than the book itself but my rating stands

[Luca Lollobrigida · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5
Libro interessante, ma un po' pedante. Ammette onestamente di non trattare le soluzioni al problema, in questo volume, ma in ogni caso lascia un senso di impotenza difficile da superare.

[Summer · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book provides a critique of many of the common solutions that have come to dominate global discussions on climate change, in particular sustainable finance, carbon offsets, asset management, ESG, and valuing natural assets (reflected in the title the value of a whale). The book looks at how these solutions have been uncritically mainstreamed, allowing actors to creatively amass profits at the expense of the environment.

[Sam Orndorff · Rating 4 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this critique of green capitalist solutions. I think it is well sourced and opens a lot of engaging debates beyond an academic audience. That said, I do think the financial aspects could have been more clear. Overall, the book well written for a broad audience and vital for the discussion on climate justice.

[Wallbrock · Rating 5 out of 5]

I thought this was a phenomenal book. It sets out to detail and explain the various ways in which market-friendly 'solutions' to the climate and environmental crises are not only ineffective in their stated aims, but will likely exacerbate the violence inflicted on poorer nations and peoples.

Briefly, chapters 1 and 2 mostly focus on introducing and criticising carbon pricing, both in theory and based on empirical analysis of existing schemes, particularly the EU's Emissions Trading Scheme. Chapter 3 provides an overview of the rise of the asset management industry, and how the way that large asset management firms operate mostly increases inertia in the economy, rather than accelerating decarbonisation. Chapter 4 then goes on to discuss ESG investing - both how it is an exercise in greenwashing and how it is more concerned with reducing investors' exposure to climate-related risks (including a sudden improvement in governments' environmental policy) than diverting funds towards greener endeavours. Chapter 5 then discusses how the transfer of wealth from the Global South to the Global North is ongoing, and jeopardises the chances of meaningful climate action on a global scale and a liveable future for many of the inhabitants of former colonised nations. Chapter 6 discusses efforts to commoditise ecosystems, which ties in nicely with the first chapters' criticism of carbon pricing, before the the book concludes in the following chapter.

The book is extremely well written: perhaps a little dense at times, but overall the author covers many topics in considerable depth, while taking pains to keep the book accessible and properly explain her reasoning at every stage. The returning example of the plight of whales made for quite difficult reading, but I think it's only right that a book like this makes the reader feel as well as think.

[Kai · Rating 4 out of 5]

this is a pretty good overview of the contemporary state of green capitalism from a critical perspective (not exclusively or overwhelmingly marxist). i'm not sure why there's the expectation that the book is a novel intervention (as another reviewer laments); to me, it's useful as a synthesis of existing literature in a presentation that is somewhat less theoretically/academically jargony. it still concerns global political economy, so it's quite complicated - but not because of the analysis which is clarifying, to me. beyond earlier approaches and updates for 2023, the significance of the book for me was the devotion of two chapters to understanding the ecological impact of asset-concentrating index funds, and the insufficiency of ESG funds to augment their ecological impact. i think the nuts and bolts of this are actually quite important, as calls for "divestment from fossil fuels" are often times operationalized by universities, for example, through just redirecting endowments towards ESG. what's missing in the critical but non-marxist perspective presented here, as one might anticipate, is labor. and in that regard it didn't quite meet my expectations...

[Eitan Hershkovitz · Rating 5 out of 5]

"At the core of neoliberal thought is the argument that the global economy is so complex as to render any attempts to plan or even fully measure it futile, giving birth to the price system as the ideal arbiter of information. There is a certain irony to be found in the fact that the same humility about the inherent unknowability of the biosphere and dazzling web of lifeforms with it is distinctly absent. There is also irony in the fact that the enormous effort required to fully quantify natural capital and ecosystem services and agree unified methods for their trade in newly constructed markets is likely to be immeasurably more complex than the supposedly bulky direct regulatory approach it is meant to avoid."


One of the most important books of our lifetime...

[Nathaniel Fousek · Rating 5 out of 5]

“The use of the mainstream economic discipline - its prestige, the ostensible objectivity of its analysis and sober authoritativeness of its prominent figures and institutions - has been among the most potent forces in the delay, dilution and overt obstruction of the political and policy programmes requires to both mitigate catastrophe in the future, and strive for justice in the present.”

A great breakdown of all the ways we continue to fuck ourselves searching for "market-oriented solutions" to the climate crisis

[Dean Tebbe · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great book that lays out how the market is not solving and will not solve our ecological crisis. The power of the asset management "industry" dictates that any policy intended to improve the situation must first provide significant profit, with the technical success almost beside the point.

Trying to solve a problem with the thinking that created it has left us with a predicament that now requires a response that our capitalist politics will not accept.

[stephanie udzielak · Rating 3 out of 5]

too much jargon for the average public readers and i felt like it could’ve been way shorter. Overall a good book w an important message but i think it got very technical super quick in which was hard to grasp at some points

[Viktor Van Trimpont · Rating 5 out of 5]

Eye opening. Must read!

[Sophie Mirgaux de Pina · Rating 5 out of 5]

World view altering

[Cleo Rank · Rating 3 out of 5]

the sort of book i wish i could write

[Simon Harrison · Rating 5 out of 5]

A solid, clear, well-needed guide.

[Adrian Vodislav · Rating 3 out of 5]

“We can no longer afford to answer inconvenient truths with convenient fantasies.” Tariq Fancy

The book addresses one central question: “Why do so many of the current solutions to the climate crisis fail to deliver?” The book examines what is wrong with mainstream climate and environmental governance, from carbon pricing and offset markets to 'green growth', the commodification of nature, and the growing influence of the finance industry on environmental policy. In doing so, it tries to expose the self-defeating logic of a response to these challenges based on creating new profit opportunities, and a refusal to grapple with the inequalities and injustices that have created them.

Buller argues that the most widespread threat to climate action comes from the “pursuit of false solutions”, the market-centric solutions dubbed as “green capitalism”. The book argues that green capitalism has two main purposes: (1) to preserve the current economic architecture and (2) to commodify nature to create new avenues for wealth accumulation. The book does a very good job of tracing the intricate connections between financial power, economic injustice, and ecological crisis but the heavy anti-capitalist ideology and lack of solutions to the existing system make the book hard to read at times.

The book is titled after researchers at the IMF set out to calculate a whale’s value by totting up the number of eco-tourists whales lure to different countries, plus the animals’ capacity to store carbon (they came to $2m for each great whale).

Carbon Markets: Carbon Pricing and Carbon Offsetting

There are two main methods of pricing carbon: (1) a carbon tax, which establishes a predetermined cost per unit of carbon (via absolute emissions or via a sliding scale such as carbon intensity) and (2) cap-and-trade model, where an absolute emissions cap is set by the governing bodies and emissions allowances are handed out to the entities falling under the market’s purview.

Buller argues that market-based approaches such as carbon markets are currently preferred to direct regulatory approaches because of the diffusion of responsibility: if a market-based policy fails to deliver on its intended outcomes, the sheer volume of actors involved distributes accountability by design (everyone and no one is responsible). Buller argues that carbon pricing initiatives have had modest results so far because carbon pricing would be a useful tool to be implemented only towards the tail end of the decarbonization cycle (due to the current lack of infrastructure to accommodate the transition to a decarbonized economy).

Moreover, Buller criticises carbon taxes for not allowing society to discriminate between spurious uses of carbon and vital uses such as building the infrastructure for a non-carbon economy and the fact that they are non-progressive (they do not discriminate between emissions from affluent consumption vs emissions from making ends meet).

Lastly, Buller argues that the jewel of the cap-and-trade systems, the EU-ETS, has had very modest results so far: “most reductions achieved to date by the EU-ETS have been due to a switch from coal to gas rather than long-term decarbonisation shifts.” Moreover, the scheme covers only a limited amount of high-emitting sectors, due to successful lobbying in Bruxelles.

Carbon offsets broadly fall into two categories: (1) negative emissions or emission removal offsets such as planting trees and (2) avoided emissions – projects aimed at stopping an activity from taking place such as cutting down a forest. The additionality of avoided emissions is difficult to prove, reliant on a hypothetical counterfactual scenario, which creates a system incredibly prone to abuse. An example used in the book is Total Oil achieving “carbon neutrality on a big shipment of gas” by paying for a forest management project in Zimbabwe. Rather than paying for the restoration of a forest or carbon-trapping wetland, Total paid volunteers to manually clear the thick underbrush as a fire prevention measure. The scale and value of the offset was then determined based on the emissions theoretically avoided between a scenario in which the forest goes up in flames and one in which it doesn’t. This is what Mike Carney called “paper decarbonisation”.

Buller’s conclusion is that offsetting is, “worse than doing nothing, since it triggers a rebound away from meaningful mitigation and towards the development of further high-carbon infrastructure, all while creating a veneer of action to placate both consumers and governments.

Asset manager capitalism

Fascinating chapter about passive index funds and how they have quietly changed the way our global economy works, with a focus on BlackRock, dubbed “the fourth branch of government” by Bloomberg, because of the immense power they wield on a global level.

In the interwar period, corporate shareholders were highly diffuse made up largely of individuals with savings. For example, right after WW2, US households directly owned 94% of corporate equities. However, beginning in the 80s, asset managers replaced individuals and pension funds as dominant shareholders. Nowadays, because of the passive index fund revolution, asset manager capitalism is defined by the strength, concentration, and universality of asset managers (Black Rock, Vanguard and State Street manage assets in the tens of trillions and determine how capital is allocated. Asset Managers advance “a response to the climate and nature crises defined by three related pillars: using the state to minimize financial risk; generating new and ideally state-backed opportunities for private investors through climate and environmental policy; and ensuring the aggregate stability and growth of asset prices.”

Buller argues also against the idea of stakeholder activism, arguing that BlackRock, for example, employed only 45 people in its stewardship team, paid to superficially perform their fiduciary duties. She argues that “asset managers are presently succeeding in walking a tightrope, effectively branding themselves as champions in the climate fight while working to ensure that any legislation coming down the line protects their interests.”

In regard to sustainable finance, Buller argues that the sustainable finance industry is focused on minimizing risks to investors’ returns, not minimizing risks to the planet or its inhabitants. For example, by conflating real sustainability improvements with improvements in disclosure, disclosure-based approaches might simply be encouraging companies to publish better information on their activities.

Interesting Concepts:

The value of a statistical life” (VSL): a concept developed during the Cold War to compare the costs of military operations. VSL generally ranges from $8 to $11 million per life nowadays. The lives of those in lower-income nations or lower-income regions within a country are assigned a lower VSL.

De-coupling - reducing the amount of resources used to generate economic growth while decreasing environmental deterioration and ecological scarcity. Buller argues that de-coupling has not worked so far, and it is likely that it won’t work in the future either: “On a country by country basis, evidence shows that GDP growth is the single most important driver of resource consumption”.

Deflationary coalition – A loose group whose financial position depends on the continual appreciation of capital assets at the expense of wages. The group is represented mainly by a cohort of the richest people in the global North (e.g. pension holders), whose interests “might not be aligned with the society as a whole”. [Related to @Capital in the 21st Century)

Imperial Mode of Living: the basis by which the working middle classes in urban centers remain in compromise with capital – in effect, broadly accepting the vast inequalities that define our economies in exchange for a moderate baseline of comfort and consumption. Buller argues that inequalities stem from asymmetrical exchanges, where wealthy populations rely on “elsewheres” for their everyday existence. “Elsewheres” are not defined by their geographical location but by their near invisibility in sustaining the mode of living of those living in wealthy areas. The evidence that affluent consumption is the primary driver of the ecological crisis is ample. While technological progress has, to date, produced some reductions in material throughput and waste, these gains have been entirely negated by rising consumption.

Wall Street Consensus (WSC) – a project for socializing the risk of losses while allowing private capital to privatize the returns. It promotes de-risking investment opportunities for the private sector by having the public sector use its fiscal and monetary capacity and policy decisions to reduce risks for the private sector via financial instruments such as guarantees, with the idea that this will crowd in “private investment”, shepherd private capital into new spaces previously deemed too high risk. The WSC is based on four central pillars structuring finance’s role in fighting climate change: reporting, risk management, returns, and mobilization.

Note of Foreign Aid – In the US, for example, just 4% of the country’s annual “foreign aid” budget goes to foreign governments for public sector allocation. More than half of all spending is allocated to non- and for-profit US companies.

I recommend reading Tariq Fancy’s brilliant 4-part article for a shorter, less ideologically imbued expose of green capitalism. Moreover, for a more balanced view of the shortcomings of the current system, I recommend Kate Raworth’s [book:Donut Economics: seven ways to think like a 21st century economist|57410899].

Different Take: https://www.economist.com/christmas-s...
Tariq Fancy: https://medium.com/@sosofancy/the-sec...

[KT · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book sets out to answer: why is it that we are so perilously off course for a future (and for many, a present) of ecological and climatic safety?
The focus is on the actors wielding outsized influence over the global response to ecological crisis, which includes mainstream economists, NGOs and financial titans

The book begins by summarising the ideas, policies and relevant actors that make up the prevailing response to the climate and nature crises under a single banner, arguing that they all ultimately suffer from a particular set of biases and serve neoliberal capitalism
Then explores how these ideas and policies are self-defeating when it comes to grappling with the existential threat posed by a changing climate and the collapse of biological diversity; at best, they are a distraction for which we have no time, but at worst they are actively sabotaging the desperate fight for a future that can offer both justice and ecological stability

I thought the book does well in criticising the mainstream, neoclassical approach of economics that is used in crafting solutions to the crises, as well as the ideology that weaponises against the actions we must take to both mitigate and adapt to deepening ecological crisis e.g. the common (as well as frequently inaccurate or disingenuous) refrain that policies designed to curb emissions will necessarily place unliveable burdens on working people or load debt on future generations

Criticisms of programmes that I found particular interesting include carbon pricing schemes, analysis of which has shown that the longest established scheme - the EU emissions trading system has decreased emissions by only "between 0% and 2% per year"
Also the offsetting industry, in large part because the additionality of avoided emissions is difficult to prove, reliant as these claims are on a hypothetical counterfactual scenario result, is a system incredibly open to abuse

A large portion of the book is dedicated to the major role of finance, particularly asset management, has in green capitalism, and readers' mileage of this may vary with regards to interest
I did find the chapter on Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing particularly interesting, as the book summarises this form of investing, which offers a mechanism for investors to minimise ‘exposure’ to financial risks – whether incoming regulation to end fossil fuel extraction or an exposé on a clothing manufacturer’s human rights violations – that could harm their portfolio’s financial returns
In that sense, ‘green’ or ‘ethical’ investing can be far better understood as a means through which the wealthy and those with financial assets can bet on the likelihood of a greener economy, rather than contribute to bringing that economy into being
In other words, ask not what your portfolio can do for the climate crisis, but what the climate crisis will do to your portfolio

I found the final chapter the most engaging and interesting as it tackled the titular question of value and the flaws behind mainstream economics pricing and valuation of nature, I came into the book, perhaps misreading the title thinking the majority of the book would be dedicated to this topic, but unfortunately only one chapter, albeit a very informative one, was all

Natural capital accounting has fallen apart in confrontation with the realities
of financialised global capitalism – its accumulative drive, its ruthless innovativeness in finding new means for externalising costs, the immediate prospects for securitisation and speculative activity invited by new assets and forms of capital – and, critically, with the profound complexity of our planet’s natural systems and their integration with social values.

Ostensibly ‘neutral’ calculations of the dollar values of fresh water, biodiversity or forests obscure the countless political decisions and assumptions required to parse the complexity of the biosphere to a list of services it can provide the economy, and erases all those values deemed irrelevant to the calculus.

Market-based approaches to conserving and restoring ecosystems ‘sanction habitat loss through development transformations by decoupling the distinctiveness of nonhuman natures from the geographical locales in which they occur’ – in other words, by artificially separating out elements of an often-indivisible whole
In effect, it’s difficult to see how pricing methods, such as proxy pricing and revealed preferences, in combination with the problems inherent to separating ecological systems into apparently discrete units of value, could ever provide a representative figure of the value of the natural world even in purely economic terms – let alone their intrinsic worth.

At the same time, new financial products, such as the ‘sovereign green bonds’
with interest rates pegged to achieving climate and environmental outcomes recently proposed in Uruguay, open up the possibility for transferring sovereignty over the governance of nature to private investors. At a glance, this may sound like an appealing model, both in terms of obtaining financing for and enforcing governments’ environmental targets.
In practice however, this mechanism risks creating new avenues through, which private investors can discipline sovereign governments, particularly of low-income states, and in doing so ‘entangle environmental management strategies with the unpredictable play of competing profitable domains of speculative investment and hedging activity.'
In the world of rising private investor ownership of poorer countries’ sovereign debt, the financialisation of ecological conservation therefore represents a pathway toward further neo-colonial control.

The foregrounding of profit-motivated solutions risks exacerbating the very inequalities driving ecological crisis in the first instance. It is for this reason that the solutions of green capitalism – whether carbon pricing, ESG or habitat banking – are self-defeating the urgent task of actually slowing, reversing, and adapting to climate and ecological crisis; at worst, they are actively undermining our ability to do so.