ABSTRACT
The term 'ecosystem services' has been around since at least the 1970s, and the concept of Nature providing for human needs even longer. The term "natural capital" was first used by E. F. Schumacher as a powerful metaphor in his critique of Western capitalism and the sustainability crisis, and has been subsequently picked up by many authors wishing to bridge the gaps between ecosystem science and economics. Whilst the "capital-stock-that-generates-interest" analogy might appear to be a common-sense way to approach the sustainable management of ecosystem services, this view is an over-simplification. For other kinds of ecosystem services – regulatory and cultural, as well as supporting – this simple stock-flow model is not appropriate, and they are better captured by the concept of fund-service resources. The components of natural stocks that underpin ecosystem service flows include soil, water, air and biodiversity. In general, biological stock-flow resources are associated with the structural properties of an ecosystem, and fund-service resources with functional properties.
